The NYtimes new At War blog has an interesting infograph on the lethality of weaponry on American forces in Iraq and Afghanistan. The writer, C.J. Chivers, uses the infograph to highlight a quantitative anomaly in the data: Why are bullets more lethal in Iraq than Afghanistan?
The answer is two fold: training and terrain. Iraqi insurgents often have prior professional military training and thus are more accurate shots. Furthermore, the urban terrain of Iraq forces American and insurgents into close proximity, 1) allowing little time for bullets to slow down in flight and 2) increasing the probability of multiple hits on a single person. By contrast, the typically poor training of Afghan fighters and mountainous terrain lend to spray and pray at extended ranges. The end result is that bullets in Afghanistan are slower on impact and less concentrated.
Wes Morgan’s comments on the At War blog offer additional insight:
I would echo the comment about engagement ranges. I’ve only spent time in the two places briefly (as an embed), but my understanding is that insurgents actually do a lot more shooting in Afghanistan than in Iraq — but in Afghanistan it is often sustained AK/RPK/PKM fire from a considerable distance, particularly in the south of the country, whereas in Iraq it is often in [close quarters battle] environments where the shooter, even if he’s not a great shot, has a better chance of getting a kill.
Christopher R. Albon is a political science Ph.D. specializing in armed conflict, public health, human security, and health diplomacy.
Want more? Subscribe to Conflict Health through RSS or email.
{ 1 comment }
This post has been linked for the HOT5 Daily 8/22/2009, at The Unreligious Right
Comments on this entry are closed.