Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!att!cbnews!cbnews!military From: A512JANW%HASARA11.BITNET@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU (Jan Wim Wesselius) Newsgroups: sci.military Subject: Re: Where do the most casualties occur ? Message-ID: <1991Jan21.034052.1130@cbnews.att.com> Date: 21 Jan 91 03:40:52 GMT References: <1991Jan15.021152.22475@cbnews.att.com> Sender: military@cbnews.att.com (William B. Thacker) Organization: SARA - Stichting Academisch Rekencentrum Amsterdam Lines: 29 Approved: military@att.att.com From: Jan Wim Wesselius On 19 January 1991 Brian K. W. Hook (jdb@reef.cis.ufl.edu) wrote: | In article <1991Jan17.052222.27310@cbnews.att.com> ab3o+@andrew.cmu.edu | (Allan Bourdius) writes: |> Point of information: In WWII, 80% of casualties suffered in battle by |> the US Army were absorbed by the infantry. This number is even more |> shocking when you consider that only 10% of the Army were infantrymen. | I don't find this very shocking at all when you consider that the people | doing the fighting are infantrymen! Stating that this is shocking is akin | to saying "Wow, you know that in the average football game, players take | most of the injuries and the coaching staff almost takes NONE!?" | Not being facetious, just making what I thought was an obvious observation. Well, whether or not you think it shocking, the average American volunteer or conscript certainly has experienced it that way, which (among other causes) led to the generally recognized rather poor quality of the American infantry soldier in this century (see, e.g., Dunnigan *et al.*). In armies where this imbalance is smaller the PBI tends to be more respected and valued, if only because of increased self-respect... Jan Wim Wesselius, University of Amsterdam A512JANW@HASARA11 // Wesselius@SARA.NL