English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I assume at present that on a tour of duty there would be more fatalities for soldiers (infantry and all other units) than for officers, however if anyone could tell me a webpage where I could find the info I would appreciate it. Thanks

2007-11-13 09:52:03 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Military

Thanks to answers so far, however I probably wasnt very clear what I meant. I know there are alot more regular soldiers than officers in the army, however for every 1000 regular soldiers and every 1000 officers which group would typically have more fatalalities in a tour of duty?

2007-11-13 10:05:37 · update #1

I mean fatalities.

2007-11-13 10:07:00 · update #2

good point Barnababe, but I mean the British, or US army. I have a presentation in the morning so really need to find out and I am sooooo tired.

2007-11-13 10:08:59 · update #3

Thanks everyone, that has given me stuff to think about, but if I was trying to make the point about the inequality between soldiers and officers should I call them commissioned officers and do they have a much safer job than NCOs?

2007-11-13 10:17:39 · update #4

13 answers

It's always more dangerous statistically to be a lower-enlisted soldier than it is to be a higher-ranking non-commissioned officer, commissioned officer, or warrant officer. Not only because the lower enlisted far outnumber everyone else, but because they're far more likely to be doing the dirty work--whether that's a foot patrol in Baghdad, a cordon-and-search in Ramadi, a weapons-cache disposal in Kandahar, or switching an engine out of a Black Hawk or a Bradley in the motorpool back home at Ft. Bragg. They're involved in more of the actual manuevering, heavy lifting, and being in the line of fire than higher-ranking individuals, simply because their rank, lack of experience, and place in the pecking order. It's not mean; it's just how the military hierarchy works, not to mention the simple ratio of lower-enlisted to all higher-ranking individuals. That isn't to say that non-commissioned officers, commissioned officers, and warrant officers aren't hurt or killed, too, because they are--but there's fewer of them, and they're also more likely to be further behind the front lines because of their jobs or their positions, particularly commissioned officers. NCO's and warrants, plus very low-ranking commissioned officers, are more likely to be in harm's way than a high-ranking commissioned officer.

2007-11-13 10:20:08 · answer #1 · answered by ಠ__ಠ 7 · 1 0

The question you ask is a very important one, but wont be answered until a scholar chooses to research it in detail. The question of combat casualties in the officer corp would be exhaustive in the detail required. A Blackhawk went down with all bighats onboard, made the cover of a weekly, but it was an ash and trash flight, not combat. You need to keep a keen eye on news reports, watch the firefights that the news stringers shoot for the networks, rare is there ever an officer in the segment. Watch the casualty lists, and use your own judgment. I did find one academic study by doing a google on this 6 months ago, but were just raw numbers, trend is 25% down, but I'll bet it's more.

2007-11-14 17:25:11 · answer #2 · answered by Edith P 1 · 0 0

Pay and job responsibilities especially Officer - you're in cost of the team and you supply the orders Enlisted - You stick without the orders and complete the challenge The Officer is extremely like the shop supervisor in case you think of of a Dept shop at your interior reach mall. The Enlisted are each and every of the staff in the inventory rooms and on the floor as revenues buddies. There are quite a few dept managers that must be senior enlisted reporting to the officer yet coping with the staff. i'm hoping that analogy made experience. The Officer finally holds all accountability for their Dept/Command, and so on. So if a junior enlisted makes a huge mistake it could advise the Officer is likewise in jeopardy for lack of self assurance in command.

2016-11-11 10:04:31 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

Officer's are regular soldiers.

Officers are in command of units.

Non-Commissioned Officers ensure enlisted soldiers and lower ranked Non-Commissioned Officers are trained to standard.

Enlisted soldiers are the workers, they accomplish the majority of the work, supervised by NCO's and commanded by Officers.

Since there are more enlisted soldiers in a unit, it is more dangerous for them.
Hope that helps!

2007-11-13 10:10:51 · answer #4 · answered by Bubba 6 · 1 0

as a SGT in the US Army, it is the officers job to make up the rules/missions, and the SGT's to insure that is gets done. it is a SGT's job to insure everyone is safe, and makes it back OK. however if we are taking %'s here, 1000 enlisted to every 1000 commisioned officers. i would really have to say there are more officer deaths in combat. however it is more danerouse for the enlisted troops. we get sent to the thick of it while the LT waits in the truck. i really think the main reason all the Jr. Officers get hurt/killed is because they don't listen to all the senior knowledge they have all around them. where a private knows to do what ever his SGT tells him to do.

2007-11-13 10:17:37 · answer #5 · answered by old bitty 6 · 1 0

More enlisted ranks are casualties than commissioned ranks because there are more of them. I do not know military terminology very well but if a platoon consists of 20 men and one officer and there are say 20 platoons out there I would expect 20 men to be killed before 1 officer. If you look hard at this it means that satirically they have an equal chance of being killed. given that a junior platoon officer is there to lead his men I would suggest his chances of being killed or wounded if he does his job are greater than that

2007-11-13 10:07:59 · answer #6 · answered by Scouse 7 · 1 0

Yes, statically, there are a lot more enlisted than officers.

A platoon of approximately 30 men is commanded by a Lieutenant, so that makes it about 30:1

Try Defenselink:

www.defenselink.mil

2007-11-13 09:58:21 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 3 0

I'm not trying to be a smart butt so please don't report me. I would think it depended on which country you lived in. History has shown that officers in some countries do not play by the same rules we do. They stand behind their men to make sure they stay there, I'll let the rest be up to your own imagination.

2007-11-13 10:03:46 · answer #8 · answered by Bamababe 2 · 1 0

In a war zone it would go as follows raido operator machine gunner and then the officer and when he goes down so does everyone else......well at least that is what we were always taught in the military!

2007-11-13 10:00:03 · answer #9 · answered by ktmoney101 2 · 1 0

Actually the junior officers lead them in battle.

2007-11-13 10:07:16 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

fedest.com, questions and answers