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

How are wars fought today?

and what was different that greatly decreased the number of casualties from WW2 to the Iraq war?

2007-11-28 13:42:43 · 6 answers · asked by SF Giants 4 in Politics & Government Military

6 answers

we are fighting an enemy that is hidden in the population.

what has brought down casualties is the Armour, to include body Armour, and medicine.

The advances in combat medicine has changed the casual tie rate more than anything else.

2007-11-28 13:52:17 · answer #1 · answered by SFC_Ollie 7 · 0 1

Too many rules now adays, Too many weak politicians, not enough patriotism, a weaker mindset for the pride of being Americans. Thats the main difference of how wars are fought now and then. Casualty rate, much better medical technology, I mean inn WW2 you got shot in the arm and you died from bleeding, now you get your arm and legs blown off and you live. Well on the other hand technology is the biggest part of how wars are fought. More intel and airstrikes, I guess that helps.

2007-11-28 14:20:26 · answer #2 · answered by juan68701 4 · 0 0

Mainly with Combined arms techniques, Air power and Missile technology. Thats for a modern Force, other primitive Armies use hit and run and insurgent tactics. Then when a position of streagth is obtained they expand and attack in mass with Infantry and Tanks, to overwhelm the enemy. In political terms theres a more of a hand tied behind the back way of fighting, weak willed public, and too much opinionation in the fighting forces that dilute from combat effectiveness. (least in Western forces)

Main differance is better and faster equipment, and numbers of troops are alot lower. In fact in such low numbers we don't know how modern forces would fare on a massive and well dug in low tech Army. Also casualties are lower given advances in medical technology, and in the US Military, the use of helicopters to quickly move wounded to field hospitals and save them from what would have been a death.

2007-11-29 02:03:37 · answer #3 · answered by TK-421 2 · 0 0

Better technology leads to a change in tactics. We no longer have to send in a division of troops to take over a beachhead that it well defended. All we need to do now is fire a couple cruise missles at the air defense sites than send in the bombers to clear the area. Or just have the battleships bombard it from the sea.

Body armor is used and has been greatly improved leading to less "devastating" injuries. This why the number of amputees is up in Iraq. Many of the amputees would be KIA in WWII, but due to the advancement in body armor, they are surviving the wounds, but lose limbs.

Finally, medical treatment is much better than it was. Also, we are able to evacute our wounded quicker because of helicopters, not in use during WWII.

These are just a few examples.

2007-11-28 13:51:47 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

The biggest factors for decreasing causalities, talking about the mix between wounded and killed, is advances in medicine, advanced field hospitals and the use of the helicopter to rapidly evacuate wounded. I assume that is what you are looking at-total casualties have to do with number of troops involved and intensity of operations.

2007-11-28 13:53:16 · answer #5 · answered by GunnyC 6 · 0 0

right now we are not fighting a full scale war, we are dealing with terrorists taht hide in buildings blowing jeeps up

2007-11-28 13:46:52 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers