- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Louisiana fatal casualties of the Vietnam War
Posted on 2/3/15 at 9:07 am to Darth_Vader
Posted on 2/3/15 at 9:07 am to Darth_Vader
quote:
remember watching the movie "We Were Soldiers" and at the end of it they gave a full list of the men who died there. I was surprised to see a guy from the tiny town I grew up just outside the city limits.
Underrated movie imo. I learned a lot watching that flick and researching the facts behind it.
1
Posted on 2/3/15 at 9:08 am to mikelbr
quote:
Obviously not the part where I mentioned watching the Vietnam in HD series over MLK holiday and THEN go on to mention that the Korean War shocked me more than Vietnam b/c I had no idea of the number of soldiers we lost there. Turd butt
Oh, sorry, I missed the part where the discussion dovetailed off into the Korean War. My bad.
Posted on 2/3/15 at 9:10 am to ctiger69
Vietnam was a meat grinder, a real infantry soldiers war. When I was at the Infantry School we were told a WW2 Infantry soldier would spend 10 days in combat over a 12 month period, a Vietnam infantry soldier would spend 240 in combat over a 13 month tour, think about that.
Until some fairness came around in the draft process in 1970 it was also a war fought mostly by poor kids, if you want to make yourself wretch google the heroic draft evasion exploits of Dick Cheney, Rush Limbaugh and Ted Nugent.
Late for a depo but I'll come back and post some good reading material on the subject for those interested.
Until some fairness came around in the draft process in 1970 it was also a war fought mostly by poor kids, if you want to make yourself wretch google the heroic draft evasion exploits of Dick Cheney, Rush Limbaugh and Ted Nugent.
Late for a depo but I'll come back and post some good reading material on the subject for those interested.
Posted on 2/3/15 at 9:10 am to mikelbr
quote:
Underrated movie imo.
It's one of those I have to pull out so often and re-watch. I just recently watched it with my son and loved it. Even my wife who's not a big fan of war movies loves it. The part where the taxi driver keeps bringing the telegrams makes her cry every time.
Posted on 2/3/15 at 9:10 am to REB BEER
quote:
For those that have never heard of the Battle for Firebase Ripcord, it must've been hell for 23 straight days.
Is that the siege where reinforcements were literally told to jump out a moving plane because the runway was being blown to shite too? That was in the Netflix documentary but I don't recall the name of the firebase.
Posted on 2/3/15 at 9:12 am to Lakeboy7
quote:
would spend 10 days in combat over a 12 month period, a Vietnam infantry soldier would spend 240 in combat over a 13 month tour, think about that.
That was also mentioned in the documentary. Wtf they had to know that would seriously frick up a lot of men's mental health.
Posted on 2/3/15 at 9:13 am to Lakeboy7
quote:
Vietnam was a meat grinder, a real infantry soldiers war. When I was at the Infantry School we were told a WW2 Infantry soldier would spend 10 days in combat over a 12 month period, a Vietnam infantry soldier would spend 240 in combat over a 13 month tour, think about that.
I think you were given a false picture comparative of the WWII infantry soldier's experience to that of the Vietnam infantry solider's experience. When it comes to talking meat grinders, Vietnam was far less of a meat grinder than WWII. It was bad to be sure, but nothing like what was seen between 1941 & 1945.
Posted on 2/3/15 at 9:25 am to Darth_Vader
quote:
I think you were given a false picture comparative of the WWII infantry soldier's experience to that of the Vietnam infantry solider's experience. When it comes to talking meat grinders, Vietnam was far less of a meat grinder than WWII. It was bad to be sure, but nothing like what was seen between 1941 & 1945.
That was explained Vietnam In HD. It's not to say the battles were less costly in WWII. Just sheer hours under duress of active combat. The statistic is impossible to ignore and is shocking we(the US) would subject soldiers to that in a FOREIGN war(not defending our soil directly).
Posted on 2/3/15 at 9:28 am to Lakeboy7
quote:
Vietnam was a meat grinder, a real infantry soldiers war. When I was at the Infantry School we were told a WW2 Infantry soldier would spend 10 days in combat over a 12 month period, a Vietnam infantry soldier would spend 240 in combat over a 13 month tour, think about that.
My uncle was in Europe during WW2 and I can assure you that he spent more than 10 days in combat form the time he landed in France in June '44 until the end of the war.
Posted on 2/3/15 at 9:29 am to ctiger69
Yeah - my mom was born in 1946 - she went to high school with, probably, dozens who ended up serving during the period and a handful who died in Vietnam - more than 1 from her high school class.
Not quite like WWII, where every family was affected, but we had millions serve in Vietnam, so everyone knew someone who served and almost everyone of that generation knew someone who didn't come home.
Not quite like WWII, where every family was affected, but we had millions serve in Vietnam, so everyone knew someone who served and almost everyone of that generation knew someone who didn't come home.
This post was edited on 2/3/15 at 9:30 am
Posted on 2/3/15 at 9:29 am to mikelbr
quote:
That was explained Vietnam In HD. It's not to say the battles were less costly in WWII. Just sheer hours under duress of active combat. The statistic is impossible to ignore and is shocking we(the US) would subject soldiers to that in a FOREIGN war(not defending our soil directly).
I see what you're saying but one aspect you've got to take into account is that the average solider in Vietnam served one 12 month tour and even with that would go out on missions and then return to the relative comfort and safety of a secure base. The WWII grunt on the other hand was literally in the fight for the duration of the war. For the most part the only way for the WWII soldier to get out of the fight was to be killed or injured.
Posted on 2/3/15 at 9:36 am to Darth_Vader
quote:
see what you're saying but one aspect you've got to take into account is that the average solider in Vietnam served one 12 month tour and even with that would go out on missions and then return to the relative comfort and safety of a secure base. The WWII grunt on the other hand was literally in the fight for the duration of the war. For the most part the only way for the WWII soldier to get out of the fight was to be killed or injured.
Yea that makes sense. There was a part of the show where a guy comes from intense battle and is sent for a weekend of R&R at a beach with booze and chicks but he couldn't help but feel guilty as hell knowing what was going on the front lines.
Posted on 2/3/15 at 9:36 am to Ace Midnight
To give a good example of what WWII was like compared to Vietnam, I'll cite the mostly forgotten Battle of Hurtgen Forest that was fought from September through December 1944. In this one battle fought over a few month period the US suffered over 30,000 casualties and many of the infantry battalions that were engaged suffered losses over 70-80%. And this battle only wrapped up due to the German's launching their winter offensive that history knows as The Battle of the Bulge where the US suffered another roughly 100,000 casualties in a little over a month.
Now add in on top of that the fact the US was also at that same time having men fighting and dying every day in Italy and then there's the whole Pacific theater going on as well and you get a picture of just how huge of a meat grinder WWII actually was.
Now add in on top of that the fact the US was also at that same time having men fighting and dying every day in Italy and then there's the whole Pacific theater going on as well and you get a picture of just how huge of a meat grinder WWII actually was.
This post was edited on 2/3/15 at 9:42 am
Posted on 2/3/15 at 9:38 am to ctiger69
My uncle was killed in Vietnam, he was only 19.
E. : when I was born I was given his name. Im honored
E. : when I was born I was given his name. Im honored
This post was edited on 2/3/15 at 9:41 am
Posted on 2/3/15 at 9:43 am to Darth_Vader
quote:
I see what you're saying but one aspect you've got to take into account is that the average solider in Vietnam served one 12 month tour and even with that would go out on missions and then return to the relative comfort and safety of a secure base.
Vietnam was a lot of "haves" and "have nots", though Darth. WWII saw a lot of rotation, because of the scope of the war. A lot of units saw a lot of combat, but, think about it - lets take a fairly extreme example - 3rd Armored Division - unit was activated and trained in Louisiana from April 1941, to July 1942. Then it moved to California and then Pennsylvania for additional training before shipping off to England, where they stayed from September 1943 to late June 1944 when they moved to Normandy to take part in Operation Cobra (technically, they were in Normandy for the last few days of Overlord - after the storm).
They saw 231 days of combat from June 24, 1944 to V-E Day, then went into occupation duties.
It was not uncommon for Vietnam era draftees - particularly for Army infantry units and USMC rifle platoons to see 300 days of combat, depending on when and where they ended up in SE Asia. And you had others stationed in Saigon and Thailand that saw very little action.
But the worst part was the shock - the draftees got a few weeks of training, a few days of leave and they might be in combat 4 or 5 days after being in their living room. The reverse was true as well. Those guys who ended up seeing a lot of action - many of them were in a firefight on a Thursday, leave Vietnam and be back in their living room with mom and dad the following Tuesday or Wednesday.
I'm not saying either generation's experience was easier or harder, but for certain elements of the Vietnam generation, it was certainly different and more jarring - and I'm not even getting into how they were treated by their "grateful nation" for a decade or more.
This post was edited on 2/3/15 at 9:45 am
Posted on 2/3/15 at 9:50 am to Ace Midnight
quote:
Vietnam was a lot of "haves" and "have nots", though Darth. WWII saw a lot of rotation, because of the scope of the war. A lot of units saw a lot of combat, but, think about it - lets take a fairly extreme example - 3rd Armored Division - unit was activated and trained in Louisiana from April 1941, to July 1942. Then it moved to California and then Pennsylvania for additional training before shipping off to England, where they stayed from September 1943 to late June 1944 when they moved to Normandy to take part in Operation Cobra (technically, they were in Normandy for the last few days of Overlord - after the storm).
They saw 231 days of combat from June 24, 1944 to V-E Day, then went into occupation duties.
It was not uncommon for Vietnam era draftees - particularly for Army infantry units and USMC rifle platoons to see 300 days of combat, depending on when and where they ended up in SE Asia. And you had others stationed in Saigon and Thailand that saw very little action.
But the worst part was the shock - the draftees got a few weeks of training, a few days of leave and they might be in combat 4 or 5 days after being in their living room. The reverse was true as well. Those guys who ended seeing a lot of action - many of them were in a firefight on a Thursday, leave Vietnam and be back in their living room with mom and dad the following Tuesday or Wednesday.
I'm not saying either generation's experience was easier or harder, but for certain elements of the Vietnam generation, it was certainly different and more jarring - and I'm not even getting into how they were treated by their "grateful nation" for a decade or more.
Good points. But one thing I will point out is that the total number of days in combat can be a bit misleading due to the different enemies faces in the two wars and the way in which those enemies operated. If you look at the average infantryman in WWII in Europe he was facing an enemy that offered active combined arms resistance on a daily basis. The enemy that our infantrymen faced in Vietnam though had a far different method of fighting in that other than the rare pitched battle for the most part sought to avoid major and sustained contact with any American field forces.
Thus while almost every day of "combat" for the grunt in WWII was actual combat in the sense there were bullets, bombs, and shells flying back and forth, in Vietnam most of the "combat" days were spent trudging through the jungle just trying to find someone to shoot at. This was very stressful to be sure, but at the same time a different experience than that of the WWII grunt.
This post was edited on 2/3/15 at 9:58 am
Posted on 2/3/15 at 9:53 am to Ace Midnight
quote:
Vietnam was a lot of "haves" and "have nots
My cousin was assigned to the motor pool in Saigon, he saw no combat, never was near any fighting. He says that those were some of the best days of his life, partying, hooking up with fine Vietnamese chicks, great drugs, etc.
Posted on 2/3/15 at 9:56 am to doublecutter
quote:
He says that those were some of the best days of his life, partying, hooking up with fine Vietnamese chicks, great drugs, etc.
I have wondered about myself in Vietnam. I think I would have accidentally overdosed on something before taking a bullet in combat. Hah but seriously. The availability of drugs there was nuts. Is there a good book to read about that by chance? I would like to learn more about the blind eye turned by our leaders and the distribution channels of drugs to the soldiers in SE Asia back then.
This post was edited on 2/3/15 at 9:57 am
Posted on 2/3/15 at 9:57 am to Darth_Vader
quote:
If you look at the average infantryman in WWII in Europe he was facing an enemy that offered active combined arms resistance on a daily basis.
No question - and I think you had more "combat exhaustion"/PTSD because guys who were unsuited for that level of combat were quickly identified.
quote:
The enemy that our infantrymen faced in Vietnam though had a far different method of fighting in that other than the rare pitched battle for the most part sought to avoid major and sustained contact with any American field forces.
Certainly true as well. But you had far more up close and personal, hand-to-hand engagements out in the jungle and villages. I'm not dismissing the points about the differences in enemy - but our guys were different, too. There was a certain national "enthusiasm" about WWII - guys volunteering, whole families enlisting, etc.
In Vietnam, particularly as the war dragged on - a dread, a hesitance, and the guys who were drafted (and who actually showed up to be inducted, versus avoiding, dodging or actually fleeing the war) were in survival mode, rather than victory mode - that whole perspective shaped our entire war experience.
Best take on this is "If I Die in a Combat Zone" - by Tim O'Brien.
This post was edited on 2/3/15 at 9:58 am
Posted on 2/3/15 at 9:59 am to Ace Midnight
quote:My dad, who was a pilot, didn't see any rotation. He flew PBY's rescuing pilots and the Marine's version of B-24's taking photographs of enemy held islands. He did these kind of missions for two and one-half years.
WWII saw a lot of rotation
I like reading his flight books. Plucking downed pilots out of North Korea, transporting Admiral Nimitz back from the Japanese surrender, and some oddly timed "blank" areas (e.g. the Cuban Missile Crisis - he was in Miami flying every day on "training" exercises, until two weeks before the crisis - at that point his book is blank).
On his third tour of Vietnam, the war was winding down. Politicians wanted ground patrols, even though they knew the war was almost over. The VC would booby trap the troops. So my Dad and his commanding general ignored the politicos and started using helicopters to drop the Marines on top of the enemy. It worked very well, with no more booby trap casualties.
I know, TL/DR, but my dad is 91 and having a bad time as my mother is in hospice (they have been married 65 years).
Page 3 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News