50 years ago today, 18 SEP, in sunny Vietnam-land - Where were you?

SSG(P) D. Wright Downs
I have to throw the BS flag or need evidence to support this...if I am reading this correctly. I have checked the archives and found nothing supporting junior enlisted not being listed on the casualties lists? I could see, and understand, that we would not take the enemy casualties count of E-3s and below because in the heat of battle and number of over lapping reports. It makes sense for a call for NCOs or officers verifying numbers of enemy dead but there is no way the American military would be not counting everyone of our own dead.

Junior enlisted were on the casualty lists, however, they were not counted in the "dead." It was part of the propaganda, as I was told about it, yes we were masters of propaganda in Vietnam, and it was for the folks at home and for the enemy as well. It was what was reported to the news media not what was in the official records. There were press releases stating what the enemy and our losses were battle for battle. I was told that it was to do with the press releases and that the lower enlisted were not included. You can give me the BS flag if you want to because I have not proof and do not have my source written down and it was years ago in a school like SATCOM or DINFOS or one of my other leadership schools while we sat around talking I remember asking about it. i had heard rumor of it and wanted clarification on it. I cannot prove my source.

SSG(P) D. Wright Downs - Rumor is all that was, the were certainly noted at the Army morgue located 150 feet from a post I worked, listed on the wall, reported by their units with the over 58,000 killed. The casualty list were never broken down by rank and every man and woman there was an equal loss. I was in Vietnam and never even once saw any know KIA excluded from the list. No such policy ever went into effect and anyone that says otherwise is full of it and spends too much time paying attention to unfounded rumors and total BS ! There isn't and never has been a reason to break it down by rank and exclude those most likely to be Killed in Action , that's not even believable. I do know from first hand experience from my unit far higher enemy losses than ours in My area, I watched it happen especially after use of airstrikes and AC47 "Spooky" gunships being in action. I watched it happen and saw the bodies in the aftermath before they were picked and either buried, transported off (Enemy) or brought to the morgue (Americans). I'm sure others in heavier battle areas wouldn't have much of anything different to say although I was in a defensive position not out in the jungle looking for Charlie like some I'm sure are here did. The bottom line is rumors are rumors and nothing else. Will anyone exaggerate anything ? Yep, the press did it all the time, I'd hear what they reported and what I saw and wondered if We were talking about the same event, often they were outright liars !

Thank both of you, SMSGT Lawrence McCarter and MSG Brad Sand, for clearing this up for me. I had heard the story from different sources both before I enlisted and again after I was in the Army. Then there were disclosures about Gen. Westmoreland and McNamara. It made sense to me that it was something either one of them would have done under their leadership to make it seem as though the things were going better than they were by under-reporting the casualties to the press and the American people. Doing it by rank made sense as they were both arrogant people. Regardless of what the actual count was, they had to make the loss look better for the American forces. Thank you for clearing it up that there was no way they could have done it on bogus paper and press reports from their offices.

I dealt with the civilian press and understand and often wondered how some of them translated the written comments that came from my office. Some were gifted magicians with the written word whereas others were true journalists.

Our losses were not accurate. The majority of the American forces were E-3 and under, if I remember correctly, when they came into Country...at least E-3. Body counts of American forces did not include those of E-3 and under. I am sure it was imposed under Westmoreland to make the things look nice for the Americans. Remember, most of the forces were out in 75, we were totally out in 76. This was my generation's conflict---it was not a war until much later. Ask those who were in it and the reaction of those who failed to welcome them home. There are those who have said no one was spit upon. They did not interview my husband, nor did they speak to one of my cousins. I know a number of others who were victimized in different parts of the country who were not interviewed by the sociologists who wrote their report.