The Pentagon revised its official wounded count to 365, up from 303 . The Intercept's investigation, based on hospital admissions, medevac records, and unnamed officials, put the figure at 520 or more. The revised number closes the gap slightly but remains roughly 30% below the independent estimate. Neither figure includes casualties from the 3 April F-15E and A-10 incidents. The real total is likely above 540. 1
5MAR
Pentagon revises US wounded count to 365
1 min read
04:57UTC
The official count rose by 62 but remains 30% below The Intercept's independent estimate of 520 or more.
ConflictAssessed
Key takeaway
Official casualty figures remain 30% below independent estimates, excluding 3 April losses.
Deep Analysis
In plain English
The US military's official wounded count rose from 303 to 365. But an independent investigation by The Intercept, using hospital records and Pentagon sources, estimated the real figure is 520 or more. Neither number includes the new casualties from 3 April's aircraft losses. Congress is being asked to approve $200 billion for this war based on data that the Pentagon's own sources say is incomplete by at least 30%.
What could happen next?
- Consequence
Congress votes on war funding using official casualty data that independent sources place 30% too low, undermining the political basis for the $200 billion supplemental.
- Risk
Earlier casualty data showed 75% or more of wounded suffered traumatic brain injuries (ID:1690), a figure still absent from official reporting and likely to become a political liability.
First Reported In
Update #58 · First US aircraft fall over Iran
Washington Post / Financial Times· 4 Apr 2026
Read original →Causes and effects
This Event
Pentagon revises US wounded count to 365
Congress is voting on war funding with casualty data the Pentagon's own sources describe as incomplete.
Different Perspectives
Oil markets / Lloyd's underwriters
Futures markets priced CENTCOM's strikes-complete statement as a de-escalation signal and pushed Brent down 1.7 per cent to $94.71, even as the IRGC declared Hormuz closed. Lloyd's war-risk premiums held elevated because institutional de-listing requires a UN Security Council resolution that Russia and China have just shown they will block.
Pakistan (mediator)
Interior minister Mohsin Naqvi carried dual civilian and military letters to Mojtaba Khamenei in Tehran on 6-7 June with no public response. The IRGC's Hormuz closure on 11 June shows the corps is acting independently of the channel Pakistan is using, making the mediation structurally unable to produce a binding commitment without direct IRGC access.
Russia and China
Russia and China voted against GOV/2026/40 at the IAEA Board, following through on the blocking position coordinated with Grossi in Geneva on 5 June; both states continue to oppose Western institutional pressure on Iran at every multilateral venue.
E3 and IAEA (UK, France, Germany)
The E3 co-sponsored IAEA resolution GOV/2026/40, adopted 21-3-10 on 10 June, demanding Iran disclose 440.9 kg of unaccounted HEU and admit inspectors to four denied facilities. The 10 abstentions and Russia-China noes leave any Security Council referral without a viable enforcement path.
IRGC / Iran military command
The corps declared Hormuz closed to all traffic on 11 June and claimed two vessels struck, overriding the MoU its own civilian negotiators were pursuing through Pakistan. The closure order used the Persian Gulf Strait Authority apparatus to convert a toll mechanism into a military prohibition.
Trump administration / CENTCOM
CENTCOM completed a second day of strikes on Tehran, Sirik and Minab, rejected the IRGC Hormuz closure as inconsistent with observed transit, and said strikes were complete. Hegseth framed the bombing explicitly as the negotiation: the method is coercive deal-making with no stated pause threshold.