Quote Originally Posted by Fuchs View Post
The math is not universal.
There are obvious exceptions to every rule, even in math -- but the broad parameters are pretty constant. In most post WWI war, <25% Killed,wounded, captured or missing per major engagement; about 10% the rest of the time. COIN offers less but is not MIC or HIC.
The USMC 13 squad is unique and even its leaders cannot insist that nothing changed after they took some casualties.
Yes, it is unique -- that's why I cited it, it's exemplary and it works. Didn't say that things didn't change, in fact what I did say was ""...Teamwork and unit cohesion ALWAYS suffer in combat, peacetime 'ideas,' norms and habits will not work; they'll just get people killed unnecessarily."" You must have missed that.
Squads of 7-10 are usual, 9-10 seems to be typical for LI.
Usual does not equal right or even adequate. You must've also missed this; ""...why the US Army will go from its current nine man peacetime squad to an eleven man squad in HIC.""
Sorry, but that's the unique experience of a country that never joined really big wars early on and that never fought against intact 1st rate armies. And even under those conditions, U.S. forces were at times very much decimated, including complete destruction of battalions (1943-1950).
Of course. You can look at it that way. You can also realize that EVERY Army has had Battalions get decimated -- that's why they call it war.

In any event, I'm unsure to what you refer with "...the experience of a country that never joined." don't think anything I said alluded to that -- what i did allude to was generic MIC - HIC casualty rates across many nations.

I'll also point out that the condescension in your unnecessary "...never fought..." comment has little or nothing to do with the discussion at hand and just invites counter comments like: As for joining big wars late, better late than never, I guess -- how'd that turn out for you? So we can both probably lay off them, they add nothing to any discussion.
I don't bother to think much about future conflicts against 3rd rate opponents because those tend not to be real threats until we turn them into foes.
Or until they're ignored long enough to do so. You did note I stipulated HIC, not LIC or COIN in my original post?
Competent enemy forces can inflict serious casualties, easily up to half the infantry of a brigade turning casualties in a matter of weeks.
You're kidding, right? During WW II, all the major combatants in all theaters had brigade sized units that had over 50% casualties in days, not weeks. During the maneuver war in Korea, both South and North Korea, the US and China had Brigade sized units rendered ineffective due to losses in a few days on several occasions. The US and North Viet Namese even hit that in Viet Nam on a couple of occasions.

However, as I said, that's the exception, not the rule -- the rule is about what you stated, 50% in weeks in reasonably intense combat (do 10% every two to five days for a couple of weeks and see what you get, math wise). That's what I based my statements upon.
The Western world just avoided to fight such opponents since two generations (there's no guarantee that our governments will be able to keep it like that).
True -- which has little or no bearing on anything you or I said.