re: The Top 10 Bloodiest Battles of the Second World War

quote:

---

It’s an accurate number. Tens of millions of Soviet military and civilian personnel were casualties of war from 1939-1945, but of that number - 27 million were killed outright.

---

If anything, given Stalin's known "transparency", I'd wager it's higher.

quote:

---

Im willing to bet some of our battles in the pacific had a casualty per square foot or casualty per combatant number that would rival, if not surpass, some of the major eastern front engagements

---

While there were several brutal and bloody battles in the Pacific, those in Western Europe and Italy were as bad or worse. Three of the five most bloody American battles were fought in France, Belgium, and Germany. And six of the 10 most deadly American battles were in the ETO and MTO.

Here’s how America’s WWII battles are ranked by KIA.

1. Battle of Normandy: 35,000
2. Battle of Okinawa: 20,000
3. Battle of the Bulge: 19,000
4. Battle of Hürtgen Forest: 12,000
5. Battle of Luzon: 10,500
6. Operation Dragoon: 7,300
7. Battle of Guadalcanal: 7,100
8. Operation Nordwind: 7,000
9. Battle of Iwo Jima: 6,800
10. Lorraine Campaign: 6,600

quote:

---

Every country needs to believe its own story that it tells itself. Most Americans grew up believing D-Day was the heroic, yet catastrophic singular act that defined WWII.

---

It certainly defined the Second World War for the Americans… why would it not be emphasized in and American History class?

The allied liberation of Western Europe is an extremely important world event… without it, democracy as we know it today might not exist.

quote:

---

In reality, it was mostly clean-up work against 2nd and 3rd rate soldiers (many of them foreign conscripts) that weren't good enough for the Ostfront.

---

Well that’s complete and total bullshite. The reason it wasn’t brutal like the eastern front is because the Germans viewed the Slavs and Russians as genetically inferior to their pure Aryan race. The Nazis had no qualms exterminating them as a people. They viewed the French and English as brothers in need of absorption into the fold.

Additionally, the Russians viewed individuals as expensive cogs on the gear of the state. It didn’t matter how many they lost, they had more to expend.

Stalin had a truly iron grip of control over his country unlike emperor Nicolas II, who had only a tenuous grasp of power at best.

15 million soldiers. Now compare that to Russia’s population in 1940

quote:

---

The last reliable population figure was that of the census of January 17, 1939, which showed a population of 170,500,000.

---

Almost 10% of their population died as soldiers. Now think of the % of the population fighting aged males made up. They killed damn near an entire generation of men

If anything, given Stalin's known "transparency", I'd wager it's higher.
---Stalin never admitted more than a few million killed in the USSR during WW2 because he didn't want the West to think Russia had been that depleted.

Only after the USSR fell did the 27 million number come out.

quote:

---

While there were several brutal and bloody battles in the Pacific, those in Western Europe and Italy were as bad or worse. Three of the five most bloody American battles were fought in France, Belgium, and Germany. And six of the 10 most deadly American battles were in the ETO and MTO.

Here’s how America’s WWII battles are ranked by KIA.

---

Yeah, but we're better at war than the Russians and Germans.

I mean, think about it. Since our inception as a nation, we have been alpha dogs on the battlefield.

quote:

---

Russian dudes who survived the war probably knocked up 5+ women each.

---

The Russians basically raped and looted there way through Poland and eastern Germany.

I learned American historical mythology in high school and got a good taste (double minor) of it in college. Learned even more since. There are lots of excellent books out there and sites like Time Ghost do a pretty good job of interpreting history too.

quote:

---

It certainly defined the Second World War for the Americans… why would it not be emphasized in and American History class?

---

Emphasized is different than pretending it was much more relevant than it was.

quote:

---

The allied liberation of Western Europe is an extremely important world event… without it, democracy as we know it today might not exist.

---

Yep. And without the absolute meat grinder of the eastern front, might never happened in the first place.

quote:

---

It goes to show how propaganda is always in play. Every country needs to believe its own story that it tells itself. Most Americans grew up believing D-Day was the heroic, yet catastrophic singular act that defined WWII. In reality, it was mostly clean-up work against 2nd and 3rd rate soldiers (many of them foreign conscripts) that weren't good enough for the Ostfront.

---

Your assertion that the Western Allies faced only second or even third rate formations in Normandy is a gross oversimplification and highly inaccurate. You’re looking only at the German static divisions that defended the beaches themselves on the morning of the Overlord Landings. Behind those beaches was Panzer Group West with the very best of the best German panzer divisions, including the 1st, 2nd, and 12th SS Panzer Divisions along with the Heer 9th, 11th, 19th, and 116th Panzer Divisions.

Do yourself a favor and take the time to actually study the subject before making ignorant comments like the one you made here. All you’ve accomplished is to embarrass yourself.