Wich was the worst nation in the war?

[parsifal]

Hi soren

Sorry, i thought you were hinting that the total military casualties were 27 million, ie that there were 27 million not available for service. Based on demographic analysis, i can tell you that such a figure would be impossible, however, if some of the casualties are returned then ther is not as much of a problem.

The German figure i have suggested is a total figure, so it includes KIAs, MIAs, POWs and DMUs. Your figure of 3.5 million dead isnt really in dispute, but neither is it a total casualty figure. What I am trying to do is to determine the total numbers of troops rendered unavailbe for service, not just the body count.

On that basis, do you have major disagreement with the numbers suggested?

 

[parsifal]

That's untrue Parsifal, the Soviets could very easily have mustered that, just take a look at the population count, this is no small country.

err, soren, I do demographic analyses all the time as part of my job. on what basis are you saying that they can suffer 27 million casualties, removed from persons of military age, and maintain essential services at home, and still field a military for of 13.6 million. I can assure you that if they were to lose that many from their miltary force structure, the country could not operate properly, even if it is running under a dictatorship,

 

[Soren]

Hi soren

Sorry, i thought you were hinting that the total military casualties were 27 million, ie that there were 27 million not available for service. Based on demographic analysis, i can tell you that such a figure would be impossible, however, if some of the casualties are returned then ther is not as much of a problem.

The German figure i have suggested is a total figure, so it includes KIAs, MIAs, POWs and DMUs. Your figure of 3.5 million dead isnt really in dispute, but neither is it a total casualty figure. What I am trying to do is to determine the total numbers of troops rendered unavailbe for service, not just the body count.

On that basis, do you have major disagreement with the numbers suggested?

Nope, we are then close to being in agreement actually.

 

[Soren]

err, soren, I do demographic analyses all the time as part of my job. on what basis are you saying that they can suffer 27 million casualties, removed from persons of military age, and maintain essential services at home, and still field a military for of 13.6 million. I can assure you that if they were to lose that many from their miltary force structure, the country could not operate properly, even if it is running under a dictatorship,

Parsifal the Soviet Union never really functioned properly.

The reason the Soviets were capable of mustering said amount is that the basic military training delivered was very slim, infact most training was given in combat by more experienced troops. Men were simply drafted in millions, forced to fight for the motherland.

Also regarding the total amount of wounded, remember this is the amount treated for wounds, undoubtedly many returned to fight, and so the figure of soldiers who were mortally wounded or permanently incapacitated is therefore no doubt much lower.

With that in mind it seems we are in pretty good agreement.

 

[parsifal]

we should wait for others to have their say ( i am eagerly awqaiting Adlers input in particular) before finalizing our collective results on east front casualties. its a pity that we expended all this effort under the banner of such a crappy thread. I was wondering if we should not open a new thread dealing with east front discussion topics. That way we dont have to insult as many frenchmen

 

[Soren]

Good idea.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

You guys could be waiting for quite some time for me!

Like I said it will take me a while to cut through the OKW diaries because I have a lot of University work I am doing and I also have to balance that school work with my work as well.

I will get to it though. Now having said that, I do not think the OKW diaries are a 100% accurate source as well. I do not think that there will ever be an accurate source for the East Front, not when bodies are still be found today on the former battle fields.

 

[Trautloft]

im glad that hungary isnt listed,so i must not argue with ppl who voted for it

 

[Ramirezzz]

No stasoid, they were NOT accounted for, that's the whole point and the reason behind many experts argueing that the total loss of Soviet soldiers is in the area of 15 million.

Well Krivosheev includes them as MIA/POW and comes to the overall number of 4455620 of MIA/POW

 

[parsifal]

Ramirrezz

Are you talking about Soviet losses. If so, that seems like a very low number for Soviet MIA/POW losses

 

[Ramirezzz]

Ramirrezz

Are you talking about Soviet losses. If so, that seems like a very low number for Soviet MIA/POW losses

correct, this are the Soviet MIA/POW losses according to Krivosheev (source - Soviet Casualties and Combat Losses in the Twentieth Century", Greenhill Books, London, 1997, G. F. Krivosheev)
. His calculations are based at the total MIA numbers according to archives of MO (ministerstvo oborony - defence ministry), which include also the POWs.
Now quite true, Parsifal, these numbers are quite different frome those provided by Germans themselfes : so, according to Wehrmacht reports the total number of soviet POWs number is about 5,254,000. But German numers aren't quite reliable especcialy regarding 1941 : Wehrmacht reported 3,890,198 Soviet POWs captured but the OKH itself in its report of 25th December 1941 cut this number by 500,000 and comes to 3,350,639. Other German researchers like Gerns and Dietz give us lower numbers as well: particulary Ditte Gerns mentions 2,835,000 captured in 1941 and 5,254,000 between 1941 and late 1944, which still gives us a significant discrepancy between his and Krivosheev numbers (about 800,000 MIA/POW).

 

[Ramirezzz]

Adler

Soviet

Total Casualties (does not appear to include MIAs or wounded)

c11000000 dead, POW c 6000000

Parsifal,
as I see, this number of 11 million KIA includes the battlefield KIAs only, could you provide a source for this statement? and the POW number you provided exeeds even the exaggerated Wehrmacht reports.

 

[parsifal]

Hi Ramirrezz

The source for these figures is "The World War II Databook-Essential Facts Figures for all Combatants", Aurum Press (unknown date), by John Ellis

This book was a by product of his earlier work, published around 1995, entitled Brute Force which ascerted that the Allies won by numbers alone, and not by great military prowess.

There are other sources and other people on this thread who are looking at numbers of around 14 -15 million (esp Stasoid). My own belief has always been that Russian losses were about 12.2 million, with an additional 5-6 million captured.

Soviet losses cannot be worked out on the basis of combat effectiveness, and as far as I know have never been confirmed by the Soviets or the Russian authorities. It is also very difficult to demarcate between military losses and non-military losses, so the results of one researcher another cannot be easily discerned.

Can you give the details of your sources please, so that we can have a closer look at them (perhaps)

 

[KrazyKraut]

I assume the source is Krivosheev's "Soviet casualties and combat losses in the twentieth century". I have just ordered this book from my local library and hope to gain some insights.

It's the holy grail for pro-soviet argumenters because the losses specified there are much lower than what western historians (and I don't mean ex-Wehrmacht generals by this) typically state and it relies only on declassified Soviet archives (which means it relies less on statistical estimates).

The downside: Noone can confirm the numbers. Krivosheev, ex-Soviet Colonel General, was one of a few handpicked Russians who had access to these archives and you have to take his word for it.

 

[eddie_brunette]

South Africa by far, we still at war!!

 

[parsifal]

well, I am at a loss as to what to do. Here we are with figures for Soviet losses, which each of their proponents say are good. Trouble is one says 27million, the other somewhere about 7 million. These are totally incompataible numbers . I just cannot believe that there can be that much difference between the german and Soviet estimates.

Does anyone want to suggest anything to try and solve this conundrum????

Maybe my original estimate of 13 million was not so bad after all????

 

[starling]

the german people allowed themselves 2 be seduced by a evil,tyrannical,megalomatic regime.shame on them.they could have stopped the war if they wanted.starling.

 

[Haztoys]

the german people allowed themselves 2 be seduced by a evil,tyrannical,megalomatic regime.shame on them.they could have stopped the war if they wanted.starling.

I would say they were one of the worst.. But on ww1 they get the blame for some thing they did not start the had a packed to help other countries ...And got sucked into the war .. And took the fall and got the blame..After all these years theres still wrong info about Germany and WW1.. I "think" they had a packed to help Hungary...And Hungary went to war and Germany got sucked into it ...Everyone puts WW1 and WW2 as the same on Germany and it was not ...Now WW2 thats there baby ...From start to finish...

I could be wrong on what country they had the pack with for ww1...If I am let be know...

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

the german people allowed themselves 2 be seduced by a evil,tyrannical,megalomatic regime.shame on them.they could have stopped the war if they wanted.starling.

Unless you were alive at that time, I don't think you can judge the German people.

Who are you to shame them? Where you in Germany during that time? Do you know how it was to live in Germany at that time?

No!

Using your logic I guess we can say Shame on the English people for being seduced by tyrannical kings who suppressed the Irish and Scottish people...

See what I mean?

 

[kool kitty89]

Now WW2 thats there baby ...From start to finish...

Not in the Pacific...


Agree on the WWI issue; in addition to those statements I'll add that the whole mess of alliances which set he stage for WWI would have led to similar war with similar circumstances reguardless of the initial aggressor.