Author Topic: US soldiers' deaths tops 5000? (Read 1367 times)

genozaur · « **Reply #30 on:** December 25, 2004, 02:34:45 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Gunslinger
You gotta keep in mind in that 1300 deaths by accident or suicide and such are not counted. Even with that I don't think the figure is anywere near 5000.

I think he's confusing the word casualites with KIA.

and technically I don't think if you die as a result of wounds sustained in combat that you are considered a KIA

Technically you are absolutely right.
But the public awareness is quite a different thing.
One notch from hysteria.

SunTracker · « **Reply #31 on:** December 26, 2004, 04:16:52 AM »

Quote

Pretty good I'd say ... being as even if true, it is still 24,000 short of the number of American dead on D-Day.

24,000 Americans didnt die on D-Day, it was around 2000 I believe.

genozaur · « **Reply #32 on:** December 26, 2004, 04:01:09 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by SunTracker
24,000 Americans didnt die on D-Day, it was around 2000 I believe.

In my opinion, the misinforming of the American people about the full scale of the US losses connected with the war on terrorism (if you consider Iraq's occupation as part of it) is only the repetition of an old war propaganda trick which was used during WWI, WWII, Korean War, Vietnam War and many wars before that.
It's a pity that the authorities can't rely on sober judgement of the people even when the country is waging the war for the right cause (or is it ?).

Anyway, the growing rate of the US military personnel KIA in Iraq and Afganistan after May 2004 is starting to exceed the average KIA rate for the Soviet Army in Afganistan (according to my rough calculations in summer 2004).
And this is disturbing !
Especially the rumours that the American soldiers in the battle field are now using plastic bags to keep their personal firearms clean from sand.
For the love of God, why the US Army top brass strictly forbids the use by the soldiers of reliable
Kalashnikov assault rifles ? Some of the Red Army tankers during WWII were using Thompson sub-machine guns along with the US tankers' helmets and the Lend-Lease M3A1 tanks.

I consider it to be sabotage and treason that the American troops die because they don't have REALLY RELIABLE personal firearms.
The story of the Army Pfc Jessica Lynch should be taught at every Military Academy in the US.

wulfie · « **Reply #33 on:** December 26, 2004, 05:50:31 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by genozaur
For the love of God, why the US Army top brass strictly forbids the use by the soldiers of reliable
Kalashnikov assault rifles ?

I consider it to be sabotage and treason that the American troops die because they don't have REALLY RELIABLE personal firearms. The story of the Army Pfc Jessica Lynch should be taught at every Military Academy in the US.

The M16 and M4 do just fine in the desert as long as you don't totally neglect them when it comes to cleaning. Any highly accurate military rifle that isn't cleaned regularly will become unhappy with its master.

The lesson that Lynch and a few others (re)learned the hard way is taught to everyone who packs a rifle. Neglect the rifle and it will neglect you when you need it and you will get killed.

AK-47s have some nice features but I gurantee that no Soviet soldier ever skipped the daily cleaning of his weapon because it was 'so robust'.

I like the AK-47 (and I really like the AK-74) but I'll take my M4 any day.

Mike/wulfie

Schaden · « **Reply #34 on:** December 27, 2004, 04:05:11 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by wulfie
The M16 and M4 do just fine in the desert as long as you don't totally neglect them when it comes to cleaning. Any highly accurate military rifle that isn't cleaned regularly will become unhappy with its master.

The lesson that Lynch and a few others (re)learned the hard way is taught to everyone who packs a rifle. Neglect the rifle and it will neglect you when you need it and you will get killed.

AK-47s have some nice features but I gurantee that no Soviet soldier ever skipped the daily cleaning of his weapon because it was 'so robust'.

I like the AK-47 (and I really like the AK-74) but I'll take my M4 any day.

Mike/wulfie

On the topic of personal weapons - Galil for me

http://world.guns.ru/assault/as23-e.htm

combination of a Ak47, Finnish Assault rifle around a nato 5.56mm round - very, very good weapon. Heavy, ugly - same weight as a M14 - but as one Master Sergeant said to me "So is my wife and I love her dearly"

and if you're in the infantry then carrying a handgun is a waste of time - except maybe if you're a paratrooper doing combat jumps - and no-one does those anymore.

I carried a 9mm for a year - total waste of time, never used it, never even thought of using it, cleaned it a LOT - and while I'm on the topic people who wear "fast draw" strap on yr leg holsters AND carry a handgun who are in the infantry are complete and total avacados who need to grow up - don't even get me started on throwing knives btw......

SunTracker · « **Reply #35 on:** December 27, 2004, 06:54:41 AM »

Quote

The M16 and M4 do just fine in the desert as long as you don't totally neglect them when it comes to cleaning.

Not to turn this into a gun thread, but soldiers shouldn't have to clean their weapons everyday.

lazs2 · « **Reply #36 on:** December 27, 2004, 09:57:51 AM »

a 9 mm with hardball ammo is pretty bad but... I think you will find that all of the elite forces in the world from swat to delta all use handguns. Not many use 9mm ball ammo tho. A handgun can be very effective in many situations.

lazs

wombatt · « **Reply #37 on:** December 27, 2004, 02:46:46 PM »

If we can all agree that you cant put a price tag on human life
then how can we ever justify war?
I mean in the end what does it solve?
From what I see all it does is kill a bunch of people and create hard feelings between countries that take years to heal.

There are of coures people in history that need to be removed from power like old Adolph but for the most part wars are avoidable as i see it.
Just MHO.

Toad · « **Reply #38 on:** December 27, 2004, 02:51:29 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by wombatt
There are of coures people in history that need to be removed from power like old Adolph but for the most part wars are avoidable as i see it.
Just MHO.

Funny, Chamberlain didn't think old Adolph need to be removed from power. As he saw it, he thought wars were avoidable for the most part.

wombatt · « **Reply #39 on:** December 27, 2004, 03:04:21 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Toad
Funny, Chamberlain didn't think old Adolph need to be removed from power. As he saw it, he thought wars were avoidable for the most part.

Well Toad If you like wars so much im sure the Marines are looking for a few good men right about now.

rshubert · « **Reply #40 on:** December 27, 2004, 03:24:41 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Pongo
The oposition looked like a day care compared to WW2 as well. Doubt he pointed that out.
but it was a hell of a victory.

Hold on, wait a minute...

Are you saying the French army would have done better?

Suave · « **Reply #41 on:** December 27, 2004, 03:43:41 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by wombatt
If we can all agree that you cant put a price tag on human life

For some people liberty is more valuable than life.

Toad · « **Reply #42 on:** December 27, 2004, 04:00:33 PM »

Well, wombatt, it's not that I like them so much, it's just that I'm enough of a realist to understand that they happen and either good men act or the bad guys win.

You've probably heard this one from Edmund Burke:

Quote

All that's necessary for the forces of evil to win in the world is for enough good men to do nothing.

I did my hitch. USAF, 1974-1980. I volunteered for the Air Guard on 9/12; they told me I was too old. I volunteered again about 6 months ago after I heard the Guard was short on recruiting. They turned me down again, same reason.

I'll give the Marines a call; you never know, eh? I'll let you know.

Anyway, I'm sure you're a good man; what have you done? Besides nothing, I mean?

wombatt · « **Reply #43 on:** December 27, 2004, 05:11:42 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Toad
Well, wombatt, it's not that I like them so much, it's just that I'm enough of a realist to understand that they happen and either good men act or the bad guys win.

You've probably heard this one from Edmund Burke:

I did my hitch. USAF, 1974-1980. I volunteered for the Air Guard on 9/12; they told me I was too old. I volunteered again about 6 months ago after I heard the Guard was short on recruiting. They turned me down again, same reason.

I'll give the Marines a call; you never know, eh? I'll let you know.

Anyway, I'm sure you're a good man; what have you done? Besides nothing, I mean?

LOL Good Lord man is that really the best you can do?
I quess I could come back with i served in the US Army 1976-1981
you know the REAL military:D

But that would be tacky would it not.
Let's just say we both did our part and leave it at that.
And as one who serverd you of all people should be the first to hate war as you where one of the ones who might have had to fight one.

wulfie · « **Reply #44 on:** December 27, 2004, 06:28:46 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by SunTracker
Not to turn this into a gun thread, but soldiers shouldn't have to clean their weapons everyday.

I don't think they 'have to' with the M4 or M16 either. I have treated my M4 in a less-than-stellar manner on more than one occasion and it has never let me down.

I am not a gun or gun history expert like some here (lazs2, etc.) but I did ask some of the 'super gun experts' about the M16 back when I was learning the basics and every time the response I got was "It got bad press initially in Viet Nam and that's never gone away because gun magazine writers need something to write about when they are in a slump".

I wasn't there when Lynch got ambushed but my gut instinct is that She and others didn't have their immediate action drills down like they should have (and that may or may not be their fault - did the O or NCO in her unit responsible for tactical training run the courses and get ignored? Or were the courses not run often enough or in the proper way? If someone really wanted to know they could probably dig for the information and find it) and that combined with weapons that had been poorly maintained (maybe thru having no other choice...who knows?) is going to be bad news every time.

We do know that one guy in her unit - a former real-deal infantryman had no problem getting his M16 into bullet-launching mode and made the Iraqis pay dearly. And we do know that the M16 and M4 have seen more combat use over there in the sand over the past couple of years than any other combat rifle (we do more shooting than the bad guys - much to their brief chagrin) and if there were an actual problem with the current weapons in a sandy place it would get changed or people would start to hear about it.

I've played with G36s and they are sweet. But I didn't have the instant urge to chuck my M4, pay Yuri the RIfluffied KGB field guy to get me a new German ID, and screen for KSK.

The current M16s and the M4 are good guns. They perform well and they get the job done. I hear guys complain about issued weapons all the time, but the M16 and the M4 aren't the ones being complained about.

Mike/wulfie