Talk:World War II casualties/Archive 2

message: A figure of 3,500,000 seems more likely. Ksenon 17:46, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it's better to operate on confirmed numbers, as the other figures could be taking into consideration the post-war casualties of Germans in POW camps. Should they be treated as military deaths, i.e. combat deaths? Ksenon 23:21, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Left you a note on your talk page. Ksenon 06:21, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

text: The History Channel, which is WWII crazy and extremely accurate, says 3.5 million, and I've read that from several other sources. And remember, these are all estimates. Half the deaths in WWII weren't even recorded, so keep that in mind. --LtWinters 22:38, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

text: The editors over at the History Channel need to read Rudiger Overman's Deutsche militarische Verluste. --Woogie10w 01:40, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  German losses 

message: ::::Say, what is the breakdown of the number 8.6 million that you copied. How many KIA, dead of accident & disease and MIA? Also how many POWs died in German custody? I bet you can't provide a decent answer.Berndd--64.48.59.25 10:50, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: G. I. Kirosheev Soviet Casualties and Combat Losses. Greenhill 1997  lists
the following official losses ( the data quoted by Overy) Killed in Action and dead of wounds
6,330,000; non combat deaths 556,000. Those are confirmed losses reported to the high command by the fronts. Estimated MIA were 500,000 and estimated POW dead 1.3 million. The grand total was 8.6 million. What a coincidence that this is exactly the same as Axis losses of 8.6 million as reported in Kirosheev. The USSR losses were equal to the Axis on the Eastern front, right or wrong? Pow loses were 1.3 million, right or wrong? Check your numbers before you make a change. 
Real losses of Pows were about 2.8 million and MIA were 500,000. Add that to 6.9 million confirmed dead and you are at 10.2 million. That does not include losses of Partisans and Milita of 400,000 ( they must be included as military not civilian losses). Berndd--68.236.161.237 12:57, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Actually most of Bulgarian casualties were on the Allied side, after 09.09.1944, when there was a Communist coup in the country. --85.130.127.137 00:52, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  You are wasting your time copying numbers, pal.  berndd11222
I dont understand, what do you mean?
If you think the nummbers are wrong then I would be very happy to hear you oppinion :D
I dont mean that in any sarcastic way or nothing like that because I would be very happy to talk nummbers with someone who actually knows them and it seems that you do :D
And am I your pal :D
(Deng 00:55, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Give us a breakdown of that Nr you copied 

message: Total losses per Kirossheev are 9,186,000. That guy never even looked at duh book Berndd
:I got the information from a website with Krivosheev's book in it. Official Soviet statistics, as quoted by General Krivosheev, list 8,600,000 military dead. Partisans were not military - they were paramilitary. They are counted separately. Here is my source. Maybe we are talking about different people? Cossack 20:56, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kirosheev 

message: A Russian language source was published in 2004 entitled " Poteri Narodonaselenia
v 20 veke" by Vadim Erlikman. The book is a reference guide to population losses in every
country on the planet from 1900 to 2003. The author adds copious footnotes which 
lists the sources of the data, often he uses Soviet and Russian sources that are not well known in the west. 
Here is his breakdown of Soviet Losses from 1941-1945
Killed in action or died of wounds - 7.6 Million
(including 215,000 in German forces)
POW's who died in captivity- 2.6 Million
Partisans killed in battle- 250,000
Citizen militia killed in battle- 150,000
Civilians killed in fighting- 1.5 Million
Civilians executed/killed by Germans- 7.1 Million    
::Working as an UN-pathologist, I can say, killing 7,1 million people in mass executions in a time period of less than 4 years                   requires very high logistical foundations, impossible to achive given the infrastructur of occupied soviet territory in the 40s, no extermination camps, no use of gas. Pls clarify this source.--84.147.225.118 19:03, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The source of the statistic is Vserossiyskaya Kniga Pamyata 1941-45 page 406 cited by Vadim
Erlikman. The details are as follows 3 million dead in ghettos or forced labour camps and 4 million killed in German reprisals. The Germans occupied Soviet territory with 70 million inhabitants, considering the fact that vast areas were destroyed by the Nazi's the deaths of 7 million civilians, 10% of the population in 3 years, seems plausible indeed using the types and quantities of weapons at their disposal.
In Rwanda in only 3 months 1 million people( 13%of the population) were killed out of a population of 7.8 million, by militias armed with machetes and small arms. Based on your experience working at the UN as a pathologist do you consider this credible?
One must also consider that total Soviet losses were 26.6 million( in 1941 borders), military losses were 10-11 million leaving 15-16 million civilian deaths to be explained.--Woogie10w 23:10, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: 1) 4 million due to mass executions is possible though the author of list of massacres never heard of such executions, even Babi Yar massacre was not focussed at soviet civilian population. Have you got other information? 2) "3 million dead in ghettos" a) In which soviet cities did they installed ghettos? b) To separate soviet civilians from whom? 3) "or in forced labour camps" a) So in Germany died 1,2 Soviets in forced labour camps and in occupied Soviet territory 3 million minus Soviet Ghetto deaths. Is that correct? Thank you.--88.64.224.240 00:06, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

text: I'm not challenging what you are saying, I'm simply trying to understand it. Please forgive me if I am being a bit slow here. You report that the ending estimate of Soviet population for 1946 is an estimate. Can we therefore conclude that the figure for the total Soviet civilian casualties (26.6 million) is only a rough guess? Drogo Underburrow 11:35, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

text: You are quite correct, Soviet losses are what one would call a "rough guess" There is no list with 26.6 names of the dead. This statistic tells us that 26.6 million Soviet citizens died in the war, it includes deaths of famine of about 3 million in the interior of the USSR not occupied by the Germans and another 3 million deaths in the territories annexed by the USSR in 193-40. These 3 million deaths are included with the losses of Poland, the Baltic states and Romania by most western historians, you need to back them out of the Soviet number in order to avoid a doublecount. So in fact the USSR lost about 20 million due to the war. The military losses were about 10-11 million when one adds the additional POW losses I mentioned above and losses of partisans and militia. The balance of 9-10 million are civilian losses. These losses are poorly documented and may include victims of Soviet as well as Nazi repression.--Woogie10w 12:04, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thank you very much for taking the time to clarify and report on this confusing issue. I will go ahead and put on the WWII page the results of your research: Soviet military losses for WWII were approximately 10-11 million, civilian losses 9-10 million, and both these figures are rough guesses, that are poorly documented, and may include deaths due to Soviet as well as Nazi oppression. This is all correct, yes? Drogo Underburrow 12:33, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

text: When I said the WWII page, I meant the main WWII page, not the page that this is the talk page to. I will use your numbers. The numbers may already be there. Important also is that the figures are rough guesses, that are poorly documented, and may include deaths due to Soviet as well as Nazi oppression, which is all what you said earlier, yes? Drogo Underburrow 13:23, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

text: This sounds like an excellent suggestion, especially if Shanes is willing to get it started. The topic definately deserves its own page. The proposed name sounds great.  Drogo Underburrow 16:30, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The Polish Roman Catholics were a minority over there in 1939, they occupied the area by force of arms in 1919 against the wishes of the Paris peace confrence.--Woogie10w 11:53, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Soviet War Losses 1941-45 

message: I think we have enough material here to make up for a very interesting article on its own. I mean, we have already seperate articles on such things as Humanitarian effects of Hurricane Katrina, and surely the 23 million Soviet dead is an issue that could be well served with an article on its own where we explain the death toll numbers as Berndd has done here, add some prose, mention all this with unlisted and sometimes unaccounted for soldiers, POW's, the risk of double counting, and so on. I think many people can learn from reading it. I know I would. And we could also point people to that article for a more thorow explanation for those curious about why our numbers might differ from whatever number they have read. I could actually write it myself by just copy and paste stuff from this talk page... Maybe I'll do that if nobody beats me to it. But what should we call the aricle? Soviet casualties in World War II is maybe simple and good? Shanes 13:24, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This sounds like an excellent suggestion, especially if Shanes is willing to get it started. The topic definately deserves its own page. The proposed name sounds great.  Drogo Underburrow 16:30, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The Polish Roman Catholics were a minority over there in 1939, they occupied the area by force of arms in 1919 against the wishes of the Paris peace confrence.--Woogie10w 11:53, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: A special Soviet casualties article?

message: Partisan losses are included with duh military casualties. Oh my God! we need to reclassify them as civilians.Lets start with Norway, those guys who blew up the heavy water plants were not combatants. The French Marquis who worked with MI5 on D day were not combatants.  The Italian partisans who fought behind the lines in 1944-45 were not combatants.  Tito’s Red Army and the Chetniks were civilians not combatants. The Greek and Bulgarian communist partisans were not combatants they were civilians. The Slovak partisans of 1944 that assisted the Red Army were not combatants. Chiang’s guerillas were civilians not combatants. Mao’s Red Army
were not combatants they were civilians. The AK home Army losses in the 1944 uprising were civilians not combatants. The Soviet_ Partisan fighters were civilians not military combatants. Its a fact these folks did not raise their right hand and swear and oath to the motherland and did not die wearing a uniform. Put them in the same column as mom, grandpa and the kids.Bernnd--68.236.161.237 16:00, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Partisan Losses 

message: The numbers posted include non combat losses due to disease and accidents. For example the US has 113,000, Italy 50,000, Germany 500,000 and the USSR 556,000. Should they be posted with war casualties?Berndd--68.236.161.237 18:29, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Non Combat Casualties--Should they be posted with war casualties? 

message: :That nummber on the eastern front was made by me and I have told you where I got the nummbers from.
Now could you tell me what sources you get your nummbers from and also there is a gap in the POW and people that got liberated what happened to the people that didnt get liberated according to your nummbers? (Deng 00:56, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The official Russian Nr of 8,668,400 is broken down as follows 1- Killed in Action and died of wounds 6,329,600; 2-Died of disease, accident or sentenced to be shot 555,500; 3- 1,783,300 MIA and POW dead. Total POWs and MIA were 4,559,000 of whom 2,775,700 were liberated leaving 1,783,300 unaccounted for. This is on page 85 of  Soviet Casualties & Combat losses by Gen. Krivosheev. This 8,668,400 is "from listed strength" which is Soviet doubletalk to cover up the high losses of POWs and MIA. The fact of the matter is that many reservists were called up but never put on "listed strength" by Moscow. Clodfelter(see references in article) reports the Germans taking 5,735,000 Soviet POWs, 1.2 million more than the official Soviet total of POWs and missing combined. A recent Russian language source published in 2004 " Human losses in the 20th Century" by Vadim Erlikman estimates 7.6 million Killed and missing in action, 2.6 million dead POWs, 250,000 partisan deaths and 150,000 militia dead for a grand total of 10.6 million. The key point that must be understood is that many Soviet reservists were captured by the Germans but never on the official roster in Moscow because of the chaos in 1941. The Soviets lost at least 3.3 million POWS and MIA not 1.8 million as reported in the "official" total. This is why the Soviet military lost 10.6 million in the war not 8.6 million. Check and doublecheck any and all data from Soviet sources.Berndd--4.236.63.210 02:41, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The number of 10.6 million of Erlikman should be tweeked down to 10.4 million bebause 215,000 were killed or MIA in German military service. Berndd AKA --Woogie10w 13:07, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

text: The 1 million which I  believe is 2, but that dosent matter, shoud NOT add to Soviet losses but to the AXIS one.(Deng 21:43, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

text: You believe 2 million Soviets dead in German Army, where does that come from? This gets better as we move along, I need a few laughs after a tough week in the office--Woogie10w 04:22, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

text: LET ME REPEAT--About 1,000,000 Soviet POWs were in German military service and according to Gen Krivosheev 215,000 were killed or MIA in German military service. About 800,000 were returned to the USSR after the war, many later died in the Gulags and their deaths are not included with the 10.6 million war dead. The number of 10.6 million of Erlikman should be tweeked down to 10.4 million because 215,000 were killed or MIA in German military service.--Woogie10w 03:39, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: SOVIET LOSSES-IS THE OFFICIAL TOTAL OF 8.6 MILLION, ACCURATE ?

message: For Americans the Philippine campaign of 1941-42 was a great humiliation. The Japanese suprised McArthur and conquered the Philippines in six months  capturing more than 30,000 US military personnel and civilians. General McArthur had to sneek out in a US submarine. Many Philippinos collaborated with Japan. It was a disaster we don't want to remember.
The Russians look back at the disaster of 1941 and feel the same way. There is no desire to list the 3.3 million POWs captured in 1941 and the loss of the vital heartland of the USSR in five months. The fact that 1 million Soviet soldiers were in the German Army is hardly ever mentioned along with the Stalinist era repressions. Berndd AKA--Woogie10w 14:25, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Philippines  & Barbarossa -1941 

message: I have a copy of the official Italian Report, if there are any questions please feel free to ask. Berndd AKA--Woogie10w 19:14, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  ITALIAN CASUALTIES 

message: I don't think this should appear in the chart unless mention of the total number of people killed in the concentration and work camps is mentioned (not just the Jewish deaths).  It makes it seem like Jewish people were the only ones persecuted this way.  There were over 11 million people killed in those camps, of which 6 million were Jewish.  Meaning the deaths of around 5 million executed people  have been, and have traditionally been, totally ignored.  I am not making light of this. I would have qualified to have been a 'guest' of those camps if I were living in Nazi Germany (due to my father being of Jewish heritage).  I am just a bit frustrated by the one sided view. I know this view should be expected I guess, as the largest single block to be persecuted is likely to have the loudest voice.  Let's just not ignore the ones who can't shout so loudly.
The Jews were singled out for extermination and 70% in German occupied territory perished. For example the Holocaust is also a seperate item on the German Wikipedia page on war casualties. Christian civilians could survive by working for the Germans while most Jews were not given this option. The fate of the Jews deserves special mention also because the Holocaust deniers are attempting to cover up the Nazi crime of mass murder.The Jewish losses in the Holocaust must remain as a seperate item. 
This page covers the loss of civlians that are ignored by most historians, Indonesia is a perfect example. Read the footnotes for each country and you will find the details of sources that can elaborate on these losses. Poland for example has a link to the USHMM page Poles as Victims of the Nazi era. The German civilian losses are detailed here while they are ignored by most people outside of Germany. The fate of the Roma is mentioned in each country. The high rate of civilian deaths in Japan in 1945 is mentioned here but ignored elsewhere. Non Jewish civilian and POW losses are detailed for each country.--Woogie10w 21:53, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There were 350 million non Jews in German occupied Europe of whom 15 million were victims of the Nazis a 4% death rate. These losses are noted for each country in the footnotes. Of the 8 million Jews in Hitler's Europe 5.7 million perished, a 70% death rate.--Woogie10w 10:23, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: On a personal note. My father was shocked when he heard a group of German POWs in France speaking Polish. --Woogie10w 10:23, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

text: I agree, just because the Jews were the largest group of Holocaust victims does not mean they deserve special treatment over everyone else who was slaughtered in the death camps. Listing only the Jewish victims is not only historically inaccurate, it's offensive. It makes out the Gypsies, Poles, and all other non-Jewish "undesirables" as being less important than the Jewish victims, and also to an extent downplays just how bad the Holocaust really was. 71.203.209.0 05:48, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: FROM THE NOTES AT THE BOTTOM OF THE SCHEDULE
Civilian  Deaths - Includes civilian losses from military action and war related deaths caused by famine and disease. These figures include civilian deaths due to Nazi terror and the Holocaust totaling 17.8 million and  various Japanese atrocities 5.4 million The deaths related the Soviet annexations in 1939-40 are included with civilian dead. Civilian losses in the postwar era ( 1946-47) due to famine and disease are not included with these losses.--Woogie10w 21:59, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I find that sentence misleading. The way I understand it, it means that the Jewish Holocaust victims are counted twice - once as Civilian deaths, once as Jewish Holocaust deaths. That isn't the case, but I don't know what the correct description would be, so it's probably better if it's edited by someone who knos what they are doing. Pruneau 17:48, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

text: The numbers add across the page to the total. The Holocaust deaths are not double counted.--Woogie10w 18:14, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Holocaust Deaths

message: Is there a source on the number of german submarine losses. thne current number seems way too high
Check--Woogie10w 23:21, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: German Submarine Losses

message: How to check the Casualty totals for the Commonwealth that tie out to the WW2 Casualties page.
Go to CWGC webpage-Search our Records-Debt of Honour Register
To check Total losses for the Indian Army in WW2
1-Search for- CASUALTY
2-War- SECOND WORLD WAR
3-Year of Death- From: 1939 - To: 1947
4-Force-ARMY
5-Nationality- INDIAN
The search yields 79,326 Indian Army deaths in WW2.
--Woogie10w 16:52, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Commonwealth War Graves Conmmission 

message: These tables should be considered canidates for transfer to a page that deals with military hardware. They are not related to the topic of war casualties and take up space.--Woogie10w 09:57, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with that. If nobody objects, I'll move it out to its own article. Shanes 11:32, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Equipment Losses Tables 

message: These charts could be replaced a photograph of Casualties in WW2. The information they present is of limited value. I think a war photgraph would be a better suited to this page and would help to trim down it's size.--Woogie10w 10:09, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think an article like this should have some charts to illustrate the numbers in the table. But they are a bit too big in my oppinion. I'll make them smaller. Is it the first chart you find misleading? Maybe we could plot the holocoust victims seperately in that chart. But then we need to bug Dennis to make a new chart (again). Unless someone else knows how to make those charts. I don't. Shanes 11:52, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pie Charts 

message: The number of deaths from India, as mentioned in this article (1.5 million) is highly exaggerated.I am sure it is not more than 100,000.Does anybody know the exact number?
::The Bengal famine of 1943 was war related and caused an estimated 1.5 million deaths, the source of this statistic isJohn W. Dower War Without Mercy 1986 ISBN 394751728- Page 297
:::From the Footnote backing up Indian losses
:::The war dead listed here are those reported by the Commonwealth War Graves Commission. Total deaths were 87,040 which included Army (79,326), Air Force (897), Navy (501), Merchant Navy (6,114), unidentified by branch of service(9), and civilian deaths(193). These losses include war related deaths during 1946-47 (8,522)The preliminary 1945 data for Indian losses was, killed 24,338, missing 11,754, wounded 64,354 and POW 79,489.The pro-Japanese Indian National Army lost 2,615 dead and missing.  Civilian losses were caused by the Bengal famine of 1943.--Woogie10w 01:02, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Indian deaths in WW-II 

message: Any chance that this category be elaborated?  Does it include Hawaii or New Britain?  
While the number may be quite small, it is important to remember that some islands had some of the highest casualty rates.  On Nauru over a third of the population died as forced labourers (ref: Nauru). Kransky 15:27, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Pacific Islands

message: While Ireland was neutral, over 10,000 Irishmen volunteers died serving in the British and other Commonwealth armies.  Also there were Irish civilian deaths through accidental bombing. 
It is totally irrelevant that Ireland was neutral at the time - the intention of this article is to list casualties, and if a significant number of Irishmen died as a result then this fact deserves to be mentioned.  And it is insulting to list Irish dead as British dead.  
I am going to reinclude Ireland.  If you wish to debate me on this matter, do it here and lets get a consensus.  A decision should also apply for the deaths of people from other 'neutral' countries should also be counted - Switzerland was often bombed (accidentally), and thousands of Swedes fought with the Germans. Kransky 12:34, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Ireland and other neutrals

message: How to check the Casualty totals for the Commonwealth that tie out to the WW2 Casualties page.
Go to CWGC webpage-Search -Our Records-Debt of Honor Register
To check Total losses for Australia in WW2
1-Search for- CASUALTY
2-War- SECOND WORLD WAR
3-Year of Death- From: 1939 - To: 1947
4-Force-Leave Blank for all losses 
5-Nationality- AUSTRAILIAN
The search yields 40,460 Australian deaths in WW2 with each name listed 
A similar search of the CWGC for only civilian losses yields 86 names, the Merchant Navy is listed as a separate category not with civilians, this accounts for the difference between the Austrailian War Graves Commission losses of 735 civilians and the CWGC--Woogie10w 23:06, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Australian Losses

message: If we post information to Wikipedia the sources must be verifiable. For example when Wikipedia lists 40,500 Australian military deaths WW2 we cite a reference to the CWGC website so that others can verify the information.  The reader must be able to say the source for this statistic is the CWGC not Wikipedia. An unsourced statement by an individual is not acceptable because it cannot be verified. --Woogie10w 23:35, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Sources Must be Verifiable

message: Military losses are listed under the flag that they were incurred. For example German nationals who served in the US Armed forces are listed with US not German losses. The UK drafted men from colonies who are listed with the UK since the losses were incurred with the UK armed forces not with each colony. Germany drafted ethnic German citizens of Poland and Czechoslovakia, they are never counted as Czechs or Poles. Koreans and Chinese were drafted by Japan. The Irish who served the UK forces did not fight for Ireland and should be listed with the UK. It would be impossible to break out and re allocate by nationality the losses of each nation. If we have information on foreigners in a nations armed forces it belongs in the footnotes. The losses must be listed under the flag that were incurred in order to avoid a list of numbers that makes no sense and cannot be backed up with solid sources.--Woogie10w 23:49, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Military losses must be listed under the flag that they were incurred 

message: Are the German deaths from bombing just counted in the 1937 German boundaries or does this include people who died in the 1939 boundaries?
Das Deutsche Reich und der Zweite Weltkreig Bd. 9/1 - On Page 460 clearly states that losses within 1937 borders were 360-370,000 including 185,000 up until 12/31/44. The source of their data is Der Bombenkreig gegen Deutschland by Olaf Groehler--Woogie10w 23:02, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bombing of Germany 

message: Could the user from the Bulgarian IP address please share with us the source of the information posted yesterday for Bulgarian civilian losses.--Woogie10w 14:02, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bulgarian Civilian Casualties 

message: Shouldn't they be counted as military instead of civilian?
In the US they were not counted with military casualties by the US-DOD, however in the UK and Commomwealth nations the Merchant Navy was considered part of the armed forces by the Commonwealth War Graves Commission and the UK-MOD, they listed as military casualties.--Woogie10w 02:31, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  US Merchant Marines 

message: Something doesn't seem right here. According to the site, China had a population of 530 million people in 1939 (Can anyone confirm this with a real source?) and lost about a total of 10 million people, 3 million military and 7 million civilians totaling of 1.89% of their entire population. Japan on the other hand had a total pop. of 72 million and about 2.6 million total deaths, 2 million military and 600,000 civilians making their total population loss of about 3.61%. Something is really wrong here, am I really supposed to believe that Japan lost a bigger chunk of their population than China during WW2? Granted that China had a far larger population than virtually every country in the world at the time, something is still being distorted here. Either the total pop. of China is inflated or the total number of deaths especially for civilians is deflated.
Chinese WW2 losses are diffcult to determine because there was no census of the the population prior to the war. John Dower's estimate of 10 million is posted here, John W. Dower is a well known scholar of the war in Asia and his word has clout, if you have a more credible source than Dower please let us know.
As for the 1939 population two sources are listed, Vadim Erlikman who compiled his data from International Historical Statistics by B.R. Mitchell and the French encyclopedia Fremy D, Fremy M. Quid.; the website Poulation statistics lists the 1939 poulation of 517 million.
The sources cited here are real and can be verified.--Woogie10w 01:45, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Chinese Losses

message: I've semi-protected it because of persistent vandalism by some dork because the article was just linked to from fark.  Just a heads up, the semi-protect can probably be safely removed in the very near future as soon as his attention span expires. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 00:19, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Semi-protect

message: Would you know a good source about casualties by region? I don't mean casualties suffered by a given country, rather, a casualties a country inflicted on its enemies. I am particularly trying to figure out the number of Axis (99% German, probably) casualties inflicted on them by 1) Polish army from 1939 to 1945 and 2) Polish partisants only (i.e. Polish army operating in Poland after 1939).-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  00:26, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I know of no source that has the breakout of German casualties inflicted by the Polish Army in the East or by Polish Partisans. Overmnans has monthly deaths on the Eastern Front until 12/31/44 and monthly deaths for the entire war. Losses of German Police (63,462) proably include SS units fighting partisans. On the Soviet side of the ledger Krivosheev lists Soviet losses( KIA-MIA/WIA) for every major operation of the war and by yearly quarters. The losses of the Polish Armies are given a seperate line for the operations in 1944-45. Total Polish losses with the Soviets were about 24,000 (KIA/MIA) and Soviet Losses from July 44-May 45 were about 1.7 Million- about 70 times that of the Polish forces. Overmans lists 740,000 Germnan deaths in the East from July-Dec 1944, this does not include 300,000 POW. Plus from Jan-May 1945 the Germans lost 1.2 million (KIA/MIA), 80% against the Russians, 1 million dead plus about 2 million POW, in the East in 1945. In summary from July 44-May 45 the Germans lost about 3 million dead & POW , the USSR 1.7 million plus 24,000 Polish, 35,000 Romanian, 6,000 Czechoslovak and 10,000 Bulgarian allies . If you need additional information let me know--Woogie10w 02:33, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Casualties by region

message: Just looking at Wikipedia's info on the bombing of japan, it is hard to believe that after destroying 2.5 million buildings in urban centers (half-destroying the 65 most populated cities), after killing 100,000 civilians in a firestorm in one day, after the 2 nuclear bombs, that the Japanese civilian casualty number on this page of 600,000 can be anywhere near accurate. That means almost NO ONE died as we blew up half of the area of those 65 most populated cities because the rest of the deaths are already accounted for with the firestorm and nukes. I've had no luck finding alternative figures, however. Does this seem worthy of investigation to anyone? --Joelrosenblum 14:28, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point, take a look at the footnote. John Dower lists 393,000 civilians killed in the bombing( including 110,000 post war A Bomb deaths), 160,000 killed on Okinawa & Siapan Clodfelter lists 27,000 Merchant Marine crew deaths, that adds up to 580,000 not counting some Japanese civilians who perished after the war in China & Korea due to reprisal attacks. In the footnote mention is made of the study by McArthur's office in 1948 that listed 900,000 excess Japanese civilian deaths on the home islands in 1945. --Woogie10w 14:46, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Japanese Civilian Casualties Vastly Under-estimated? 

message: Japan Population 1/1/45-12/31/45
Description        	Amount(Millions)
Population 1/1/45  	73,681
Births             	1,685
Civilian Deaths    	(2,113) A.
Migration -Net     	(667) B.
Population 12/31/45	72,586
Notes:
A. The death rate was 2.9% on an annual average annual  population of 72,935 million. The pre-war death rate was 1.6% per year. The increase in civilian deaths in Japan during 1945 was 1.3% which is about 948,000.
B. Migration Net- Is mostly the transfer out of military personnel from Japan prior to 8/45.
The population data is for the Japanese home islands only and does not include Japanese civilians abroad or military deaths.
Source:
The data to prepare this schedule is listed in the study Annual Changes in Population of Japan Proper 1 October 1920-1 October 1947, General Headquarters for the Allied Powers Economic and Scientific Section Research and Programs Division. July 1948.--Woogie10w 14:25, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  == Japanese Population  Balance 1945 ==