Before the invasion of Iraq began, we were promised that developments in precision weapons would ensure that civilian casualties would be kept to a minimum. A report from a US research group estimates that about 13,000 Iraqis, including as many as 4,300 civilians, were killed during the major combat phase of the Iraq war — more than in the 1991 war. It sems that the capabilities of new weapons were used to allow more strikes to be launched, while keeping casualty rates much the same.
One premise of the “new warfare” hypothesis is that precision technologies and new warfighting techniques now allow the United States to wage war while incurring dramatically fewer casualties — especially civilian casualties. Although Operation Iraqi Freedom was supposed to exemplify the new warfare, it provides no unambiguous support for the hypothesis regarding civilian casualties.
The report concludes:
Nonetheless, the promise of a “low casualty” warfare will not be realized in practice if US strategic and operational objectives escalate in tandem with the advance of the new capabilities. Nor will the new warfare capabilities lead to an era of reduced conflict deaths if their promise serves as a rationale to wage more wars.