World War 2: Some Eye Opening Statistics

This is going to shock you:

www.secondworldwarhistory.com...

The Axis Powers, that is Germany, Italy, Japan, Hungary, Romania, Slovakia, Bulgaria lost so few troops and civilians compared to the Allies. The destruction and carnage that Germany, Italy and Japan inflicted upon the allies dwarfs what the Allies inflicted upon them.

I'll let you do the math for yourselves. The Axis powers lost just about 3.5 million to the war (total military and civillian); that is Germany, Italy, Japan and the other small countries.

The Allies lost...wait for it...something very roughly in the region of 69 million plus.

What point does this make to you?

Was it that the Axis Powers were really that clever like some deranged alter ego David conquering Goliath? China lost over 14 million people mainly fighting the Japanese, while the Japanese lost way less than 3 million.

This tells me that size does not necessarily matter. The proportion of the chunk of casualty hits will be relative and sometimes smaller nations can have advantages even. It also tells me that some other agenda was being played out. I truly believe that those "upstairs" had some kind of culling agenda and ruthlessly exploited every advantage from this chaos.

World War 2 took out 72.5 million people approx. More than half were CIVILLIANS. Never forget that. It is not only soldiers who suffer. If yo look at the figures I linked to you will discover that in some states the civilian casualties far outweighed military.

In Britain we had a million American troops on our Islands at one point. Some even called it "The American Occupation of Britain".

War is not noble. It's name is DEATH and it rides a PALE HORSE.





This "Universal Soldier" will NEVER be to blame
This "Universal Souljah" says NEVER AGAIN!

I vowed never to even hold a gun. The system can fight its own wars. All warmongers can. If they come for me I will turn the other cheek as Christ instructed; no compromise, no deal, ever!

Allies were playing politics while the Germans were making war.

Simplistic view but not to far off the truth I think, Part of the reason Patton (beyond his ego) had so many problems he just wanted to get unleased so he could wage war and Ike wanted to make sure everyone was happy.

a reply to: Revolution9
The Axis did more attacking against peoples who were not properly prepared for war.
When the counter-attacks came, their own preparations were in place.

a reply to: Revolution9

what realy SHOCKS me - is that you cannot do simple arithmetic :

I'll let you do the math for yourselves. The Axis powers lost just about 3.5 million to the war (total military and civilian). That is Germany, Italy, Japan and the other small countries.

The Allies lost...wait for it...something very roughly in the region of 69 million plus.

try actually reading your own source :

total losses for axis powers = 11 324 600 [ thats just the big 3 ]

further - in a stunning display of dishonesty - you pretend that deaths due to carious famines should be " credited " to the axis powers

this thread is a pathetic farce

a reply to: Revolution9

It’s not really surprising when you take a look at the two countries (Russia and China) who lost the most civilians and military and why.

China was in a pretty much continued state of a civil war and the country and its people a wreck. No real organizational structure, starvation, supplies, etc. Sheer numbers were the only reason they kept Japan at bay.

Russia is almost the same story. Sheer numbers gave them the win. They sent soldiers into battle without weapons or supplies. They had almost no upper military leadership because of Stalin. Which also led to horrible tactics and increased deaths.

I wouldn’t say the axis powers were more clever, but were technologically advanced, better supplied, and better trained in regard to China and Russia at the time.

I think your figures are a bit wrong. Combined German and Japanese deaths during the war, not including Italy, Finland, Romania, Hungary, Manchukuo and so on, are at least 9.4 million (civilian and military).

Regardless the casualty disparity can be explained quite easily. Germany was fighting a war of extermination against it's main opponent, the Soviet Union. Their express goal was the total extermination or enslavement of the entire population from Poland to the Urals.

The Germans did not occupy Yugoslavia, Poland, the USSR etc as they did France. They went town to town, village to village, massacring every man, woman and child. The Wehrmacht was as much a party in this as the SS despite what some would have you believe.

The Japanese weren't fighting a war of extermination against the Chinese, but they did view them as inferior, and had absolutely no problem with massacring them by the millions. We see this in the rape of Nanking and the infamous Unit 731.

The Allies were never fighting a war to exterminate the people of the Axis nations. They did bomb the cities, there were war crimes committed. But there was no order given from the highest office in the Soviet, American, British etc. Armies that stated every single person who waited for them in the occupied countries was subhuman, and to be exterminated.

Military death disparity is a far more complicated matter. A lot of it is thanks to the Soviet Great Purge that essentially left the Red Army leaderless during Operation Barbarossa. A leaderless Army is just a mob to be slaughtered by any organised opposition.

After that the Axis were mostly on the defensive, and an Army in the defence will always inflict greater casualties on the attacker than they will sustain themselves. That is primarily the reason behind the "German superior engineering" myth.

I couldn't tell you why it was so in China since I don't know much about that theatre, but China was a greatly divided country at the time, essentially the Army, despite the "United Front" remained a divided force controlled by warlords which was also very poorly equipped, at least compared to the Japanese.

originally posted by: Ohanka

I couldn't tell you why it was so in China since I don't know much about that theatre, but China was a greatly divided country at the time, essentially the Army, despite the "United Front" remained a divided force controlled by warlords which was also very poorly equipped, at least compared to the Japanese.

The Chinese theatre was basically a 3-way war. The communists were fighting against the official govt in a civil war, yet both of them were also fighting against the invading Japanese. In fact, at one point both Chinese factions had a temporary truce so they could both focus on pushing out the Japanese.

a reply to: Revolution9
Germans lost 3 million soldiers (80% of casualties) on the Eastern Front alone. So fake thread is fake. Also, when you say numbers make no difference, Marshall Zhukov sez in his book that his strategy was always to throw soldiers at the enemy til they won, which they did, so obviously it can work...

a reply to: Revolution9

To those of us that have actually studied WW2 these numbers are not shocking. There is a long list of why those numbers are skewed in such a way, but as one poster already suggested; the axis powers were attacking non-militarized civilian populations and when the counter-attacks came from the allies, the axis already had defenses in place.

It is generally accepted that 20 MILLION Russians died in WW2, civilians with broken weapons and farm implements fighting seasoned German soldiers...not to mention the cold weather which killed more Germans and Russians than weapons of war did.

originally posted by: Revolution9
The Allies lost...wait for it...something very roughly in the region of 69 million plus.

At what point are we talking "allies", because the Russians were allied to Germany up until June 1941, and while Germany had invaded most of Western Europe by then, the Russian "enemy" had also invaded half of Poland and the Baltic states, Finland et al.

Also, while the German were particularly brutal in Russia, the Russians were just as brutal to the Germans, their own forces and populations. So who killed who becomes a bit blurred when your average Ukrainian was just as likely to be shot by a German or a Russian. Same thing in China because while the Japanese were horrible to them the Chinese were pretty horrible to themselves as part of the civil war.

In the scale of human suffering WW2 has no equal, but the statistics justify a less simplistic view. No disrespect to the OP, but statistics can be misleading without context.

The axis powers felt the allies wrath once the firebombing started. Ask an old timer from Dresden or Tokyo. The axis may have had the upper hand with kills, but later many of their cites were reduced to ashes.

Once this happened the axis powers had no chance regardless of how many allies they killed once their infrastructure was reduced to ash or rubble. Kind of tough to get gas or ammunition resupplies when the building that once stored them is gone.

Those axis numbers could include Stalin killing his own as well. It wouldn't surprise me in the least if Russia just "laundered" the deaths committed by Stalin into the fighting casualties of WWII.

lets not forget that Russia started the war as an ally of Germany and fought as an axis power.
is it even possible to determine how many deaths Russia caused and received as an axis power,and how many deaths Russia caused and received as an ally power?

are all Russian war casualties counted as allied casualties, even the Russian casualties that occurred when they were fighting as an axis power against the allies?

The stat of WW2 was an agreement taken in Munich between all European royal families of The Netherlands, Sweden, Denmark, the UK, Norway, Spain and the president of France. The Munich conference, was a trick to induce Hitler into starting a war in the hopes that Russia would be unable to face off against the Germans.

These considerations didn't turn out to be true, and all the Royals, turned their back on Hitler as soon as they realized that the Russians were going to fight !

originally posted by: Flanker86
The stat of WW2 was an agreement taken in Munich between all European royal families of ...

There's fantasy, and there's history. You are going down the fantasy line. Do you really have a clue as to what happened at the Munich Conference?

This must be how the germans ""WON"" the battl of Kharkhov against children and grandmas ...

www.rt.com...

Quoting 'civilian' and 'military' casualties is misleading. These armies were primarily drawn from conscription, so in effect the armies were civilian armies. They were not professional soldiers.
Those conscripted men were true heroes.

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
a reply to: Revolution9

what realy SHOCKS me - is that you cannot do simple arithmetic :

I'll let you do the math for yourselves. The Axis powers lost just about 3.5 million to the war (total military and civilian). That is Germany, Italy, Japan and the other small countries.

The Allies lost...wait for it...something very roughly in the region of 69 million plus.

try actually reading your own source :

total losses for axis powers = 11 324 600 [ thats just the big 3 ]

further - in a stunning display of dishonesty - you pretend that deaths due to carious famines should be " credited " to the axis powers

this thread is a pathetic farce

This post.

A lot of deaths (on both sides) were from war-related causes, like famine, disease and poor healthcare etc