Iraq casualty reports, some say "injured", some say "wounded." What

[karlschneider]

exactly is the difference in this context? Isn't it essentially true that all "wounds" are "injuries" but not necessarily the converse? I mean like all squares are rectangles but not all rect...well you see what I'm saying)

I've always had the impression that a "wound" involves a loss of blood, and an "injury" might, but might not. Does that sound right, or am I just ...er, injuring a wounded horse, grammatically?

(If this needs to be in the lounge, fine-move it but it's such a wacky free-for-all over there I despise it.)
K

[NYC]

1. Different interpretation:

If I fell off a ladder, I would consider myself injured, not wounded, no matter how much I was bleeding.

To me, a wound seems to imply that someone caused it.

[karlschneider]

3. I see your point and mostly agree, but (isn't there always a but?)

if I cut myself (accidentally) with a knife, I think I would call that a wound rather than an injury. But if I were to smash my thumb with a hammer (with lots of bleeding) I would probably (like your ladder scenario) call it an injury.

I still think it has to do with blood...but then I'm a serious nitpicker. :D

[Crasher]

2. ...

Maybe it depends on the impact they want to have. I agree wounds sounds more like blood stuff, whereas injuries can be just a twisted ankle or a splinter.

[WindRavenX]

4. Personally, I don't think it matters..

...what does matter is that those soldiers are still getting hurt/killed in a war that should not have been fought.
The war is quickly becoming unable to be contained any more...