Author Topic: U.S. Casualites in Viet Nam (Read 412 times)

wulfie · « **on:** January 25, 2003, 02:22:51 PM »

There was another 'discussion' in off-topic, which I wouldn't waste time in replying to.

But the politicians currently trying to reinstate the draft tend to argue that '(minority) draftees do all the fighting and the dying' (minority in there because you'll see that depending on what part of the Nation the speech in question is delivered in).

Here are some links to Viet Nam casualty statistics for the U.S.:

http://www.rjsmith.com/kia_tbl.html

When looking at this list, keep in mind that one generally had to volunteer to become a member of an airborne or USMC combat unit.

http://www.archives.gov/research_room/research_topics/vietnam_war_casualty_lists/statistics.html#age

'Selective Service' on the relevant table on this page = 'sent to boot camp because your number came up'. Someone who was drafted, finished their time, and reenlisted voluntarily (this did happen) would be listed as 'regular military' on this table.

There's no doubt that draftees paid the price the same as their brothers-in-arms. But to hear some congressmen speak, you'd think that everyone who wasn't a draftee was sipping mai-tais in Hawaii. Far from the truth.

Here's a site where you can search for actual KIA records by name, state, etc. My Mom grew up in a really small mining town in the middle of Utah (a very sobering thing there - the population of the town was always ~300...at the baseball diamond there's 2 Memorial stones - one for WW1 and one for WW2...WW1 stone has ~40 names on it and WW2 has ~20 names on it - from a population of 300 - pretty disturbing math there). I did a search for Viet Nam casualties from that town - one entry. My Mom knew who he was, said he was a nice, good looking guy, kind of shy, everyone in town lost track of him (I didn't tell Her how I came by His name - Mom is a little emotionally fragile these days).

http://www.no-quarter.org/newpages/nq_search.html

My Mom's hometown 'Friend':

http://www.no-quarter.org/cgi-bin/details.cgi?IDNO=56393964

Easymo, Hangtime, Hardcase, etc.

Mike/wulfie

Sandman · « **Reply #1 on:** January 25, 2003, 02:26:24 PM »

Is that true? All marines combat units were volunteers?

wulfie · « **Reply #2 on:** January 25, 2003, 02:34:28 PM »

From the older Marines (keep in mind these were guys who enlisted after Viet Nam, but who had Senior NCOs to tell them 'Viet Nam stories at the time) I've talked to (and I've been around Marines alot lately) the USMC tried to keep the # of 'draftees' as low as possible during the war in Viet Nam. The USMC had a large # of volunteers in combat during Viet Nam. But then so did the U.S. Army.

Fd-Ski has a very valid point when he says that alot of people join the military for economic reasons. I had alot of guys in USN boot camp with me because they were 21 with 2 kids and the only way they could raise a family and have medical coverage was to join the military. And before anyone yells 'don't have kids stupid' I had guys in boot camp with me from very, very poor parts of the Nation - that guy's pay was going to support his Parents and 6 or 7 other people.

But a high % of the guys that wind up in a combat unit wind up there because they want to be in a combat unit. I have zero first or even second-hand knolwedge about USA infantry units in Viet Nam. Common sense tells me that instructors at infantry schools would weed out very poorly motivated draftees and wait for better motivated draftees. A guy determined to desert is going to get 5 or 10 good men killed if he ever makes it to a combat unit.

Maybe some USA infantry veterans from the Viet Nam era who read the AH BBS could verify or correct my hunch?

Mike/wulfie

wulfie · « **Reply #3 on:** January 25, 2003, 02:40:06 PM »

One other 'interesting' (quotes because I don't want to sound amused) table: look at the cause of death. The type of terrain and type of warfare (ambush heavy) causes a high % of deaths from small arms fire. This noticably different from WW2 and Korea, where the vast majority of infantry casualties were caused by artillery of some type.

Mike/wulfie

Sandman · « **Reply #4 on:** January 25, 2003, 02:41:01 PM »

It's a good point. What was the wash out rate during years that had the draft?

What happened to the wash outs?

wulfie · « **Reply #5 on:** January 25, 2003, 02:44:24 PM »

Another amazing statistic, showing how crucial helicopters were for medical evacuation:

Usually you'll figure 1:3 ratio for KIA:WIA. In WW2, the rate of survival for U.S. WIA was not very good (this had nothing to do with doctor quality).

Look at the loss statistics - 38,502 KIA. 5,264 died of wounds. By comparison, your chances of surviving being wounded in Viet Nam were much greater than in WW2. Partly due to medical advances, but greatly due to the speed with which casualties could reach a real operating room I'll bet.

Mike/wulfie

wulfie · « **Reply #6 on:** January 25, 2003, 02:46:21 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Sandman_SBM
It's a good point. What was the wash out rate during years that had the draft?

What happened to the wash outs?

I'd assume they were sent to non-combat positions. Western militaries have huge 'logistical tails' in general. A large number of persons work non-combat jobs for every person carrying a rifle and hunting bad guys.

Mike/wulfie

hardcase2 · « **Reply #7 on:** January 25, 2003, 03:56:44 PM »

The Marines drafted during Nam. They didn't make em Intell Officers. Pretty sure they became grunt101s.

davidpt40 · « **Reply #8 on:** January 25, 2003, 10:36:39 PM »

According to (Ret) Col. David Hackworth, who is the United States highest decorated living solider, 15-20% of all casualties in Vietnam were caused by friendly fire.

Suave · « **Reply #9 on:** January 26, 2003, 01:19:11 AM »

Supposedly draftees were not given a combat arms MOS . Even though they make up 30% of the KIA's .