For those who follow the Ukraine - Russia conflict online, it’s common to read claims that Russia’s military is incompetent and losing because it’s not simply rolling over the Ukrainians. This (mis)perception is based on a failure to understand that we are witnessing, in this conflict, perhaps the first major modern war. What that means is that, while this war is a mismatch in terms of firepower, Ukraine’s military is very much a modern military in important respects—especially in air defenses. Thus, the comparison between US wars against tribal or even state militaries are inapplicable.
Even if you deploy long-range strike capability, many battles soon progress to boots on the ground. Especially true when fighting insurgents and troops in defilade. We don't use/can't use "game changing" weaponry against insurgents in cities in order to reduce the number of civilian casualties. Military strategists in this country, at least, still view warfare as open terrain warfare similar to WWII, and we develop weapons to fight those types of battle. We've learned nothing from Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Somalia, etc.
So, then most fighting quickly progresses/digresses to between soldiers or soldiers with insurgents. To give you an idea of how difficult it is to win when fighting has moved to this level of engagement:
From Turley, Jan 10, 2011: "There is an amazing (and startling) statistic out of Iraq and Afghanistan: the United States has fired an estimated 250,000 for every insurgent killed. The U.S. is going through so much ammo that manufacturers are struggling to keep up. In another milestone, U.S. troops in Afghanistan now surpass the number in Iraq.
The U.S. military are now importing ammo from Israel to keep up the rate of fire.
US forces have fired so many bullets in Iraq and Afghanistan – an estimated 250,000 for every insurgent killed – that American ammunition-makers cannot keep up with demand."
Even if you deploy long-range strike capability, many battles soon progress to boots on the ground. Especially true when fighting insurgents and troops in defilade. We don't use/can't use "game changing" weaponry against insurgents in cities in order to reduce the number of civilian casualties. Military strategists in this country, at least, still view warfare as open terrain warfare similar to WWII, and we develop weapons to fight those types of battle. We've learned nothing from Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Somalia, etc.
So, then most fighting quickly progresses/digresses to between soldiers or soldiers with insurgents. To give you an idea of how difficult it is to win when fighting has moved to this level of engagement:
From Turley, Jan 10, 2011: "There is an amazing (and startling) statistic out of Iraq and Afghanistan: the United States has fired an estimated 250,000 for every insurgent killed. The U.S. is going through so much ammo that manufacturers are struggling to keep up. In another milestone, U.S. troops in Afghanistan now surpass the number in Iraq.
The U.S. military are now importing ammo from Israel to keep up the rate of fire.
US forces have fired so many bullets in Iraq and Afghanistan – an estimated 250,000 for every insurgent killed – that American ammunition-makers cannot keep up with demand."
Where's the honor in any empty battlefield?