Here is an interesting article that provides the best comparative analysis I have seen yet on Iraq versus previous US conflicts.
<a href='http://slate.msn.com/id/2111432/' target='_blank'>"Iraq 2004 Looks Like Vietnam 1966"</a>
On Iraq the authors conclude the following:
"After factoring in medical, doctrinal, and technological improvements, infantry duty in Iraq circa 2004 comes out just as intense as infantry duty in Vietnam circa 1966"
Even though the article is published in Slate Magazine, do yourself a favor and read the entire article before you attack their conclusions. It is written by Phillip Carter and Owen West, Carter is an attorney and former Army officer who writes on military and legal affairs from Los Angeles. West, is a trader for Goldman Sachs, and served in Operation Iraqi Freedom with the Marines.
The final paragraph sums up their analysis and recomendations.
"Critics of the war may use this analysis as one more piece of ammunition to attack the effort; some supporters may continue to refer to casualties as "light," noting that typically tens of thousands of Americans must die in war before domestic support crumbles. Both miss the point. The casualty statistics make clear that our nation is involved in a war whose intensity on the ground matches that of previous American wars. Indeed, the proportional burden on the infantryman is at its highest level since World War I. With next year's budget soon to be drafted, it is time for Washington to finally address their needs accordingly."
