Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Commentary
  • Published:

Why were Scud casualties so low?

Nature volume 361, pages 293–296 (1993)Cite this article

Patriot missiles were returned to the Gulf last week. But they were not the reason for the unexpectedly low casualty rate when Saddam attacked Israel with Scud missiles in 1991.

Access through your institution
Buy or subscribe

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Access through your institution

Buy this article

  • Purchase on SpringerLink
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

References

  1. Stein, R. Int. Security 17, 200 (1992).

    Google Scholar 

  2. Zraket, C. Defense News 31 (9 December 1991).

  3. Pfaltzgraff, R. L. Jr Wall Street J. A20 (8 April 1992).

  4. Detroit News 8 (13 April 1992).

  5. Boot, M. Christian Sci. Monitor 9 (23 September 1992).

  6. Postol, T. A. Int. Security 16, 119–171 (1991–92).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Schmidt, E. New York Times (Int. edn) A8 (31 October 1991).

  8. Schmidt, E. New York Times All (8 April 1992).

  9. US General Accounting Office Operation Desert Storm: Data Does Not Exist to Conclusively Say How Well Patriot Performed (GAO/NSIAD-92–340, September 1992).

  10. Lewis, G. N. & Postol, T. A. An Evaluation of the Army Report “Analysis of Video Tapes to Assess Patriot Effectiveness” (MIT Defense and Arms Control Studies Program, September 1992).

    Google Scholar 

  11. Kaplan, F. Boston Globe 1 (5 May 1991).

  12. Bleich, A. et al. J. Am. med. Ass. 268, 613–615 (1992).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Karsenty, E. et al. Israeli J. med. Sci. 27, 603–607 (1991).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Lewis, G. N., Fetter, S. & Gronlund, L. Casualties and Damage from Scud Attacks in the 1991 Gulf War (MIT Technology, Defense and Arms Control Studies, January 1993).

    Google Scholar 

  15. Dunn, C. L. The Emergency Medical Services 1, 174;179 (HMSO, London, 1952).

    Google Scholar 

  16. US Strategic Bombing Survey, Physical Damage Division V-Weapons in London Report No. 152 (January 1947).

  17. Carus, W. S. & Bermudez, J. S. Jr Jane's Soviet Intelligence Review 2, 242–248 (1990).

    Google Scholar 

  18. Bierman, J. Maclean's 34–36 (18 April 1988).

  19. Zaloga, S. Int. Defense Rev. 11, 1427 (1988).

    Google Scholar 

  20. Rudge, D. Jerusalem Post 8 (22 February 1991).

  21. Brinkley, J. New York Times 1 (20 January 1991).

  22. Flight Int. 13 (13–19 March 1991).

  23. Chartrand, S. New York Times A7 (19 January 1991).

Download references

Author information

Author notes

  1. Steve Fetter, George N. Lewis and Lisbeth Gronlund: and is a research fellow at DACS. This article is based on a more detailed paper (ref. 14.)

Authors and Affiliations

  1. the School of Public Affairs, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland, 20742, USA

    Steve Fetter

  2. the Defense and Arms Control Studies (DACS) Program, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Mas-sachusetts, 02139, USA

    George N. Lewis

  3. the Union of Concerned Scientists, 26 Church Street, Cambridge, Mas-sachusetts, 02238, USA

    Lisbeth Gronlund

Authors
  1. Steve Fetter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  2. George N. Lewis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  3. Lisbeth Gronlund
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Fetter, S., Lewis, G. & Gronlund, L. Why were Scud casualties so low?. Nature 361, 293–296 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1038/361293a0

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/361293a0

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing