You just gotta love how US military say everything openly and in their reports. In particular, it has a forecast of US casualties and mobilization reserves in a conflict of this level.
Thesis:
- military doctors project a [KIA and WIA] casualty rate for the US Armed Forces of 3,600\day.
- The combat replenishment rate is 25% or 800 troops per day.
- In 20 years of combat in Iraq and Afghanistan, the U.S. has lost about 50,000 people.
In a conflict of the Ukrainian level, the U.S. would suffer such losses in 2 weeks.
- The recruitment shortage is a major problem.
- every soldier not recruited today is a strategic mobility asset [IRR or reservists] that the US will not have in 2031**
- IRR was 700K in 1973, 450K in 1994, now at 76K.
- These numbers will not make up for the projected losses.
- the 70’s concept of contract forces is outdated and does not fit the current operational environment.
- The needs of the U.S. Armed Forces for a Ukrainian-level war require a transition to conscription.
I don’t think it is sensible to talk about having a Ukrainian level war without also having the Ukrainian scenario or context i.e. being invaded by a next door neighbor with a powerful military.
I feel like there are a whole bunch of important tactics lessons to be learned, like dealing with small grenade dropping drones, but the way that the United States conducts war is pretty different.
If the United States somehow found itself needing to repel and invasion, it is pretty obvious that enlistment rates would suddenly be very different.
Context matters.
US military doesn’t focus on fantasy scenarios though. Their interest is in real world scenarios where US is the invader.
Exactly. So why waste time deciding on conscripted soldiers for a fantasy Ukrainian scenario?
What you evidently missed here is that this is discussing what’s currently happening to the Ukrainian army and their losses. That’s what they’re making their projections based on.
You evidently missed my point which is that the situation for the Ukrainian people is unique to them. The whole What If That Was Us is pure speculative fantasy and not useful.
Except that’s not true at all, what the paper shows is what US can expect if it finds itself in a direct conflict with a peer competitor. Given that US continues trying to provoke a war with China, that’s not that speculative of a scenario.
That is a very big “if”, keeping in mind that the US has not seen a war on its mainland since 1865.
Agreed. Plus it wouldn’t be remotely comparable.
Ukraine provoked such a invasion for 8 years straight. It wasn’t russian troops doing ethnic cleansing in Donbas.
Nah, see. I agree with this bit. Because Ukraine is exactly how United States conducts war - by having someone else do it, while the wall street filth laugh and clink their wine glasses, assured in their own safety and proud of such profitable investment