Comments by "Dennis Weidner" (@dennisweidner288) on "TIKhistory"
channel.
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ilsagutrune2372 Thanks. Guderian was largely right about the numbers but wrong about the data set. More important than total production was percapita numbers, which when calculated would bring France to German levels if not above them. Also of course 1936 was a Depression year. American production was only at a small percentage of its potential. Of course, other countries were affected by the Depression, but in terms of motor vehicles, I suspect America was more impacted.
And one observation as to the German mindset--there is no mention of the Soviet Union. Now the Soviets were not making cars, but in the 1930s, thanks in part to joint ventures with American companies, they were making trucks, tractors, and tanks. Given the importance of the Soviet Union and the Ostkrieg--a rather serious omission Not to mention where Guderian' and his Panzers failed. And notice he refers to an 'effective road network'. The Soviets did not have a road network, let alone an effective one.
Also, note his reference to 'skilled labor'. That was one reason the Germans failed in industrial production. They relied on skilled labor which was inefficient and evaporated as Hitler had to draft workers. American mass production techniques did not require skilled labor. Workers were trained to do one small part of an assembly line effort. That could be done quickly and thus large numbers of people who had never been in a factory before or knew nothing about machinery (i.e. women) could be easily brought into the industrial workforce.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@peterthomson4632 This issue is a little more complicated than I had thought. So I am trying to think through it.
Here is what I have worked up.
The numbers for the Soviets I have noted are about the 9 million figure. The problem with this number is that it includes the large number of Red Army POWs that the NAZIs murdered. This was well in excess of 3 million which leaves us with less than 6 million actual Soviet combat deaths. The G.F. Krishoveev 11 million figure is interesting. That is larger than I had thought. The problem with Soviet data is that the Russians have kept their Wold War II archives closed and after a brief thaw, Putin has closed them again. Thus they are difficult to assess.
The German number is harder to get a handle on. I have seen estimates of about 7 million. A recent study by Rudiger Overmans, a German historian, estimated that German military deaths were 5.3 million. The German government reports that about 4.3 million military personnel either died or are missing. Now the Soviet Union also murdered POWs or allowed POWs to die as a result of mistreatment. This may have amounted to 1 million, probably more. Thus we are left with combat deaths of some 6.0-3.5 million. I am unsure just what numbers to use.
The Axis allies are an even greater statistical problem. As I understand it, the Hungarians, Italians, and Romanians were not actively involved in major combat operations but were generally left to deal with pockets and secure rear areas. This would not have involved huge casualties. (The Finns were different.) But of course, Stalingrad was different where these countries experienced huge front-line casualties, and many were taken as POWs in winter conditions--leading to high POW deaths. . So I am not sure how to enter them into the calculation. The numbers I have noted are Romanian (0.3 million), Hungarian (0.2 million), Finnish (near 0.1 million), and Italians (less than 0.1 million). But in this case, many of the deaths were not combat deaths. More than half of the Axis ally deaths were as POWs.
The data I have been looking at is for individual battles which take the POW calculation out of the calculation. Take Kursk for example. The Soviets had time to prepare rings of defensive lines with established defensive positions, well dug in with minefields, and pre-sited artillery implements. As you say, the Germans who were attacking should have experienced much higher German casualties. But the numbers I see for the battle are much higher than Soviet casualties, even for Bagration. Which I find hard to explain. And the Battle for Berlin shows about equal combat deaths--also difficult to explain given the Red Army's superiority.
1
-
1