[Suhiir]

Based on the Iran-Iraq War (1980-1988) it certainly seemed the Iraqis knew how to defend from dug-in positions. While most of the Coalition forces were well trained they were not combat vets, whereas the Iraqis were. Then there was the probability they'd use chemical weapons, while they're not really that lethal to well trained/equipped troops they do cause non-lethal casualties and they are a REAL pain in the butt (FYI Nuc-Bio-Chem was my primary specialty) to deal with. Finally we knew much of the Coalition had a significant technological advantage, but no one had ever fought a major ground campaign with such a tech advantage so we intentionally didn't view it as "Wunderwaffe".

So, yes, we expected significant casualties. Believe me no one was happier then we were when the Iraqis turned out to be a paper tiger.