anyone notice that the the number of wounded per killed in iraq is double that of vietnam?

Question

Former medic here who speculates we are saving more (better gear, better evac systems) wonder about societal effects, etc.

proof is simple math: vietnam 153303(w)/47424(d)=3.23 wounded to each killed
iraq 22401(w)/3027(d)=7.4 wounded per dead
thanx for numbers dipydoda

seems like we are headed for a greater post iraq shattered vet scenario than talked about. doesn't even account for post traumatic stress. come on vets, get riled up!

Answer 1

Seems everyones has it correct, wow for a change, my take is as a former medic, then psychologist:

Vietnam was often "high intensity" combat so when the vet noted "RPG's, mortars, etc and small arms" well it was that but:
using in a massed attack or amush: hence a lot of men killed, in a single action.

Our "flack vests" well they were good for shrapnel, if not a huge chunk. We walked mostly and well that jacket killed from heat exhaustion.

The other ratio was helicopter and aviation crashes: often entire crew and passengers: no wounded just killed, thus the ration we see today.

MedEvac was good, in Vietnam dangerous but the choppers were slower, less armored. Brave crews, absurd KIA rate for them DUSTOFFers.

In an action such as August 1969 we had about 60 killed in a few days, 240 wounded: that 4:1 ratio. But I'd guess we would have saved 20-25 or more of the wounded today. As the senior battalion "Doc" this still hurts. Way too many bleed out, went into shock, nearly all our head injuries died, some days later in a rear hospital, even in Japan.

See below I keep in contact with my comrades; was the Association Historian for decades, glad to share it with you.

We have a message board (when it works) and a Guest Book.

Your final query: the effects upon society? The PTSD issues will be another generations nightmare, the VA is just taxed, the "good" news is that physical rehabilitation and vocational rehabilitation seem to be doing great, not perfect. My area of practice was/is as a psychologist for those with severe physical injuries: spinal cord and brain injury. I know some about PTSD but do not venture in that area.

Answer 2

Medevac in Viet Nam was iffy at best. The Medevac choppers were the favorite targets of the Viet Cong and as a result most of the wounded had to be ground transported to field hospitals.
Also the types of injuries are quite different. Roadside bombs account for the majority of casualties in Iraq. These kill next to the center of the blast and injure and maim as the blast works outward. In Viet Nam, mortar's, rpg's and bullets were the killers. Much smaller blasts.

Answer 3

I am 50; i lived through the hell of Vietnam; this will be the current young generation's vietnam legacy. Many shattered soldiers coming back, and many coming back in a box. This is horrible.

Answer 4

A lot has to do with the vests they wear now that protects vital organs, and the advances in medical care.

Answer 5

I did notice. You and I remember Vietnam. So we can tell the difference.

Answer 6

chunkymonkey is exactly right.

I don't even think we've begun to calculate the effect this is going to have on the current generation.

God, I thought we weren't going to do Vietnam again......and here we are!

It sickens me!

Answer 7

Y E S, I have noticed that, but I am not sure about any
societal effects yet!!

Answer 8

yes, wounded are saved because of sophisticated equipments and advanced facilities, which were not there in vietnam.

Answer 9

No I didn't notice. Where is your proof? Cite examples and sources. Explain in detail.

Answer 10

That's good news you know.More people are living.