WWII Casualties

[Bleipriester]

The graph shows not only casualties but also the dimensions of the respective theaters.
Remarkable is that the German casualties are lower than the allies´ at any time and theater.
Objections have no place here, the western front was only built to relief the eastern front from the beginning.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Defense is always easier than offense. Especially when your playing defense on your home turf.

 

[Bleipriester]

Defense is always easier than offense. Especially when your playing defense on your home turf.

Generally that´s true but it doesn´t apply here. Otherwise, the German advances in the first stage of the war would have led to higher German casualties. What also counts is the Soviet war doctrine and the superiority of German training and equipment. The natural disadvantage of the attackers was greatly outbalanced by their superiority in numbers of both manpower and equipment.

 

[Ringel05]

The graph shows not only casualties but also the dimensions of the respective theaters.
Remarkable is that the German casualties are lower than the allies´ at any time and theater.
Objections have no place here, the western front was only built to relief the eastern front from the beginning.

So? What's the point? I can tell you the largest group of allied casualties were Soviet mostly due to their tactics especially following the purges in the Soviet Union and the remaining officers afraid to use any initiative. If that number also include Finns during the Winter War where the Soviet Goliath got it's ass handed to him then the numbers are skewed.

 

[Indeependent]

The graph shows not only casualties but also the dimensions of the respective theaters.
Remarkable is that the German casualties are lower than the allies´ at any time and theater.
Objections have no place here, the western front was only built to relief the eastern front from the beginning.

So? What's the point? I can tell you the largest group of allied casualties were Soviet mostly due to their tactics especially following the purges in the Soviet Union and the remaining officers afraid to use any initiative. If that number also include Finns during the Winter War where the Soviet Goliath got it's ass handed to him then the numbers are skewed.

The Joooooooooooooooooooooooooos.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Defense is always easier than offense. Especially when your playing defense on your home turf.

Generally that´s true but it doesn´t apply here. Otherwise, the German advances in the first stage of the war would have led to higher German casualties. What also counts is the Soviet war doctrine and the superiority of German training and equipment. The natural disadvantage of the attackers was greatly outbalanced by their superiority in numbers of both manpower and equipment.

Superior fighting force and tactics led to quick victories until Operation Barbarossa. Then it was a slow fighting retreat on both western and eastern fronts.

 

[Weatherman2020]

The graph shows not only casualties but also the dimensions of the respective theaters.
Remarkable is that the German casualties are lower than the allies´ at any time and theater.
Objections have no place here, the western front was only built to relief the eastern front from the beginning.

So? What's the point? I can tell you the largest group of allied casualties were Soviet mostly due to their tactics especially following the purges in the Soviet Union and the remaining officers afraid to use any initiative. If that number also include Finns during the Winter War where the Soviet Goliath got it's ass handed to him then the numbers are skewed.

Stalin emptied his gulags and prisons and said here is a stick, charge the German lines and gain your freedom or we shoot you right here.

 

[Correll]

Defense is always easier than offense. Especially when your playing defense on your home turf.

Generally that´s true but it doesn´t apply here. Otherwise, the German advances in the first stage of the war would have led to higher German casualties. What also counts is the Soviet war doctrine and the superiority of German training and equipment. The natural disadvantage of the attackers was greatly outbalanced by their superiority in numbers of both manpower and equipment.

Their early offenses were done with significant advantages in tactics and equipment.

THey managed to make great gains with relatively low casualties.


The collapse of the French due to Blitzkrieg, was a great victory, no doubt about it.

Later, the fighting on that front, was them being on the defensive.


On the other front they had, still the advantage, despite the Soviets having "warning" of that style of fighting AND strategic surprise in that Stalin didn't think that Hitler would attack him while still fighting the Brits.

 

[Bleipriester]

Defense is always easier than offense. Especially when your playing defense on your home turf.

Generally that´s true but it doesn´t apply here. Otherwise, the German advances in the first stage of the war would have led to higher German casualties. What also counts is the Soviet war doctrine and the superiority of German training and equipment. The natural disadvantage of the attackers was greatly outbalanced by their superiority in numbers of both manpower and equipment.

Superior fighting force and tactics led to quick victories until Operation Barbarossa. Then it was a slow fighting retreat on both western and eastern fronts.

The Soviets stormed and stormed and stormed. No matter how many waves the Germans would defeat, the next was just waiting. This "tactic" was not effective and the actual good equipment the Red Army had could not take effect.

 

[Bleipriester]

Defense is always easier than offense. Especially when your playing defense on your home turf.

Generally that´s true but it doesn´t apply here. Otherwise, the German advances in the first stage of the war would have led to higher German casualties. What also counts is the Soviet war doctrine and the superiority of German training and equipment. The natural disadvantage of the attackers was greatly outbalanced by their superiority in numbers of both manpower and equipment.

Their early offenses were done with significant advantages in tactics and equipment.

THey managed to make great gains with relatively low casualties.


The collapse of the French due to Blitzkrieg, was a great victory, no doubt about it.

Later, the fighting on that front, was them being on the defensive.


On the other front they had, still the advantage, despite the Soviets having "warning" of that style of fighting AND strategic surprise in that Stalin didn't think that Hitler would attack him while still fighting the Brits.

I don´t know if there was really something that could be called "Blitzkrieg". You cannot wage "Blitzkrieg" with light tanks with 37 mm guns against the heavy French tanks with 75 mm guns. It was the first time the airforce played a role in a war plan and the German airforce was capable to play this role.

 

[Correll]

Defense is always easier than offense. Especially when your playing defense on your home turf.

Generally that´s true but it doesn´t apply here. Otherwise, the German advances in the first stage of the war would have led to higher German casualties. What also counts is the Soviet war doctrine and the superiority of German training and equipment. The natural disadvantage of the attackers was greatly outbalanced by their superiority in numbers of both manpower and equipment.

Their early offenses were done with significant advantages in tactics and equipment.

THey managed to make great gains with relatively low casualties.


The collapse of the French due to Blitzkrieg, was a great victory, no doubt about it.

Later, the fighting on that front, was them being on the defensive.


On the other front they had, still the advantage, despite the Soviets having "warning" of that style of fighting AND strategic surprise in that Stalin didn't think that Hitler would attack him while still fighting the Brits.

I don´t know if there was really something that could be called "Blitzkrieg". You cannot wage "Blitzkreg" with light tanks with 37 mm guns against the heavy French tanks with 75 mm guns. It was the first time the airforce played a role in a war plan and the German airforce was capable to play this role.

I've heard fighters referred to as the artillery or Blitzkrieg.


And history shows that the germans were certainly able to wage Blitzkrieg against the French. THe rapid movement and constantly changing situation was a real part of the overwhelming of the French command.

 

[Bleipriester]

Defense is always easier than offense. Especially when your playing defense on your home turf.

Generally that´s true but it doesn´t apply here. Otherwise, the German advances in the first stage of the war would have led to higher German casualties. What also counts is the Soviet war doctrine and the superiority of German training and equipment. The natural disadvantage of the attackers was greatly outbalanced by their superiority in numbers of both manpower and equipment.

Their early offenses were done with significant advantages in tactics and equipment.

THey managed to make great gains with relatively low casualties.


The collapse of the French due to Blitzkrieg, was a great victory, no doubt about it.

Later, the fighting on that front, was them being on the defensive.


On the other front they had, still the advantage, despite the Soviets having "warning" of that style of fighting AND strategic surprise in that Stalin didn't think that Hitler would attack him while still fighting the Brits.

I don´t know if there was really something that could be called "Blitzkrieg". You cannot wage "Blitzkreg" with light tanks with 37 mm guns against the heavy French tanks with 75 mm guns. It was the first time the airforce played a role in a war plan and the German airforce was capable to play this role.

I've heard fighters referred to as the artillery or Blitzkrieg.


And history shows that the germans were certainly able to wage Blitzkrieg against the French. THe rapid movement and constantly changing situation was a real part of the overwhelming of the French command.

That was nothing new or something that could not be expected. I think the following reasons led to the quick victory:

1. Moment of surprise
The French and Brits were fully self-sufficient in their phony war that they believed would last forever. We know, it didn´t.

2. Proper war strategy of the Germans
The Germans had a good war plan.

3. Superior airforce
The airforce could carry out strategic and tactical strikes at any time and place.

Of course, the German troops were mobilized but not to that degree people think today. Cavalry existed also until the end of the war and not every infantry division was fully motorized, not even the majority, I guess. In fact, the Wehrmacht was a quite normal force. The problem was with the other armies that were stuck in WWI and the tactics used back then.

Other German trumps in the early stage:

Flak 36: This gun was a trump wherever it was deployed. It could destroy any tank at 5 km (even in 1945), was very mobile and cheap compared to whole tanks.

Initially an air defense gun, it proved to be effective against armor because of its sheer power. The Brits posed a real threat to German forces with their heavily armored Matilda tanks but the 88er managed the situation. Its sound alone caused fear and panic among the enemy. It was later mounted on German tanks like the Tiger (as KwK 36).


MG 34:

Lightweight, high cadence, high accuracy even at 3000 meters. The MG 34 was a complex and expensive but highly effective machine gun.