Talk:World War II casualties/Archives/2010/April

soviet conscripts

can any one provide sources giving the estimated number for these conscripted died on eastern front? the eastern front article now includes them as civilians losses and dont mention them anywhere on military casualties. thanks for helpBlablaaa (talk) 11:39, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

The official Russian Ministry of Defense figure for military deaths from 1941–1945 is 8,668,400; including 6,330,000 killed in action or died of wounds and 556,000 dead from non-combat causes plus an estimated 500,000 MIA and 1,283,000 POW dead out of 4,059,000 total POW captured

Source: G. I. Krivosheev. Soviet Casualties and Combat Losses. Greenhill 1997 ISBN 1-85367-280-7

Richard Overy has noted that " The official figures themselves must be viewed critically, given the difficulty of knowing in the chaos of 1941 and 1942 exactly who had been killed, wounded or even conscripted"

Source: Richard Overy, Russia's War: A History of the Soviet Effort: 1941-1945, Penguin Books, 1998, ISBN 0-14-027169-4

The official Russian statistics for military dead do not include an additional estimated 1,500,000 conscripted reservists missing or killed before being listed on active strength, as well as an estimated 150,000 militia and 250,000 Soviet partisan dead, which are considered civilian war losses in the official figures.

Source: Vadim Erlikman. Poteri narodonaseleniia v XX veke : spravochnik. Moscow 2004. ISBN 5-93165-107-1

The estimate by western historians of Soviet military POW deaths is about 3.3 million out of 5.7 million total POWs in German hands

Source: US Holocaust Memorial Museum [1]

Do the math, the figure of 8.7 million war dead includes 1.3 million POW, not the 3 million estimated by western historians.

I hope this answers your question.--Woogie10w (talk) 14:46, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

First, thank you. "Vadim Erlikman. Poteri narodonaseleniia v XX veke : spravochnik. Moscow 2004." is this the only source supporting 1,5 million of these conscripts? Blablaaa (talk) 16:28, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

The following Russian academic source goes has a detailed discussion of Soviet losses in the war. Mikhalev presents a convincing argument that the official figures are flawed and unreliable. Mikhalev points out that the total missing , POW and dead were actually 13.6 million not the 11.9 million reported in the official figures listed in Krivsheev.

Liudskie poteri v Velikoi Otechestvennoi voine 1941- 1945 gg: Statisticheskoe issledovanie by S. N Mikhalev Krasnoiarskii gos. pedagog. universitet • 2000 ISBN: 978-5-85981-082-6

BTW I have a copy of Mikhalev's book if we need to discuss the details.--Woogie10w (talk) 16:31, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

so u think they should be mentioned on the eastern front page? there is not even a note about them in the table for military losses Blablaaa (talk) 16:40, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

You may want to do so--Woogie10w (talk) 16:47, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Dont understand your sentence. What is your opinion? Blablaaa (talk) 16:51, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

My opinion is that you can include them on the eastern front page if you want to, the information is supported by the sources I have listed.--Woogie10w (talk) 17:03, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Hm. if it would be your choise would u include or not? i dont want to make changes without backup when this issue is disputed. Blablaaa (talk) 17:10, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

The issue is not disputed, it is backed up by reliable sources that can be verified.--Woogie10w (talk) 17:14, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Note well on Wikipedia I am not a source for the information you post, I have listed reliable sources that can be verified that put total Soviet POW losses at about 3 million not the 1.3 million listed in the official 1989 figures in Krivsheev's book.--Woogie10w (talk) 17:25, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

the 1.5 million died not only as POWs. what does literatur say about this? Blablaaa (talk) 17:45, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Please cite a reliable source for your statement--Woogie10w (talk) 17:59, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

which statement? i ask u what the literatur says about this conscripts. not all of them could have died as POWs little/some/many/most of them died in combat. The eastern front article seperates combat deaths and POW deaths so it would be good if there is an estimation how much died in combatBlablaaa (talk) 18:02, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Please see the footnotes and the sources cited The official Russian statistics for military dead do not include an additional estimated 1,500,000 conscripted reservists missing or killed before being listed on active strength. From a Soviet POV they were listed as missing, some may have died on the battlefield others as POW, they had no way of separating KIA from POW dead.--Woogie10w (talk) 18:15, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Yes i know. does your literatur break down this 1.5 ? Blablaaa (talk) 18:18, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Let me repeat From a Soviet POV they were listed as missing, some may have died on the battlefield others as POW, they had no way of separating KIA from POW dead --Woogie10w (talk) 18:23, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

i got it the first time thats why i asked if other sources break this figure down. u sound like soviet official sources are the only source. Blablaaa (talk) 18:37, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

No I never made this assertion , I have in fact cited reliable sources that refute the figure of 1.3 million POW dead listed in Krivsheevs’s book--Woogie10w (talk) 18:44, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Einmal in deutsch. Die soviets hatten gelistete Soldaten und Leute die einberufen wurden aber nicht mehr in die Bücher kamen. Davon sind scheinbar schätzungsweise 1.5 Millionen mann gestorben. Nun stellt sich die Frage ob es irgendwo eine Schätzung gibt wieviel von diesen durch Kampf gefallen sind und wieviele in deuten Gefangenenlagern ums Leben kamen. Das ist die einzige Frage die ich im Moment habe. Das sowjetische offizielle Quellen da nix zu haben, habe ich verstanden und deswegen auch nicht weiter nach diesen Quellen gefragt.... Hoffe in deutsch bin ich verständlicher. Grüße Blablaaa (talk) 18:57, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Klar, Wir konnen nicht wissen wieviel sind als Kriegsgefangner oder am Schlachtfelt gestorben. Also, die Russichen Quellen haben 1.3 million Kriegsgefangener gestorben und 2.1 million Zivilisten in Deutscland as Zwangsarbeiter gestorben. Mancher von Die Zivilisten waren in der Tat Reserven nicht am Ranglisten. Die Historiker in der West sagen das sie waren Kriegsgefangner, aber im heutigen Russland die Quellen verzeichnen diesen Verlusten als Zwangsarbeiter. --Woogie10w (talk) 19:27, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

The idea Blablaaa tries to push seems obvious: to inflate Soviet military losses as much as possible thereby supporting the point of view that it was a Soviet numerical superiority and tolerance to losses that allowed them to win the war. This idea is mostly a German POV and is not shared by all scholars. The average Axis/Soviet loss ratio was 1 to 1.5, and many sources agree with that. In this particular cases, it is not correct to list as military the men who got no arms, were never assigned to any military formations, and were killed or captured before they saw any combat. They were not left unaccounted neither here nor in other WWII articles: they were listed as civilians (which seems to be more correct). In addition, I again point your attention at the Ellman & Maksudov's conclusions there [2]. By no means these two scholars can be considered to be prone to Soviet propaganda.
And, finally, it is generally assumed to be correct to use Russian/Soviet sources for Soviet losses and German sources for German losses.--Paul Siebert (talk) 00:05, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Paul, I have re-read Ellaman & Maksudov's article which presents a demographic argument that military war dead are overstated by 900,000 because if the war had not occured these men would have died anyway. Michael Haynes writing in Europe-Asia Sdudies(2003 #2)[3] found Ellaman & Maksudov's logic unconvincing. Haynes asks if Ellaman & Maksudov would reduce Jewish Holocaust deaths to account for the estimated natural deaths that would have occured if there was no Holocaust.--Woogie10w (talk) 14:20, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

your synthesis? Blablaaa (talk) 00:21, 16 April 2010 (UTC) i push nothing, i asked for the 1.5 million conscripts which died. the same conscripts which are mentioned on this page two. Blablaaa (talk) 00:23, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

normally we should avoid discussing our opinions and stick to the sources but i must ask u: " these men were killed before they saw combat so they are no military casualties" ? how can all the 1.5 million be killed without seeing any combat. sorry but your synthesis is odd for me. Please dont say i push POV, iam sure u dont like that 1.5 million soldiers/militia which died should be included ( in my opinion ) and i know why u dont like. iam not the guy who created the number i saw this number multiple times than i asked here to verify. please read what is written enough. thank u.

for any admin watching me. i did not want to start a over long discussion or make a forum. i saw these conscripts numbers and asked why they are not included. i accused nobody of being POV or something like that i only asked for the conscrips which are mentioned in the "world war II casualties" article Blablaaa (talk) 00:31, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

The table of casualties lists 8.8 to 10.7 million military deaths which reflects the differing opinions of scholars on the topic. This is not our synthesis but a statement of the degree of scholarly opinion on the topic.

Bear in mind that the total killed in action, died of wounds and died of non-combat causes comes to 6.9 million. Krivosheev estimates the total MIA at 500,000 and POW dead at 1.3 million.

Western historians put POW total dead at 3.0 million, 1.7 million higher than Krivosheev.

I ask you to go to Krivosheev and reconcile the total of the men on duty in 1941, the total conscripted in the war, those discharged with those on duty at war’s end and you will come up to total losses of 10.2 million.

A Russian scholar Mikhalev in 2000 published a detailed analysis of Soviet military losses based on MOD records from the war and found that a figure of about 11 million is closer to reality. I cited this book above.

Back in May 1965 Marshal Konev stated that Soviet military war dead were 10 million.

How did this difference come about? In my opinion the figure of 8.6 million military dead is a plug. Total USSR war dead were 25.3 million (not counting an additional 1.3 million increase in infant mortality), Brezhnev era published sources listed 13.7 million civilian dead in the German occupied USSR. Soviet demographers estimated 3 million famine dead in the rear areas. Krivosheev was left with the remaining 8.6 million to explain as war dead. The statement of Marshall Konev and the detailed records at the MOD archives were ignored.--Woogie10w (talk) 01:12, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

regarding your efforts and libary i think u are an "expert" for this topic. so whats your advice for the eastern front article? 8.8-10.7 ? difficult figures...... Blablaaa (talk) 01:37, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

My advice is not to haggle over the "correct" number but to present both sides of the argument and let the readers decide. Wikipedia should mirror the sources, not reflect our POV.--Woogie10w (talk) 01:44, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

ok i hope Paul and I have consense then. i have a question only for me. what do u think about German POWs who died? overmans give ~1.000.000 , soviet sources ~400.000. what is your personnel opinion. iam interessted. the pure fact of the long time german POWs were held makes the ~400.000 unlikly, doesnt it? Blablaaa (talk) 01:55, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Read Overmans Deutsche Militaristche Verluste, he has a solid analysis of the topic, also see his book on German POWs Rüdiger Overmans: Soldaten hinter Stacheldraht. Deutsche Kriegsgefangene des Zweiten Weltkriegs. Ullstein Tb., 336 Seiten, März 2002.. You can take the figues from both books and compare them to Krivosheev. Back in 1969 in Germany I met a former German POW in the the USSR who said he survived because local people offered them food, he said many men died in transit. His camp was run by Soviet Volga Germans.--Woogie10w (talk) 02:02, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

my grandpa ( stalingrad area not inside stalingrad ) said that many died while transit. but this were often the guys already exhausted and so on. than later food supply wasnt good. but i think where he was many died but not compared to other "reports". than i thank u for investing time and answering questions. Danke Blablaaa (talk) 02:17, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Mexico

Someone with the right permit please include the five pilot war casualties of Escuadron 201 (201th Squadron) of the Mexican Expeditionary Air Force as military casualties. Please.

Please see footnote on Mexico, they are included.--Woogie10w (talk) 07:24, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Verification of Source- S. N Mikhalev

For those who wish to verify my recent post- A critical analysis of official Soviet wartime casualty statistics published by Krasnoyarsk University in 2000 estimated actual Soviet military war dead at more than 10.9 million persons

I was able to obtain the book by inter library loan in the United States,it is also avaliable at the British Library,at Cambridge and Oxford.

Liudskie poteri v Velikoi Otechestvennoi voine 1941- 1945 gg: Statisticheskoe issledovanie by S. N Mikhalev Krasnoyarsk gos. pedagog. universitet • 2000 ISBN 5-85981-082-2. --Woogie10w (talk) 12:49, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Jewish deaths were not caused by the war.

Jewish holocaust wasn't a direct result of military action by either side. In reality, little to no jews died as a result of war (bombings, combat etcetera). My reasoning is that if we were to include jews that died in the camps or otherwise, we'd also have to include other millions of people that died in Russian gulags, or in American concentration camps for Japanese in the US, they like the jews in national-socialist camps, died because of ill care for their lives. As such, I judge that their deaths should not be included in this article since it relates to deaths caused by the war. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.80.66.199 (talk) 14:15, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Most sources do in fact include Jewish Holocaust deaths with overall losses during WW2, if you desire to exclude them you can subtract them from the total on your own spreadsheet, its simple math. --Woogie10w (talk) 16:30, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

The article isn't limited to combat casualties. (Hohum ^@) 18:10, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Well if it isn't limited to military casualties then the article shouldn't be named World War II casualties. But again, if you insist in including the jewish holocaust, you should include all other holocausts/atrocities casualties. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.80.78.190 (talk) 13:39, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Plese take the time to read the notes and footnotes and I believe you will find your concerns addressed. --Woogie10w (talk) 15:06, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

We don't insist on anything other than reflecting what is included in source material on casualties associated with WWII. This article does just that. The sources clearly link the casualties included with the war, whatever your personal opinions. (Hohum ^@) 20:31, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Maybe it wasn't a DIRECT result of the war, as it would have continued after, say, the AXIS won. However it SHOULD be included in WW2 losses for the simple reason that the countries that were occupied were under the mercy of the NAZI regime. If it were not for the war, only German (and Austrian) Jews would be at risk. --RobNS 21:10, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Verification of Source- Haynes, Michael

For those who wish to verify my recent post Re Soviet War Dead- Michael Haynes has noted that “ We do not know the total number of deaths as a result of the war and related policies” We do know that the demographic estimate of excess deaths was 26.6 million plus an additional 16.1 million natural deaths that would have occurred in peacetime, bringing the total dead to 42.7 million. At this time the actual total number of deaths caused by the war is unknown since among the 16.1 million “natural deaths” some would have died peacefully and others as a result of the war

The Journal Europe-Asia Studies is available online at many public libraries in the US, the UK and Australia

HAYNES, MICHAEL, Counting Soviet Deaths in the Great Patriotic War: a Note Europe-Asia Studies, Mar., 2003, vol. 55, no. 2, p. 303-309

Mike Haynes is currently on the faculty of the University of Wolverhampton, in the U.K.

you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink

--Woogie10w (talk) 22:42, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Losses for neutral states

The website Uboat.net has a list of neutral/allied ships sunk during the war with verification.

Some of these include:

Colombia, with 23 killed. Chile, with 26 killed. Argentina, with at least 20 killed. Dominican Republic, with 26 killed. Egypt, with at least 21 killed. Faroe Islands, with 42 killed. Greenland, with 23 killed. Honduras, with 94 killed. Panama, with 820 killed. Portugal, with at least 41 killed. Venezuela, with 5 killed.

I know these aren't large numbers, but the give a real look as to how universal the war was. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.122.132.127 (talk) 16:41, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Interesting can you provide a live link to these figures?, a Google turned up nothing on Uboat.net --Woogie10w (talk) 17:25, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

It's www.uboat.net. If you go to "The Allies" and then "Ships hit by U-boats in World War II" a search option will appear, and give the above states as options (in addition to the usual ones). The specific link is http://www.uboat.net/allies/merchants/ 69.122.132.127 (talk) 19:19, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

But readers still need to look up each ship, we really need a summary.--Woogie10w (talk) 20:04, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Lets see what others say on the inclusion of this information, it is relevant to the topic and I would like to somehow include it in the article.--Woogie10w (talk) 20:59, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

I did a quick cross check with the USMM web site and found Panamanian ships in US service, to avoid a duplication with US casualties will take a bit of research to eliminate US flagged ships, that could very well be considered original research. --Woogie10w (talk) 22:03, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Also can we get data on Italian Navy activity, they had a few boats in the Atlantic in 1942.--Woogie10w (talk) 22:07, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

I have on my bookshelf Axis Submarine Succeses, there were listed a good number of Italian sinkings and a few by the Vichy French, the U-Boots had some minor league helpers. Also, I wonder how many ships were sunk by the Luftwaffe and by mines laid by the surface fleet?--Woogie10w (talk) 00:56, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

From what I've read the Italians were responsible for a fair number of Greek and Yugoslav losses. The Romanians were also responsible for some losses in the Black Sea. The IJN must have also tallied its share. I've been trying to locate accurate, sourced data as well. 69.122.132.127 (talk) 15:14, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Along similar lines, Atkinson's book "An Army at Dawn" mentions 752 Tunisian civilian deaths during the fighting in that country on page 487. 69.122.132.127 (talk) 15:11, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Good catch on Tunisia, I checked Google books and verified that figure.--Woogie10w (talk) 15:59, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

It might not be the best of sources, but I found a newspaper article mentioning civilian casualties in San Marino as a result of the RAF bombing. According to the article, 59 civilians were killed. Here's the link. http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1817&dat=19621217&id=uxcfAAAAIBAJ&sjid=H5oEAAAAIBAJ&pg=5980,2722733 69.122.132.127 (talk) 23:40, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Interesting, but this could be considered trivia. Let’s see what other editors say.--Woogie10w (talk) 00:20, 27 April 2010 (UTC)