Soviet losses: 9 million, German losses: 7 million

[phrost]

seizure said:

Duke, no offense intended, but - why on earth do you post here?

I wonder too. ;D

[dukeofpain]

phrost said:

seizure said:

Duke, no offense intended, but - why on earth do you post here?

I wonder too. ;D

It's an internet forum, Boy wonder. That is not exclusive to PC monkeys.

Dodona believes in:

1. Freedom of speech: we think that every opinion should be heard if it is expressed in a civil manner.

2. Realism: we are interested in facts and the rational interpretation of facts.

3. Learning: we want to increase our knowledge on matters of Human Biodiversity (HBD), and to spread whatever knowledge we have to others.

Dodona is about ideas, not ideology. We want to talk honestly about HBD, and not to propagandize for a particular group of people or a particular point of view.

[aeon]

crimsonguard said:

The Soviet's wouldve invaded Europe eventually as Stalin had designs of taking Finland and Poland.

The russians had the numbers where they could loose 100 millions people and still have another 200 million in reserve. They had a near endless supply of manpower.

Really? According to the 1939 census, the USSR had a population of 170 mln. I do not think the population of Germany and its allies was much lower (or higher?)

[aeon]

nordicyouth said:

Even at war's end, the Soviets suffered 6 dead soldiers for every German killed; hence the 24 million-figure.

Germany and its allies lost 8,649,000 soldiers in the Soviet-German front including 4,376,000 prisoners. The Soviet Union lost 11,520,000 soldiers including 4,559,000 prisoners. The ratio is 1:1.3. Not bad, considering the fact that we fought the world's best army. The 24 million figure includes Soviet civil losses during the 4-year German occupation. Dividing it by the number of Germans lost in battle is... well... not quite honest.

[zemelmete]

aeon1 said:

Germany and its allies lost 8,649,000 soldiers in the Soviet-German front including 4,376,000 prisoners. The Soviet Union lost 11,520,000 soldiers including 4,559,000 prisoners. The ratio is 1:1.3. Not bad, considering the fact that we fought the world's best army. The 24 million figure includes Soviet civil losses during the 4-year German occupation. Dividing it by the number of Germans lost in battle is... well... not quite honest.

hmmm... do you really think that 24 millions of Soviet civil died only under german rule? I do not think so.
And actually I have seen in some sources another numbers like 40 millions of people died in Soviet Union. And 20 millions of them died in Soviet labour camps (GULAG etc.). Much more than jews in German camps...

[Glenlivet]

Are you anti-Russian?

zemelmete said:

aeon1 said:

hmmm... do you really think that 24 millions of Soviet civil died only under german rule? I do not think so.

[dukeofpain]

glenlivet said:

Are you anti-Russian?

zemelmete said:

aeon1 said:

hmmm... do you really think that 24 millions of Soviet civil died only under german rule? I do not think so.

The soviet Union isn't russia.

[phrost]

dukeofpain said:

phrost said:

I wonder too. ;D

It's an internet forum, Boy wonder. That is not exclusive to PC monkeys.

Hey dont make fun of yourself. ;D

[zemelmete]

glenlivet said:

Are you anti-Russian?

I am anti-soviet.

soviet=nazism

Stalin=Hitler

[Ilmatar]

crimsonguard said:

The Soviet's wouldve invaded Europe eventually as Stalin had designs of taking Finland and Poland.

I actually think -and many historians think- that the Soviets would have fared a lot worse later on if they hadn't initiated the disastrous war against the Finns in November 1939. The Winter War was supposed to be "Sunday walk" for the Red Army. However, four months of fighting really showed Stalin how ill prepared his army was. Stalin had excecuted most of the senior officials in his purges just a few years before, so the Red Army was really lacking of tactical masterminds. Many lives and legs were lost simply because the Soviet troops were ill equipped. The Soviet troops also suffered extensive material losses - Stalin may not have cared that much about the men, but tanks and airplanes were expensive. The Red Army learnt a valuable lesson in Finland, and came back much stronger.

[Crimson Guard]

Yes their original Soviet Army was terrible...but they always had the numbers and had a very strong industrial compactly which would later turn the tables.

German military advisers saw the weakness of the 1939/40 Soviet Military and took advantage of that..hence Operation: Barbarosa in 1941....The Germans almost won the war in that uncanny drive across the plains of Russia,had they prepared themselves for harsh Winter,as fighting dragged on..in Winter of 1941/42,was both furious and brutal. Hitler made the unwise decision not to take Moscow and later drove his army to Stalingrad in the South..big mistake.

The Soviets got over their initia shock & shortcoming,namely Stalin appointed able Generals this time and didn't have his officer core liquidated(Until after the war,when most where either sacked or killed off again),and better and far more modern Tanks where rolling off the assembly lines in Eastern Russa ...Tanks like the T-34 and KV-1. The only thing that really saved the Germans from flat out loosing the war right their, was their training,Discipline & tactics. The Soviets lack of co-ordination,lack of Radios and communication in their ranks and in their tanks and mis-use of manpower.

So the Germans and their allies where able to eventually stem the tide,despite heavy and serious loses,which where mainly cause not by the Red Army,but by the WINTER.

[aeon]

crimsonguard said:

Yes their original Soviet Army was terrible...but they always had the numbers and had a very strong industrial compactly which would later turn the tables.

Germans also always had the numbers (see above) and a very strong industry.

crimsonguard said:

German military advisers saw the weakness of the 1939/40 Soviet Military and took advantage of that..hence Operation: Barbarosa in 1941....The Germans almost won the war

Taking Moscow would not have meant winning the war. Remember Napoleon.

crimsonguard said:

in that uncanny drive across the plains of Russia,had they prepared themselves for harsh Winter,as fighting dragged on..in Winter of 1941/42,was both furious and brutal. Hitler made the unwise decision not to take Moscow

It would have taken just Hitler's decision to take Moscow.

crimsonguard said:

and later drove his army to Stalingrad in the South..big mistake.

Why didn't he take Stalingrad? I guess de decided not to.

crimsonguard said:

The Soviets got over their initia shock & shortcoming,namely Stalin appointed able Generals this time and didn't have his officer core liquidated(Until after the war,when most where either sacked or killed off again),

Lie. There were no army purges after the war.

crimsonguard said:

and better and far more modern Tanks where rolling off the assembly lines in Eastern Russa ...Tanks like the T-34 and KV-1. The only thing that really saved the Germans from flat out loosing the war right their, was their training,Discipline & tactics. The Soviets lack of co-ordination,lack of Radios and communication in their ranks and in their tanks and mis-use of manpower.

I wouldn't call a loss of 1.3 Soviet soldiers per 1 German soldier an awful mis-use of manpower. Would be interesting to know the ratio in the western front.

crimsonguard said:

So the Germans and their allies where able to eventually stem the tide,

Really? Last time I checked up, they unconditionally capitulated.

crimsonguard said:

despite heavy and serious loses,which where mainly cause not by the Red Army,but by the WINTER.

Hitler should have known that winter happens sometimes. Plus, warfare was taking place throughout the year, not just in winter.

[Ilmatar]

Germans were actually quite well prepared for the Winter conditions. They weren't sent to the Eastern Front in boots with the soils made of cartoon, as Italians were. They also had seen what happened to the Red Army tanks in Finland with -30 temperatures. They had major logistic problems mainly in the Spring months.

[Crimson Guard]

Wrong the Germans where just as ill prepared as the Italians where.

Only very few,more only their premier Panzer Divisions where equipped with Snow and winter equipment,and barely. As a result the vast bulk of their Wehrmacht suffered for it and they lost thousands upon thousands of men just by the Winter alone on the frontline. Their is many books on this,detailing the horror.

Remember the German & Axis High Command where expecting the War to be over by August or September...The Germans Army also overran their supply lines,which vastly inhindered and prevented key supplies(thats including food aswel) from reaching the front line.



And

Aeon I have no idea where you get your information from.

<<Really? Last time I checked up, they unconditionally capitulated. >>

I was clearly talking about the Russian Counter offensive of 41/42 their,which the Germans and their allies eventually stemmed . Stop playing games with my words.

[aeon]

crimsonguard said:

Aeon I have no idea where you get your information from.

Neither do I have any idea wherefrom you get yours.

Do you have any information on the population of Germany and its allies and on the ratio of losses in the Western front so that we could know whether there is any truth in your words about Soviet misuse of manpower?