Excerpt from On Killing: The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society by Lt. Col Dave Grossman. Most soldiers are reluctant to fire their weapons when confronted by the enemy:
"During World War II, U.S. Army Brigadier General S. L. A.
Marshall asked the average soldiers what it was that they did in battle.
His singularly unexpected discovery was that, of every hundred men
along the line of fire during the period of an encounter, an average of
only 15 to 20 'would take any part with their weapons.' This was
consistently true 'whether the action was spread over a day, or two days
or three.'
"Marshall [and his team] based their findings
on individual and mass interviews with thousands of soldiers in more
than four hundred infantry companies, in Europe and in the Pacific,
immediately after they had been in close combat with German or Japanese
troops. The results were consistently the same: only 15 to 20 percent of
the American riflemen in combat during World War II would fire at the
enemy. ... The question is why. ... [The answer] is the simple and
demonstrable fact that there is within most men an intense resistance to
killing their fellow man. A resistance so strong that, in many
circumstances, soldiers on the battlefield will die before they can
overcome it. ...
"There is ample supporting evidence to indicate that
Marshall's observations are applicable not only to U.S. soldiers or even
to the soldiers on all sides in World War II. Indeed, there are
compelling data that indicate that this singular lack of enthusiasm for
killing one's fellow man has existed throughout military history. ...
"Paddy
Griffith estimates that the average musket fire from a Napoleonic or
Civil War regiment (usually numbering between two hundred and one
thousand men) firing at an exposed enemy regiment at an average range of
thirty yards, would usually result in hitting only one or two men per
minute! Such firefights 'dragged on until exhaustion set in or nightfall
put an end to hostilities. Casualties mounted because the contest went
on so long, not because the fire was particularly deadly.'
"Thus
we see that the fire of the Napoleonic -- and Civil War-era soldier was
incredibly ineffective. This does not represent a failure on the part
of the weaponry. John Keegan and Richard Holmes in their
book Soldiers tell us of a Prussian experiment in the late 1700s in
which an infantry battalion fired smoothbore muskets at a target one
hundred feet long by six feet high, representing an enemy unit, which
resulted in 25 percent hits at 225 yards, 40 percent hits at 150 yards,
and 60 percent hits at 75 yards. This represented the potential killing
power of such a unit. The reality is demonstrated at the Battle of
Belgrade in 1717, when 'two Imperial battalions held their fire until
their Turkish opponents were only thirty paces away, but hit only
thirty-two Turks when they fired and were promptly overwhelmed.'
"Sometimes
the fire was completely harmless, as Benjamin McIntyre observed in his
firsthand account of a totally bloodless nighttime firefight at
Vicksburg in 1863. 'It seems strange ...,' wrote McIntyre, that a
company of men can fire volley after volley at a like number of men over
a distance of fifteen steps and not cause a single casualty. Yet such
was the facts in this instance.' The musketry of the black-powder era
was not always so ineffective, but over and over again the average comes
out to only one or two men hit per minute with musketry. ...
"Muzzle-loading
muskets could fire from one to five shots per minute, depending on the
skill of the operator and the state of the weapon. With a potential hit
rate of well over 50 percent at the average combat ranges of this era,
the killing rate should have been hundreds per minute, instead of one or
two. The weak link between the killing potential and the killing
capability of these units was the soldier. The simple fact is that when
faced with a living, breathing opponent instead of a target, a
significant majority of the soldiers revert to a posturing mode in which
they fire over their enemy's heads."
On Killing: The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society
Author: Dave Grossman
Publisher: Back Bay Books
|
No comments:
Post a Comment