As a result, less than one percent of all Americans wounded, who survived the first 24 hours, died. The helicopter provided unprecedented mobility. Without the helicopter it would have taken three times as many troops to secure the mile border with Cambodia and Laos the politicians thought the Geneva Conventions of and the Geneva Accords or would secure the border.
The Vietnamese pilot who dropped the napalm in error is currently living in the United States. News media have reported tha an American commander ordered the air strike that burned Kim Phuc. Those are incorrect. There were no Americans involved in any capacity. During that same Census count, the number of Americans falsely claiming to have served was: 9,, As of the current Census taken during August, , the surviving U. Vietnam Veteran population estimate is: 1,, During this Census count, the number of Americans falsely claiming to have served in-country is: 13,, This makes calculations of those alive, even in , difficult to maintain.
Corrections and confirmations to this errored index resulted in the addition of U. Isolated atrocities committed by American Soldiers produced torrents of outrage from anti-war critics and the news media while Communist atrocities were so common that they received hardly any media mention at all. The United States sought to minimize and prevent attacks on civilians while North Vietnam made attacks on civilians a centerpiece of its strategy. Americans who deliberately killed civilians received prison sentences while Communists who did so received commendations.
From to , the National Liberation Front assassinated 36, Vietnamese and abducted another 58, The death squads focused on leaders at the village level and on anyone who improved the lives of the peasants such as medical personnel, social workers, and school teachers. The last American troops departed in their entirety 29 March How could we lose a war we had already stopped fighting?
We fought to an agreed stalemate. The peace settlement was signed in Paris on 27 January It called for release of all U. The , evacuees in April during the fall of Saigon consisted almost entirely of civilians and Vietnamese military, NOT American military running for their lives. There were almost twice as many casualties in Southeast Asia primarily Cambodia the first two years after the fall of Saigon in than there were during the ten years the U.
Thanks for the perceived loss and the countless assassinations and torture visited upon Vietnamese, Laotians, and Cambodians goes mainly to the American media and their undying support-by-misrepresentation of the anti-War movement in the United States. As with much of the Vietnam War, the news media misreported and misinterpreted the Tet Offensive.
It was reported as an overwhelming success for the Communist forces and a decided defeat for the U. Nothing could be further from the truth. Includes many photographs. Highly readable biography of Colonel Charles E. McGee, whose exceptional war record began with the Tuskegee Airmen and extended through the Korean and Vietnam conflicts.
Includes articles, photographs, and activities. Adult Fiction. Robbins centers his novel on a driver for an African American battalion of the Red Ball Express, which played a crucial role in supplying the U.
- Catalysis without Precious Metals.
- Globalization and Transformations of Local Socio-economic Practices (Routledge Advances in Sociology)?
- Integrated River Basin Management: Practice Guideline for the IO Table Compilation and CGE Modeling.
- Political Theology: Four Chapters on the Concept of Sovereignty (Studies in Contemporary German Social Thought).
Ideal for pre-school children and early primary school students, this nicely illustrated book highlights the challenges and accomplishments of the Tuskegee pilots through the narrative of a fictional veteran talking to his grandchildren. For kids in upper elementary school. Includes very good photographs. Ironically, this unit, which had been previously discriminated against, helped liberate the Nazi concentration camps of Dachau and Buchenwald.
The relatively small amount of ammo that soldiers carrying Mausers or submachine guns was tolerated because their relative lack of firepower was compensated for by their machine guns. The intended purpose of this arraignment was for the machine guns to provide fixing firepower on the enemy while the maneuver elements flanked. They were never so foolish as to rely on good marksmanship to win the fight, and neither should U.
Kills from small arms have always been a relatively tiny percentage of overall deaths in modern conflicts, particularly so with rifles and carbines. If you think that even a sizable minority of U. I will take a platoon of guys and gals that know how to shoot M-4s in semi auto at yards with iron sights having man sized hits over people who qualify expert marksman yet can't hit a barn at 40 yards then resort to full auto mag dumps wasting precious ammo resources. The people that shoot better generally win when their leaders let them use agile and maneuver to attack rather than slug around pounds of crap like turtles.
Build a base. Drop pounds. Go fight. Return to base.
G.I. (military) - Wikipedia
You can't kill a 7. Obsolete bolt rifle my butt…. My father flew in Vietnam. He even had more marksmen training than our poor grunts get these days as a helicopter pilot with an M He learned how to adjust the sights, take up the slack, breath, and squeeZe. With iron sights. They issued him a. He never used the revolver in anger, but he was happy they issued it.
Too many videos on YT of guys behind a wall, just spraying at the Taliban. I beg to differ with the opinion about the amount of US troops that spray and pray. After years and years and countless thousands of Afgan youtube posted videos all I have seen any of our troops do is fire in fun mode full auto……no flanking or moving to counter. Just spray spray and spray some more. Half of the time from behind cover..
The idea of sustained covering fire is to put a large volume of semi on target area fire. That is usually been the job of the platoon or squad. For him that is his job…run belts through as good as he can and help his rifleman to gain ground or kills. I have seen more then enough of my share of M4's and M16A3's being rapid fired way beyond the range that a 5.
Say oh yards on out to yards. I just think that there are a lot of new younger NCO's and squad leaders that are just not as trained as the older more experienced ones were. We all know it's no fun being shot at, but there is a huge difference in taking fire from a MG42 at meters in salt water and sand then there is taking fire from a RPK at meters when wearing body armor head to crotch. There is also a difference in shooting semi aimed bursts and rapid semi auto fire and holding your M4 over a wall spraying 30 rounds into the world around you. I do agree though that ammo is not the weight to cut from a troops gear.
An old saying in Vietnam was not to carry another can of Sardines but to carry another box of loose ammo or another magazine….. Well you saw it on YouTube you must be an expert. Didn't have full auto M4s issued to units until And there's a difference between being shot at from M away and being shot at from 5 M down a hallway from a fully auto AK.
I would give these kids sacrificing their lives a little more credit. Have seen plenty of these kids shot and blown into bits despite being armored "head to crotch. My first comment is a little tongue-in-cheek, but you identified the best addition to the current transport lineup in your article: the mule. Able to go pretty much anywhere infantrymen can go. New technology is not always the answer…. My second has more to do with organization. The fact that the infantryman has to carry such a ridiculous load SO OFTEN says more about inadequate organization at multiple levels mission planning, operations, tactics, etc.
Oh man, exactly what I was thinking. During WW2 and post war, militaries were so eager to get rid of pack animals. It's honestly a bit of a mistake. Sure they require immense amount of water and food, but they are invaluable to a army's mobile logistics train. Trucks are limited to road or hard surfaces in general. Tracked vehicles are less limited, but more fuel hungry. And all vehicles are still limited by rocky terrain or dense forestry.
Instead of a mechanical mule that is loud, require trained technician… horses, camels and mules are better. Camels and mules are actually the best pack animals, better than horses. Keeping pack animals for tactical level logistics would be very helpful. Trucks can be long distance base to base. But when troops are moving out from base or from their encampment, only pack animals will keep up. This is not a new problem. When I jump today I carry pounds of high-tech, light equipment.
How about ammunition instead? During the Revolutionary War, lightly-equipped, fast moving colonials, using asymmetric guerrilla warfare tactics, defeated marching ranks of British infantry further bogged down by supply wagons. Have we become the equivalent of a 17th century Army? Yeah I'd say the 17th century equivalent is true.
In modern flavor. Too slow to move.
Pentagon spends $17,500 per soldier for high-tech protection, weapons
Too massive of an organization to change to new tactics when required to win. Put the generals in the front lines with the troops and the paper pushers will change what needs changing. Marine Officers has been able to meet the requirement, so why should we lower the standards to accommodate females. Your reply is so off base.
Nothing about all of this is about females.
Stop it. Yes they were at the beginning of the article, go back and open your pretty little snowflake eyes hunny. The point is still missed tho, the main point is not about accomodating females, its about lowering ridiculous overweight issue that happens on infantries. Its just happens to quote one retired soldier suggestion that mention about this ridiculously heavy load hinders females participants in Marine's Officer test, which is agreed by other male former military man that also regards this standard as unrealistic, and lowering this will not just benefiting servicewomen, but servicemen as well.
They Marine's Officer are able to pass this of course, but why we should hang in this unrealistic standard that will harmfull to both soldier's condition and operations in the future? Why should we burden our troops just to fulfill our unnecessary machismo standard? We training troops, not masochistic donkeys. Rez pounds is not unrealistic, especially for troops that are specialized in crew-served heavy weapons like mortars, machine guns and rocket launchers. I was in a weapons platoon and carried loads of up to lbs at times. In addition to a standard rifleman's load, I carried 2 or 3 rockets that weighed 14 pounds each.
There were guys with heavier loads than me. Preach it. Seems it's just more of a conspiracy against women to keep them from being physically equal to men…lol. Oh, wait. Biology dictates that. I feel we have become too relent on tech as a solution to our problems.
- GI: The US Infantryman in World War II by Robert S. Rush.
- Why are American soldiers called GIs? - HISTORY!
- Adult Fiction.
- Political Theology: Four Chapters on the Concept of Sovereignty (Studies in Contemporary German Social Thought)!
- US Infantryman in World War II: Mediterranean Theater of Operations 1942-45?
- Business And Religion: A Clash of Civilizations?.
- Culture matters decision-making in global virtual teams.
Like Bradleys and hmmvws today, exos and mules will go down in the future. What cannot break is the infantryman, he must be able to take the weight carried by the machine and move forward without its help. The radios consume countless batteries and no solar panel, or NATO slave module, can keep up with the demand. We need to train leaders to use brevity and reduce their EM signatures, the byproduct of this being survivability and extended battery life. For sustaining the warfighter, I would argue we pamper our infantrymen too often. The answer is reduce the size and creativity of the MRE when patrolling.
MREs have countless ounces of unnecessary weight. They have remained the same cubic center meter dimensions they did a decade ago and have reduced superficial weight through removing some cardboard packaging. Focus soldiers food intake on fuel for patrolling and not the contents of the meal. These are only two ideas, not the absolute best answers, but what I would attack before spending money in our budget constrained environment on something that might not solve the problem.
Decent points but it's already standard practice to field strip MREs and take only the basics unless we're operating from a vehicle. The discussion on the correct load for a soldier to carry is fair enough. Virtually all women have failed at this task in military tests and in civilian fire departments. The latter have been pressured to lower standards and some have. Foreign military forces like those of Canada, require the test be performed with someone of comparable weight. This artificially makes it possible for women to succeed.
The bottom line is that there are more strength-endurance issues in all branches of the military than just the fighting load carried by the infantry. This article has nothing to do with females being allowed in the infantry. Reducing the weight on any soldier or Marine is beneficial, regardless of gender.
GI’s gear costs 100 times more than in WWII
Oh yeah is the response to lb load? Dumb, dumber , dumbest. We spend endless time and dollars training our soldiers and providing them with superior skills and then overload them to the point those skills are negated. The questions of combat load require two things, discipline and moral courage.
Not on the part of the grunts but on the part of the commanders. Tell us, commander, why are heavier casualties acceptable to you? Because the infantry must close with and destroy the enemy not be a pack mule. If the unit needs something, have it freaking delivered via the myriad machines that we are blessed with. Grunts will always have to hump but their commanders are to protect them from stupidity not encourage it. Go talk to the troops that had to Ruck that pounds under fire.
Many are on disabilities today with back injuries. They are furious and would have given up pounds or more of mostly useless side and rear armor. They liked the flak jackets for urban. They liked the armor when sitting in vehicle turrets. They all complained too much to carry.
What has changed is ceramic and metal plate armor. It weighs a ton. Yes it's way better and lighter than previous generations. It still weighs a lot. Why are they carrying soft gel pistol protection armor? The gel everywhere else armor won't stop a Russian 7. To adjust for winds or gravity. Dear God… Reload the ammo brass case spent on training in US. Double the training time on shooting range for all enlisted. Same costs. Better performance on infantry accuracy. Spread the training sessions out because the shooting skill is perishable. That is SAD. Many complaints of "expert marksmen" failing to hit barn at 40 yards on first deployment.
Stop equipping CQB red dots on mountainous long range environments with no cover. ACOG or better yet a variable zoom scope!!!!
- THE WAR . At War . Life in the Infantry | PBS.
- About the Film.
- The US Army in World War II?
- An epic film documents the experiences of the citizen soldier and his community..
- Syphilis - A Medical Dictionary, Bibliography, and Annotated Research Guide to Internet References.
- Booklists - African Americans in World War II.
- National Endowment for the Humanities;
But someone who has more range time with iron sights will shoot better than any multi thousand dollar optic dude who has only shot rounds or less. The enemy uses Russian PKM. It's lighter than a FN and uses heavier ammo. It has slightly more range than 7. The enemy has packable mortars. They have reliable reloadable RPGs. Need to equip more Carl Gustavs squad level. Blow hole in mud hut.
Reload-able high explosive lobber. Bring back infantry mortars. Screw treaties.