Ike (and US/British military doctrine) stressed massive material superiority, not indifference to casualties. Both Britain and the US lacked the manpower and the public buy-in to risk Soviet or WWI scale tactics.
Tha Allies used massive firepower, artillery and air, plus operational maneuver, logistics systems, engineering and construction, helped by the availability of endless fuel, in preference to human bodies, whenever possible.
This limitation was explicitly stated in the planning documents created at the time. Its an interesting area of study, the “operations research” level of allied strategy, and the related economic analysis. The Axis and the Soviets did not plan like this, to their cost. Ex of many related documents https://www.jstor.org/stable/2518970
I once worked for a man who spent most of WW II training to be a troop leader in the first wave to invade Japan. He and his fellows -- all volunteers -- expected to die in the first hour if they even made it ashore. He was a big fan of nuking Japan.
Anyway, my comment was not intended as a criticism but as an observation based on Russian military history and their conduct in the current invasion of Ukraine. Russia's large population traditionally meant that it could usually field large armies and overwhelm opponents -- as Napoleon and Hitler both learned. As Putin has found though, modern US and NATO smart weapons have changed the equation to the advantage of small, better equipped military forces.