I made this graph showing the number of dead versus the number of wounded. I find it interesting that the number of wounded dropped so sharply in September. It certainly may just be an anomaly, we’ll have to wait and see. These numbers are all the dead no matter what the cause, but only the wounded in battle. So if a soldier is killed in a traffic accident it is counted, if another soldier is hurt in that same accident it is not shown.
The average dead through the campaign is about 68 so the 62 last month is down, but not that much. But with the wounded average at 515, 186 is significant. I was also interested in the 2004 numbers, it looks to me like this timeframe was the perfect storm of the enemy having better tactics than us and the elections (theirs and ours) being held. The elections made it imperative to terrorize the locals and try and convince the anti war left in America to surrender. Terrorizing the locals was probably harder.
This was about the time we were getting our asses handed to us by the enemy with their use of IEDs and RPGs. They were very effective against the lightly armored humvees. So we adapted with slat armor on the vehicles and rushed systems like Stryker and the Buffalo into service along with a host of robots to clear the roads of the booby traps, we also developed jamming equipment to jam the cell phone signals the enemy was using to detonate the bombs. After that year injuries dropped significantly and leveled off. That of course is how wars are fought, won and lost. You attack your enemies weaknesses, they adapt and you change your tactics adapting to changes in their tactics and so on. The side with the most resources, innovations and will wins.
The average dead through the campaign is about 68 so the 62 last month is down, but not that much. But with the wounded average at 515, 186 is significant. I was also interested in the 2004 numbers, it looks to me like this timeframe was the perfect storm of the enemy having better tactics than us and the elections (theirs and ours) being held. The elections made it imperative to terrorize the locals and try and convince the anti war left in America to surrender. Terrorizing the locals was probably harder.
This was about the time we were getting our asses handed to us by the enemy with their use of IEDs and RPGs. They were very effective against the lightly armored humvees. So we adapted with slat armor on the vehicles and rushed systems like Stryker and the Buffalo into service along with a host of robots to clear the roads of the booby traps, we also developed jamming equipment to jam the cell phone signals the enemy was using to detonate the bombs. After that year injuries dropped significantly and leveled off. That of course is how wars are fought, won and lost. You attack your enemies weaknesses, they adapt and you change your tactics adapting to changes in their tactics and so on. The side with the most resources, innovations and will wins.
Source: GlobalSecurity.org
No comments:
Post a Comment