Military War Death Tolls

[DGS49]

Going back a ways in history, General Grant became Lincoln's standard-bearer when he (in effect) accepted the reality of a war of attrition. To state it callously, if Grant went into a battle with 20,000 troops knowing that he would lose 5,000 and the Rebs would lose an equal number, or even fewer, that was an acceptable battle for him. Because be knew that he could replace those five thousand bodies with five thousand new recruits. The Rebs could not. And that was his plan, which ultimately "won" the Civil War.

Similar attitudes prevailed by the Top Brass in The Great War and in WWII. It was less manifest in Korea and Vietnam, but there WERE engagements in all of these wars where the American commander ordered his troops into a situation where he KNEW that some of them would be killed (e.g., D-Day). That was the price of victory in that battle.

Starting in Iraq and even more markedly in Afghanistan, this did not happen. All of the casualties of those wars were the result of defensive engagements and offensive engagements gone wrong. "We" were never sent into battle where a tangible number of casualties were expected and accepted by the Brass. This is why the casualty numbers (fatalities per year, for example) dropped so dramatically between Vietnam and Iraq.

The "heroes" in Iraq and Afghanistan were soldiers (and sailors?) risking their lives to save or recover their fellow soldiers, and almost never risking their lives to achieve the military objective (take out an entrenched machine-gun). It is a whole different mentality, is it not? And yet it is never mentioned.

And parenthetically, it is obvious (to me) that Putin expected to win a war of attrition in Ukraine, accepting the likelihood of massive Russian casualties, but presuming that he would be able to replace the casualties - and then some - with new conscripts. This strategy may be imploding as Russian soldiers are able to communicate back with their families to tell them what's going on. The conscripts may be fighting back on the Homefront.

 

[Donald H]

Going back a ways in history, General Grant became Lincoln's standard-bearer when he (in effect) accepted the reality of a war of attrition. To state it callously, if Grant went into a battle with 20,000 troops knowing that he would lose 5,000 and the Rebs would lose an equal number, or even fewer, that was an acceptable battle for him. Because be knew that he could replace those five thousand bodies with five thousand new recruits. The Rebs could not. And that was his plan, which ultimately "won" the Civil War.

Similar attitudes prevailed by the Top Brass in The Great War and in WWII. It was less manifest in Korea and Vietnam, but there WERE engagements in all of these wars where the American commander ordered his troops into a situation where he KNEW that some of them would be killed (e.g., D-Day). That was the price of victory in that battle.

Starting in Iraq and even more markedly in Afghanistan, this did not happen. All of the casualties of those wars were the result of defensive engagements and offensive engagements gone wrong. "We" were never sent into battle where a tangible number of casualties were expected and accepted by the Brass. This is why the casualty numbers (fatalities per year, for example) dropped so dramatically between Vietnam and Iraq.

The "heroes" in Iraq and Afghanistan were soldiers (and sailors?) risking their lives to save or recover their fellow soldiers, and almost never risking their lives to achieve the military objective (take out an entrenched machine-gun). It is a whole different mentality, is it not? And yet it is never mentioned.

And parenthetically, it is obvious (to me) that Putin expected to win a war of attrition in Ukraine, accepting the likelihood of massive Russian casualties, but presuming that he would be able to replace the casualties - and then some - with new conscripts. This strategy may be imploding as Russian soldiers are able to communicate back with their families to tell them what's going on. The conscripts may be fighting back on the Homefront.

Are those your own words or is it your link?
It can be a good discussion but you'll have to provide us with both or it could be taken down.

 

[DGS49]

My words and music. Sorry.

 

[Donald H]

My words and music. Sorry.

You're mostly taking into consideration America's ability to wage war without human casualties when the foe doesn't possess the ability to fight back using conventional means.

But your descriptions also apply to America's proxy wars in which the proxy country will suffer the human losses.

The war with Russia is America's proxy war but can't be fought to fruition by the means of the Ukraine proxy.

You bring to mind the 911 attack on America being a battle instead of a war as such. America suffered heavy losses to an enemy that was without conventional warring means.

In Afghanistan, America suffered few human losses. But the enemy may not have began to wage war against America yet?

If they do and it becomes nuclear, all bets are off on the questions of attrition.

 

[whitehall]

Americans justified the numbers in WW1 because the media taught them to justify the democrat regime that sent Doughboys to liberate France. Americans justified the incredible numbers lost in WW2 because the media taught Americans that the losses were justified regardless of the reckless way American Troops were sometimes lost. Korea was different. We lost anywhere from 35,000 to 50,000 Americans in a 3 year quagmire that the media couldn't quite justify even though Truman was a democrat so they called Korea the "forgotten war". The media initially justified LBJ's faked "crisis" that sent Troops to Vietnam and supported the effort until Nixon took over. The 1st Gulf War was a textbook effort by the U.S. Military but the media hated it because Bush was a republican. The Next Gulf War produced far less casualties than any 20th century war but the media hated it because a republican was in office.

 

[shoshi]

During World War 2 after Midway Yamamoto cried and asked the emperors forgiveness because it would now be war of attrition against America. A war japan could not win.

 

[james bond]

During World War 2 after Midway Yamamoto cried and asked the emperors forgiveness because it would now be war of attrition against America. A war japan could not win.

The US was able to break the Japanese code so knew ahead of time and were adequately prepared for their military action.

 

[whitehall]

The success of the Japanese code break called "Magic" was a bit of an exaggeration. At first it delt with Japanese diplomatic messages. COS Marshall had the most important decoded message in history that indicated the Pearl Harbor attack but he diddled around for hours and finally sent a Western Union telegram that arrived at about the same time as the Japanese Zeroes

 

[AZrailwhale]

The US was able to break the Japanese code so knew ahead of time and were adequately prepared for their military action.

It wouldn't have mattered in the long run. Even if Yamamoto had sunk Enterprise, Yorktown and Hornet, Wasp and Saratoga were available within days of Midway and Ranger could have moved west into the Pacific. Within twelve months there were four Independence Class light carriers and five Essex class Carries in service. So even if Japan hadn't lost any carriers, by July 1943 it would have had Kaga, Akagi, Shokaku, Zuikaku, Soryu, Hiryu, Junyo, Hiyo, CVLs Zuiho, Hosho, Ryuho, Ryujo carrying 647 aircraft to face the USN CVs Wasp, Saratoga, Ranger, Essex, Yorktown II, Lexington II, Bunker Hill and the CVLs Independence, Princeton, Belleau Wood, Cowpens, carrying 736 aircraft, Most fighters being F6Fs by that time.

 

[Mushroom]

Starting in Iraq and even more markedly in Afghanistan, this did not happen. All of the casualties of those wars were the result of defensive engagements and offensive engagements gone wrong. "We" were never sent into battle where a tangible number of casualties were expected and accepted by the Brass. This is why the casualty numbers (fatalities per year, for example) dropped so dramatically between Vietnam and Iraq.

Oh, that is not true at all.

Hell, in the 1990 Gulf War even the National Security Council and the Joint Chiefs of Staff were expecting between 20,000 and 30,000 casualties. Possibly as high as 75,000 if Iraq decided to make widespread use of their chemical weapons.

And the numbers were similar for the 2003 Iraq War.

The only difference is that the US was so overpowering and both times predicted that Iraq would put up more of a fight.

But the big failure in your claim, is that you are looking at the numbers as they were after the fight, and not what was predicted before the fight.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

The success of the Japanese code break called "Magic" was a bit of an exaggeration. At first it delt with Japanese diplomatic messages. COS Marshall had the most important decoded message in history that indicated the Pearl Harbor attack but he diddled around for hours and finally sent a Western Union telegram that arrived at about the same time as the Japanese Zeroes

Sure he did!

 

[Mushroom]

The success of the Japanese code break called "Magic" was a bit of an exaggeration. At first it delt with Japanese diplomatic messages. COS Marshall had the most important decoded message in history that indicated the Pearl Harbor attack but he diddled around for hours and finally sent a Western Union telegram that arrived at about the same time as the Japanese Zeroes

AF is out of water

 

[Mushroom]

During World War 2 after Midway Yamamoto cried and asked the emperors forgiveness because it would now be war of attrition against America. A war japan could not win.

The Admiral knew that going into the war. He knew when he was given the order that it was a war they could not win. However, he did his duty as best he could.

But please, I would love to read a reference to that. Because I have never read that, and I would have to question if the Admiral had ever rally talked to the Emperor. Emperor Showa was so isolated that he barely even spoke the same language as the others in the nation.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

The Admiral knew that going into the war. He knew when he was given the order that it was a war they could not win. However, he did his duty as best he could.

But please, I would love to read a reference to that. Because I have never read that, and I would have to question if the Admiral had ever rally talked to the Emperor. Emperor Showa was so isolated that he barely even spoke the same language as the others in the nation.

Yamamoto visited the Naval War College in the US in 1924, so he was well aware he could not beat the military-industrial complex of the US.

 

[whitehall]

It's ironic that the Bushido Japanese military government viewed Americans as a dilettante weak society that would be easy to defeat while the U.S. government viewed the Japanese as a nearsighted little yellow race that couldn't build a plane that would fly or a ship that would float. Of course both sides were criminally wrong.

 

[Mushroom]

Yamamoto visited the Naval War College in the US in 1924, so he was well aware he could not beat the military-industrial complex of the US.

Hell, he attended Harvard for two years. He was also the Naval Attache to the US, and spoke fluent English.

And it was amazing what he noticed. Like touring factories that were producing cars that only a few years before had been making artillery for the Great War. And the massive shipyards that covered almost all of our coasts, from Washington to California, from Texas to Boston. And he knew that if needed we could quickly convert them to armaments once again. And had the infrastructure (rails) to move them and other material anywhere that was needed.

He knew that all of his nation was within easy air strike range to naval aviation, and from the long range aviation that was just being fielded when the war started. However, huge areas of US industries were nowhere close to that kind of range. We could cripple their industry, they could never do more than hit out smaller factories on the coast.

Even he knew that Pearl Harbor was only a pinprick, as that would do not a damned thing to blunt our shipyards at all. That is why one of the things he is recorded as saying is that if Japan had to go to war with the US, he expected to run wild for six months. After that, the outcome was doubtful.

And the Battle of Midway was just over 7 months later. That was as far as Japan could push forward, and it was a fighting retreat for the rest of the war.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Hell, he attended Harvard for two years. He was also the Naval Attache to the US, and spoke fluent English.

And it was amazing what he noticed. Like touring factories that were producing cars that only a few years before had been making artillery for the Great War. And the massive shipyards that covered almost all of our coasts, from Washington to California, from Texas to Boston. And he knew that if needed we could quickly convert them to armaments once again. And had the infrastructure (rails) to move them and other material anywhere that was needed.

He knew that all of his nation was within easy air strike range to naval aviation, and from the long range aviation that was just being fielded when the war started. However, huge areas of US industries were nowhere close to that kind of range. We could cripple their industry, they could never do more than hit out smaller factories on the coast.

Even he knew that Pearl Harbor was only a pinprick, as that would do not a damned thing to blunt our shipyards at all. That is why one of the things he is recorded as saying is that if Japan had to go to war with the US, he expected to run wild for six months. After that, the outcome was doubtful.

And the Battle of Midway was just over 7 months later. That was as far as Japan could push forward, and it was a fighting retreat for the rest of the war.

Thank you Mister MOTO!

Brevity is just not your thing, is it?

 

[Mushroom]

It's ironic that the Bushido Japanese military government viewed Americans as a dilettante weak society that would be easy to defeat while the U.S. government viewed the Japanese as a nearsighted little yellow race that couldn't build a plane that would fly or a ship that would float. Of course both sides were criminally wrong.

It is not really that.

Japan was just like Germany, in believing they were a "Master Race". Part of an empire formed in 660 BCE, descended from a Goddess. Founder of a lineage stretching back unbroken for over 2,500 years and had never been defeated.

After that, Babylon rose against the Assyrians. Even before Josiah that was talked about in 2 Kings took the throne. This really is "Biblical Times", as a lot of the events in The Bible took place after the founding of the Japanese Empire. And when one talks about "Dynasties" like the 33 of Egypt, Japan is literally still in their first "Dynasty".

They honestly believed that they could never be defeated, as they were superior to every other culture and country on the planet.

And do not confuse what "popular culture" may have thought of a country, the US Government knew damned well that Japan was a potential threat. The US had been closely monitoring them since the end of the 1800s, and had a damned good idea of their capabilities. Especially as not all that long before they had seen them crush a superior Russian naval force with minimal losses. And had been trying to warn them off in China for years.

Heck, we even had the ultimate war plans we would use them in our hands since 1920, and had been sending people out to scout islands we "might" fight on later as early as 1922.

Quite a few in the military and government knew exactly what threat the Japanese were, and were already making plans.

 

[Mushroom]

Brevity is just not your thing, is it?

Not really. I believe in trying to give a complete picture, not just a "post-it note" that gives the bare minimum data without any context.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Not really. I believe in trying to give a complete picture, not just a "post-it note" that gives the bare minimum data without any context.

You would have never made it as a teacher, being down in the weeds all of the time.