How come there were more soldiers in WWll than in Iraq?

Question

I know we had more than 4 million (does anyone know how many soldiers we had in WWll?). In Iraq, we have like 250,000 soldiers. How come we don't have more soldiers? And also Afghanistan? Why aren't we taking those measures that we took back then now? I believe we could've won these wars if we had more power. And why isn't the US doing more research for weapons and stuff, like WWll?

Answer 1

World War Two, in terms of manpower; The Army fielded 91 combat divisions of approximately 20 thousand men each while the Marine Corps had 6 combat division and a couple of Amphibious Corps which all total probably accounted for something like ten divisions when you include all the Corps assets.

All these ground forces deployed in two major theaters of command, the Pacific and European Theaters. Pacific was divided into two sub-commands; Southwest Pacific - U.S. Navy under Nimitz and Southeast Pacific - U.S. Army under MacArthur. The European Theater of Operations had command areas such as North Africa, Italy, Northern Europe, Central Europe and Southern Europe.

The scale of military ground operations was so much greater in World War Two that one cannot make a fair comparision to the war in Iraq....

Answer 2

I'm not completely sure why there is a smaller amount of soldiers in this war then there were in World War two but I know for a fact that the soldiers in this war are scattered all over the Middle East, so maybe you should add all of those numbers up, and see what you get.

Answer 3

because we were facing germany. a nation that actually had the capabilities of waging a war with us globally, and on many fronts. not to mention war back in those days was more centralized along quantity. basically, Germany is 10 times more powerful than iraq.

Answer 4

These days, it costs far more to train, pay and equip each individual soldier. Not to mention they actually conscripted a lot of those soldiers ("the draft" is just another term for conscription, before anyone busts an artery).

That and WW2 tactics and technology were far more outdated. They didn't have pairs of aircraft knocking out dozens of tanks in one pass, laser guided bombs, Javelin missiles or even the humble helicopter as force multipliers in those days.

Answer 5

Look at the words:

WORLD WAR TWO

now look at the words

Iraq War.

Spot the difference??

World = Many Countries!

Iraq = 1 country.

Answer 6

Well, at the time emphasis was simply placed on large numbers of soldiers. Though efficient weapons developed, armies became large as the war went on. Also after Vietnam, we became an all volunteer force with a large emphasis on training and technology. That's why we decreased our number of soldiers, since the current troops were better equipped and trained for the task.

Answer 7

what??? Iraq is a very small country as opposed to western Europe,north Africa,the enter pacific, and all the other places fighting was going on during world war 2 go get a clue.

Answer 8

16 million servedin the Armed Forces in WWII. that was 10% of the population back then. today we have .5% of the population defending us. it's all about manpower. since we don't have enough manpower, we are forced to rely on private military companies like Blackwater to run logistic task that would drain the army of men. we just don't have enough men to get the job done. and that would and is delaying the return of our troops in iraq

Answer 9

back then we needed that much. Battles were fought by the hundreds now all we need is a hand full of soldiers a laptop a GPS and a carrier in range and we can wipe almost any number of combatants.

Answer 10

There was a draft! Weapons research is going hot and strong. Watch the military channel for the latest stuff.