How many German Soldiers died in WW2?

[@MilitaryHistoryVisualized]

Here is a German version by Jens Wehner, it is a bit different, e.g., he covers the birth years in more detail: kzbin.info/www/bejne/fnzOp5-haLaKeLs

[@ondrejdobrota7344]

More important is the cause and dates. How many in each operation etc.

[@ondrejdobrota7344]

Great video, one of the best you ever made.

[@thelastaustralian7583]

Job well done ! Considering Russia had 36 Million Military. With all the other Allies combined .It seems the Krauts Leadership ,never were after Winning, from the beginning ?

[@Randohandle55748]

Hi Military History Visualized, could you please make a video explaining how political commissars function in communist nations and how Russia's imitation of a Military Political Department impacts their performance in the war?

[@JS6969tz]

Their aggressive tactics reaped a heavy toll on their troops. One German said they were never taught on withdrawal tactics and defences in retreat.

[@17cmmittlererminenwerfer81]

I had an encounter with a elderly woman whose brother never returned from the Ostfront. She never got a definitive answer about his fate. Her grief, decades later, was still enormous and very upsetting to observe. Just one soldier's sister. And then to think of millions of sisters, millions of families who lost their sons, brothers, fathers. Then that multiplied across the allies, everyone... the scope of the pain created by that war is unimaginable.

[@seanodwyer4322]

yeah here in 2024 ahh discover from Google how many O'Dwyer/ Dwyer died / serve in new zealand army and airforce in W,W.2. Only 1,400 000 humans in new zealand in W.W. 2. Found renently one died in Tunisia in 1943 and one att Monte cassinno 1944 Italy. - 4 died in airforce fighting Japs

[@Tam0de]

And fast forward to today: What have we learned as a result of all that pain & suffering? Absolutely NOTHING. NADA. ZERO.

[@Ian-vj5pv]

She was spared from the murderous stories of her bestial brother...

[@deutsche_lyrik]

​​@@Ian-vj5pvWas für ein komplett dämlicher Kommentar....so dermaßen dumm und unüberlegt...

[@deutsche_lyrik]

​@@Ian-vj5pvwas für ein komplett hohler Kommentar....so dermaßen unwissend und unüberlegt

[@didfet5496]

Looking at these numbers I wonder how my grandfather and his 4 brothers all made it alive… A true miracle.

[@lawLess-fs1qx]

Phenomenal luck/skill. uplifting story among the carnage.Thanks.

[@benjaminguilatcoiv]

​@@lawLess-fs1qx these things can only happen through God's will that they live through the hardest times where many have died

[@Digueirazz]

luck, while in your family the 4 brothers survived, there are other families where 2,3 or even 4 german brothers died.

[@byzantinehoney3384]

Well as the video states they had a 77% chance of surviving

[@greenockscatman]

@@byzantinehoney3384 77% sounds like good odds but if you have to roll those dice four times, it's only a 35% chance for all three to make it back alive.

[@ARNM55-l9v]

Older American here. Good data, graphics / icons / & easily understandable symbols. Well done.

[@MilitaryHistoryVisualized]

Thanks!

[@marcusott2973]

Much awaited, much appreciated looking forward to excellent insights as always from you.

[@captainhurricane5705]

The scale of the slaughter in the last year of the war is almost beyond comprehension.

[@jamesdellaneve9005]

Look at the Soviet losses. Besides the fact that Stalin killed his Generals, they sent those poor bastards up against the Germans with no ammo and such and would execute troops for falling back and such.

[@joemamaobama6863]

@@jamesdellaneve9005 sure buddy

[@jamesdellaneve9005]

@@joemamaobama6863 Are you disagreeing? If so. Why? I am not denying that 5 million German soldiers died. However, 1 out of 7 Russians died on the Eastern front. Hence, why the Russians were so brutal to German captors.

[@erikgothberg8078]

@@jamesdellaneve90051 out of 3 Russians died and it was the same ratio for the Germans. But the chance to survive the entire war was a lot lower

[@jamesdellaneve9005]

@@erikgothberg8078 1 out of 3 Russian soldiers died? I believe that the ratio was 1 out of 7 for the entire population.

[@henriklarssen1331]

Its pretty insane that the losses in 1944 are the same as 1939, 1940, 1941, 1942 and 1943 combined. Makes you wonder how different Germany would be today if the War ended in 1943 and over 3 million mostly young men still alive.

[@PatGilliland]

Germany, Russia, China, Israel....

[@aleksazunjic9672]

Well... there were some peace feelers during lull in the fighting in Spring of 1943, between Germany and USSR. Right after Stalingrad and 3rd battle of Kharkov. Basic idea was status quo ante bellum. Supposedly Hitler did not like the idea, i.e. he wanted one more military victory, to be able to negotiate with upper hand. This victory would be Zitadelle, but it turned out quite differently, and the rest is history as they say.

[@JRyan-lu5im]

@@aleksazunjic9672 Can you expand on that? I've never heard of such discussions ever happening, and they'd seem pretty unlikely given the alliances and the precedents made.

[@allangibson8494]

@@JRyan-lu5imThere were documented negotiations between the USSR and Germany in Stockholm early in 1943 behind the backs of the Western powers.

[@cptant7610]

They would probably try to perpetuate the same "stab in the back" myths that they did after WW1 if Germany wasn't defeated completely militarily.

[@Willindor]

Excellent work as always Bernhard

[@MilitaryHistoryVisualized]

Thank you! Cheers!

[@fancyultrafresh3264]

Really appreciate you crunching these numbers for us, very good broad perspective from you.

[@alexandersteffen7805]

by far this is the best ww2 related Channel.

[@tavish4699]

I have had heated debates with Americans that wouldn’t want to understand that Soldat means men off all branches not just the army So thanks for clarifying that from the start

[@billrich9722]

What a weird thing to have a heated debate over.

[@tavish4699]

@@billrich9722 exactly Especially when I even told them that I’m a native German speaker His reply was I only speak English but that doesn’t matter here 😂

[@billrich9722]

@@tavish4699 Well... Can't argue with that.

[@pandaprewmaster325]

Dude what sort of heated debate to be started on such topic were you guys yelling at each other "NO SOLDAT MEANS SERVICEMAN" "IT MEANS SOLDIER IN THE ARMY NOT SERVICEMAN" something like this??

[@Lagmaster33]

Americans... a big surprise there lol

[@grizwoldphantasia5005]

The losses in North Africa are a lot lower than I expected.

[@mikelesan3964]

The western allies took prisoners

[@l.a.wright6912]

​@@mikelesan3964I'd argue that it's more than that. I'd argue that the difference in tactics that came with normandy is what really crippled the loss ratio.

[@bl4ck5un9]

​@@mikelesan3964 I'd say a big reason for that was also the limited amount of Men that got send to Africa to begin with. If I remember right the entire Korps only consisted of 30-40k Men.

[@MrZauberelefant]

​@@l.a.wright6912Falaise crippled the loss ratio. That's 200.000 killed/taken prisoner.

[@noobster4779]

Two reason: 1) North Africa was an absolute sideshow by german standarts in WW2 and troop commitmeant. Germany generally commited a few quality divisions to the front, but no mass until literally Tunisia in 1943. 2) German casualties does not include the italians for obvious reasons. The main axis forced in North Africa were, against comman narratives, the italians. They were responsible for all the "non fancy stuff" of the africa corps like holding the frontline with infantery divisions so the mobile units could attack. Especially after El Alamein the italians suffered heavy loses, although more often in captured and less killed troops.

[@andrewklang809]

1:25 What comprises "auxiliary forces"? Civilian air defense? Strategic logistics? Merchant marine? Or is that a reference to non-German (and non-SS) organizations like the Osttruppen?

[@MrZauberelefant]

That would be, not complete list: - Reichsbahn - Organisation Todt - technische Nothilfe - Reichspost And other people working for the Reich in a non military fashion. Basically: wears a uniform, but is not Wehrmacht/SS/Police

[@samsonsoturian6013]

Mostly civilian organizations working for the army.

[@holgernarrog962]

Usually the Organisation Todt, Deutsche Rote Kreuz, NSKK were labelled as "auxilliary forces" -The Organization Todt built bunkers, bridges, roads behind the front lines. In the Soviet Union some were armed to protect them from partisans. - Deutsche Rote Kreuz operated hospitals behind the front lines. - The NSKK operated transport bataillons.

[@fazole]

​The German Labor Force boys were also sent into combat sometimes when everyone was needed to fend off a Soviet attack.

[@holgernarrog962]

@@fazole Usually they were not sent to fight but quite often war came to them either by Partisans or when the Soviet forces moved faster than they retreated.

[@MrSteve280]

The Union Army alone saw 3155 soldiers killed at Gettysburg over three days. The means the Germans experienced more than two Gettysburg every day for four years. The Russians more. That's hard to comprehend.

[@EroticOnion23]

US civil war was a picnic compared to a single day on the eastern front, don't understand why the Americans cry so much...😂

[@MrSteve280]

@@EroticOnion23 Something between a culture of entitlement and being the center of the universe.

[@historyisawesome6399]

@@EroticOnion23as a american i think in comes down to the us being rather unscaved by war through out its history our civil war is just like the avarge to russia or germany or france 620,000 dead for us is really high for france its a mere footnote you guys had ww2 ww1 the franco prussian war the napolonic wars the russo-japense war the crimean war all with death over 500,000 in like a 150 year span and there wayyyyy more then just that not to mention the possibility of a cold war gone hot in central europe we had 1 in our entire 250 year history

[@BruinHerr-bj7uk]

You should research the Battle of Antietam 1862.

[@MrSteve280]

@@BruinHerr-bj7uk The context is KIA sustained daily over many years. Antietam was only a single day. Gettysburg isn't much better but a more appropriate comparison.

[@io_metre]

Such an excellent analysis. Thank you!

[@stephencoleman3578]

My aunt's husband was a German Soldier stationed in The Netherlands. The soldiers learned they were soon to be sent to the eastern front. Many of these soldiers deserted and had to stay hidden to aviod being shot. My aunt hid him for the duration of the war. She was not popular with her family because she married a German deserter. He never returned to Germany and remained in the Netherlands. His wife (my aunt) lived to 100 years old.

[@justicartiberius8782]

So ironic. If she would have married a german non-deserter they would have judged her. Marrying a deserter they also judged her. Maybe it was more about him being german, not being a deserter.

[@КолтуновСерёга]

If all the men on planet Earth were deserters, would that be a good thing? Or would that be a bad thing?

[@dormandavis2767]

@@КолтуновСерёгаso your saying America should not fought after Pearl Harbor?

[@justicartiberius8782]

@@КолтуновСерёга In the context of military? A good thing because there wouldn't be any war. Even the men to force other men to fight would desert.

[@КолтуновСерёга]

@@dormandavis2767 "so your saying America should not fought after Pearl Harbor?" Pearl Harbor should not have happened because the Japanese pilots would not have returned from leave.

[@johnfrench1239]

Absolutely fascinating - thank you

[@bigsarge2085]

Interesting data and context. Thank you!

[@selfdo]

Luftwaffe included pilots and other aircrew, ground support personnel, and "Fallschirmjager" (Paratroopers). However, the bulk of LE casualties were in LW Field Divisions, including a PANZER division.

[@marcusott2973]

I wonder what the survival rate of my grandfathers division ID44 was from the 1st to the last day of the war was. As the unit went "through" Stalingrad. Were would I be able to find sich data. He survived the war from day one to the end, I guess he was one of very few.

[@whiteheatherclub]

It is possibly impossible ever to find out but it would be very interesting to know, for example, what percentage of the troops who invaded France, Belgium, the Netherlands and Luxembourg in 1940 were still alive at the end of the war. Or what percentage of the troops who invaded the Soviet Union in 1941 were still alive at the end of the war.

[@baltulielkungsgunarsmiezis9714]

Surviving from wars start to finish is rare if the war lasts more than 3 months.

[@julianheaton9546]

It would be interesting to know, from a British perspective, how many of the 'few' involved as pilots in the Battle of Britain, managed to survive the whole war and how many of those were still in action as opposed to still alive but inactive due to wounds. War is a terrible thing.

[@GD_Spieler]

I am now dying to know the answer to this as well (in regards to those that took part in the 1940/41 campaigns and how many survived till the end). Try to get that comment seen and pinned to the top so it can hopefully be answered.

[@marcusott2973]

@GD_Spieler I know a couple of snippets. He was wounded in and flown out of Stalingrad. After his stay in a hospital for the wound and a sanatorium for the frostbite. He was part of the "Stammpersonal"when the division was reestablished in Belgium. So obviously, enough personnel survived Stalingrad for various reasons to form the nucleus of a new division.

[@adiebland9220]

Your work is amazing and presents a clear picture of the progression of the war. Sir I salute you for your efforts.

[@vmycode5142]

16:25 Soviet womble reference the same day he finally uploads

[@mpersad]

Another excellent video, with terrific analysis and graphics. I learnt a great deal, thank you.

[@jabo0553]

Would it be possible to make such a Video about the German Losses during World War One or Is it harder to get material there ?

[@Piece-Of-Time]

They are easy to find in internet, but it's probably hard to find documents that would prove it

[@joaocabral3541]

Amazzing video, very informative. I was curious about this particular topic but never found a cohesive understandable investigation. Thanks

[@TheSmesi]

Soviets lost about 27 million individuals. The tragic part of it is 19 million civilians, including women, children and elderly, and 8.7 million were military losses.

[@300thNPC]

The amount of death is difficult to comprehend. Insanity.

[@EroticOnion23]

*In just 4 years. The 2nd highest, China, was through more than a decade from 1931 to 1945...

[@aishazaza23]

Krivosheev puts Soviet military deaths at 11.5 million. This includes 3 million POWs murdered by the Germans.

[@micheldriessen5081]

In a conversation with Churchill in Potsdam , July '45, Stalin boasted that he had lost over 5 million soldiers and thus had right to a larger share in the restoration payments of Germany ... He should not have underestimated the figures, like it is tangible cash, just like with the Holocaust. Now the figures are 20, 25 ... 40 million !

[@likeAG6likeAG6]

@@micheldriessen5081 He had no idea how many he had lost until much later, there were no time to do population census and also soviets never had metal tokens in army which more or less allow to figure out how many die in a battle, they had paper books instead. I'm not event talking about civilians, nobody was counting them. What is indicative is that soviet army had 4.2 millions in the beginning of the war, they lost all of it in 41, while only 300k of germans died. Soviet army until late 42 was completely incompetent, they learned on the battlefield.

[@johnelliott7850]

An interesting breakdown of figures I have often wondered about.

[@greenockscatman]

I never thought I would have this kind of an emotional reaction to a lot of bar graphs. Outstanding research, and can only agree with the guy who said it was an atrocious waste of life.

[@dermotrooney9584]

Nicely done. Thank you.

[@septembersurprise5178]

"All war must be just the killing of strangers against whom you feel no personal animosity; strangers whom, in other circumstances, you would help if you found them in trouble, and who would help you if you needed it." - Mark Twain

[@cliffordterry2133]

Thank you for this information. It adds information that is vital to understanding the totality of the effects of war.

[@neilwilson5785]

The 1945 losses did shock me a bit. I thought Bagration+D-day would be the big one.

[@smokenfire]

D-day wasn't big in itself - its results in the months that followed were.

[@davidkavanagh189]

The Soviet steamroller made D-Day looks like a small skirmish. D-Day was clearly one of the significant points of the war but still quite small in comparison to an average day on the Eastern Front.

[@aleksazunjic9672]

East Prussian offensive and Soviet counterattack after failure of Operation Spring Awakening.

[@Warmaker01]

The 1945 losses came after the result of the German armed forces getting ripped apart in 1944. Think of all this as a gigantic "Snowball Effect." I had an excessively long reply in mind earlier, but it's simply all the bad things from earlier keep adding up to make the situation afterwards even worse.

[@nightshade4186]

It was total downfall in 45, shortage in ammo, fuel, tanks, shortage in everything, no air cover, no organization.

[@installwebercarburetorsona6159]

Well done review

[@whiteheatherclub]

A video on civilian deaths in Germany during the Second World War would be interesing.

[@NGBRADLEY1991]

Would love to see a version of this covering ww1 too

[@vladimpaler3498]

What is appalling is that if Hitler had negotiated a surrender once he was beaten a huge chuck of them would have lived.

[@HBD-tx1jm]

you are brain dead. he sent out 12 different peace proposals throughout the war.

[@YAHWEH-IS-HIS-NAME]

Dunkirk beaches was his MERCY to the british. Well over 300,000 UNHOLY ALLIANCE ALL-LIES were spared to go home, stock up, and strike back even HARDER. HOW ABOMINABLY EVIL!!!!

[@billyosullivan3192]

​@@HBD-tx1jmhe never accepted unconditional surrender unlike Italy and Japan. Hitler's peace proposals were to powers he hadn't defeated demanding they recognise German victory

[@billyosullivan3192]

​@@YAHWEH-IS-HIS-NAMEwhy did the Germans bomb Dunkirk and cancel the halt order if they intended to let the BEF get away?

[@darklysm8345]

He tried. Its not like the germans never even tought about peace

[@russellnixon9981]

Informative

[@billd2635]

Thanx for your work. Well done. This validates much of my understanding about German casualties. Especially the U Boat crewmen. Only one in four ever came home. I wonder how many actually served from day one til the end of the war? Did any of them last the duration?

[@AmericanImperialMenswear]

The seasoned veteran crews were far more likely to survive. All the top U-Boat commanders up to #8 survived the war (Wolfgang Lüth, #2, only for a few days before taking his own life).

[@EnigmaCodeCrusher]

Good presentation

[@traumvonhaiti]

For comparison the Soviet losses in WW2 (specifically 1941-1945) were in 5-6 thousand per day.

[@F40PH-2CAT]

Because they were callous and ignorant.

[@traumvonhaiti]

@@F40PH-2CAT Well, yes. The issue is quantity is quality in itself. That's why Germany failed to win the war against USSR.

[@warwarneverchanges4937]

Im glad you icluded the navy losses as recovering from a sunken ship is a whole diffrent story than surviving a failed land operation

[@patrickwentz8413]

Interesting that the older Soldiers who went into Soviet captivity had a higher death rate than the younger Soldiers. In the Philippines, it was precisely the opposite for American Soldiers. The older Soldiers tended to go in with a little bit of body fat and survived, while the younger Soldiers were skinnier and died quickly.

[@aleksazunjic9672]

Quite easy to explain: USSR suffered food shortage in 1941-43 , due to most arable land being captured by Germans. Thus, as German POWs were at the bottom of feeding chain, they suffered malnutrition and death. Later situation improved, and USSR actually wanted Germany as neutral buffer state (Stalin's idea) . Thus, German POWs, especially younger kids not serving in USSSR proper, did get more food.

[@Danewcielo]

Excellent video. Would be interesting to see a similar video for civilian casualties

[@scottjuhnke6825]

Makes sense that those put in uniform in 45 had short life spans, as they were not trained, and placed in front of enemies who were far better equipped, and were, largely, more experienced.

[@klobiforpresident2254]

It should also be mentioned that later in the war the enemies were more numerous. This is not to invoke the myth of endless --Mongol-- Russian hordes. When one soldier firez upon an unfortunate conscript there may be time to find cover before being hit, perhaps one's comrades may even be able to eliminate the enemy themselves before our exemplary conscript dies. If there are two enemy soldiers my maths suggest that twice as many bullets are more likely to hit in time (and suppressing one opponent no longer suffices). While the Axis had a (relatively, it did decrease) constant 3.5M men in the east until 1944 the red army doubled in size between Barbarossa and Bagration.

[@mconrad8243]

If I hear this video correctly, even the early war recruits were mostly likely to die not in 1940-44, but in 1945.

[@godwrote01]

On top came that Hitler send in his HIGHLY indoctrinated youth (HitlerJugend) Boys and Girls (Girls mostly serving in the AA) not much older than 15 /16 Born 1928/29 That only new the Third Reich. They fought as Hitler wanted - until the last bullet and ran bravely into T34 tanks to destroy them with there last Panzerfaust. There is a movie - The Bridge showing 7 - 8 Hitler Youth Boys holding a Bridge against americans - they put some significcant losses - shot down a sherman but no one made it

[@barbsmart7373]

And nor did our side have old men or deluded boy fanatics in uniform.

[@BernardoFagot]

What a horror! The suffering of war is unimaginable.

[@bradenatkinson4784]

Hey dose this tally include Russians force into German service or various political ss units that pulled from alternative manpower polls

[@aleksazunjic9672]

Unlikely, as they were not citizens of Reich.

[@brianlong2334]

​@aleksazunjic9672 From memory, just over 4.3 million Germans died, and 1 million non Germans in the German military. Surprisingly, the biggest ethnic minority of that 1 million were Russians, about 600k to 1.2 million red army troops fought for Germany in ww2, only about 60k changed back to fight for the USSR....

[@aleksazunjic9672]

@@brianlong2334 Non-Germans are Austrians and Volksdeutsche, which were citizens of Reich but not later West or East Germany. As for Russians, BS story, even if you include Ukrainians in that number. They had couple of not fully maned divisions late in the war (1944) and that is that. Germans as a rule did not want to arm Slavs.

[@brianlong2334]

@aleksazunjic9672 Austria was considered part of Germany and its people full Germans and citizens.... Also, 300,000 Germans Jews fought for Germany they just claimed not to be Jews anymore till the war was over, obviously, many had names made up and family history by the SS and other Germans organisations. Ww2 is not as black and white as it's made out. Germany, before any conquest / joining / unification population, was about 70 million after Austra and others were brought in its population, which was 86 million Germans according to the Nazis them selfs.... They were very good at keeping records.... You had a large number of Russians who fought for the Germans who did so in its military. The majority did actually die fighting for them. Slav weren't all viewed the same either. About 40 million ethnic Russians were going to be Germinised after the war, according to Hitler before ww2 started, so full Germans citizens... But as the war raged on he claimed that number could be about 80 million due to the high amount of Aryan blood within the Russian population, infact before ww2 started slavs were considered Aryans only when war started in 1941 did that change, but yes he basically planned to wipe out half of the Ukrainian population.

[@brianlong2334]

@aleksazunjic9672 You need to cheek your information, mate, that's totally wrong for a start, sorry. How did the Germany population go from 70 million to 86 million it wasn't babies.... Austrians were German's, along with many others, they classified as Germans look it up.... Also, 300k German Jews fought for Germany in ww2 they had their names and family history made up by the ss and other Germans' organisations at the time, ww2 not as black and white as it's made out. Also, you're talking about 150k USSR personnel, not 600k to 1.4 million yes half of that was for non-combatant roles but as mentioned hundreds of thousands were in the German military, you do know the Germans had many spies in the red army thats one of the reason Stalin had so many purges early on in the war and even in the middle. Slavs were originally claimed to be Aryans, only after oparation barbarossa did that change, and most of the USSR population was to be Germinised, and converted to be German citizens after the war so indoctrinated that is. Edit: they Germans had about 22 million men available between the ages of 11 and 65 of that 5 million were in the workforce, leaving 17 million for the military.

[@alejandroduran1830]

It’s shocking to learn the extent Hitler destroyed his own country. After the war, Germany had to import huge amounts of people from several countries, some of which had no affinity to Western culture and stayed there. Hitler’s malevolence is still harming Europe today.

[@charlieturner5831]

Will you do a similar video on the on the British or Italian casualties?

[@angelperazzo9096]

No lo creo no viéndolo...!

[@angelperazzo9096]

Ni viéndolo ( perdón )

[@TheHistoricalReview]

Bernhard understands this but for the comment section: deaths includes non-combat losses and even those died during the war years but not from war related causes. Rudiger Overmans is the ultimate source of the data and he went through German deaths cards, but he did not factor cause of death at all of so many have mistaken this as “killed by the allies” or “died from war related causes” though obviously few died from non-war related causes

[@senseofthecommonman]

The only figure missing is percentage of front line soldiers lost. An army of 18 million has a very large percentage forming supply and logistics, so 5 million dead will represent a massive proportion of those actually on the front line.

[@petergunn-w2v]

Great stuff; thank you! Imagine how different Germany would be today if all those healthy, young men had not had to die. Victor Davis Hanson mentions that WW2 is unusual in comparison to most wars in that the losers killed far more than the winners. I still remember meeting you at Conneaut in 2019.

[@acr08807]

Great video, as always. One correction: "tion" in Bagration is pronounced "tea own," not "shun."

[@DirtyHairy1]

Just to clarify, if I understood correctly: In the statistic, Navy soldiers that died in infantry combat, are still counted towards the Navy losses, and not the Army? I ask because I was under the impression that Navy personnel which was reassigned to infantry, was also organizationally moved to the Army, and thus counted as Army losses.

[@MilitaryHistoryVisualized]

Yes, as Navy losses. They might fight under Army command, but were still navy personnel.

[@usun_politics1033]

Good video

[@jorgschimmer8213]

Jup. Mein Großvater ist als Österreicher geboren und als Deutscher vor grob 20 Jahren gestorben. Der war ein geborener Bergbauernsohn und hatte überhaupt kein Bestreben als „Held“ zu sterben. Kann die Ausführungen nur unterstützen:😎

[@peterfmodel]

Bei meinem Vater und einem meiner Onkel war es genauso. Mein anderer Onkel wollte kämpfen, hat es aber geschafft, den Krieg zu überleben, nachdem er im Osten und in Italien gekämpft hatte. Ich glaube, er hatte großes Glück. Mein Großvater hatte nicht so viel Glück.

[@Schizohandlers]

I am learning German these comments are fun to try and read. I learned Österreicher is Austrian from this, thanks.

[@jorgschimmer8213]

@@Schizohandlers . My grandfather was born as an austrian mountain farmer and died in Germany 20 years ago. He had absolutly no Intention to die as an hero. I can confirm the explanations .

[@Schizohandlers]

@@jorgschimmer8213 Danke!

[@pRahvi0]

It would appear that part of the reason for the longer life span of earliest recruitees was simply because most of the deaths only happened several years later. Probably the experience gained during those years had an impact, but the death rate of late years was so staggering that it probably dominates the statistics.

[@ewok40k]

Note that 1939 losses were almost entirely in Polish campaign, reaching almost 20k in just one month. So it was as deadly as savage fighting of 1941... Battle of Norway and France in 1940 took less than 3 months for 80k dead. Overall, this means it was not difference in fight intensity, but ability to end campaigns quickly that made the difference.

[@MS-io6kl]

Also, the Soviet invasion of Poland did shorten the German Polish campaign considerably.

[@thomaskositzki9424]

You are right! I had the same thought some years ago when looking at the numbers for Poland.

[@voldemerjanuarij7340]

20.000 это почти средний уровень потерь РФ в Украине

[@Keckegenkai]

what were the polish losses?

[@ewok40k]

@@Keckegenkai according to Wiki, 66k kia, 133k wia, and 694k taken pow

[@phillipsmith4814]

Thank you, very interesting. Would you consider doing a video on losses due to being taken prisoner and compare those numbers to deaths and across the various theaters. Thanks.

[@bloqk16]

Aside from the number of deaths, there's also those that survived the war but had chronic wounds, as well as other health issues related to being in the armed services, afflicting them for the rest of their lives. With such horrendous losses, it's remarkable how West Germany was rebuilt in less than two generations after the war.

[@Ish_Fire]

Thats horrifying to think about.

[@AddieHilton]

No more brother wars

[@florinivan6907]

17 year old german circa 1942:I got drafted into the Navy. Dad:That's great news. 17 year old german:They said on subs. Dad:Bogus.

[@creatoruser736]

It's funny to me that even German speakers say army instead of Heer while saying the official names of the other branches. I guess it's because Heer sounds too dull compared to the other ones. Probably why others usually say Wehrmacht when they only mean to say army, it just sounds cooler.

[@baltulielkungsgunarsmiezis9714]

Could ofcourse just be language change. Modern english say army instead of host, modern latvieši say armija rather than karapulks. People also say army instead of ground forces, armija instead of zemesspēki. In all languages Ive looked it up the word army is comming out on top.

[@PatGilliland]

Weren't the Police combat units (Orpo) absorbed by the SS, or are you referring to police acting as law enforcement (KriPo, Schutzpolizei, Gendarmerie etc)

[@deadlyknights1119]

A Soviet soldier died every 7 seconds during the war A German soldier died every 20 seconds What a tragic loss of life for now reason.

[@maximilianodelrio]

More like every 14 seconds

[@EroticOnion23]

'No reason' because Germany lost, if they won they'd be a global superpower...

[@deadlyknights1119]

@@EroticOnion23 War is never for any good reason, it’s when diplomacy fails, never look at any conflict as “we beat the bad guy”.

[@EroticOnion23]

@@deadlyknights1119 war is a good reason if you win lol...what are you 12?...😅

[@deadlyknights1119]

@@EroticOnion23 The issue with war is that the old people who cause it in the first place don’t actually fight the war themselves, they brainwash the young into thinking they are dying for some “noble cause” that most of the time has no actual barring on the situation at hand, and then they send those young out by the thousand’s-millions in droves believing they are dying for some high purposes. I’m not saying we shouldn’t have taken down Hitler, what I’m saying is we shouldn’t be proud that we had to do it in the first place, the entire situation was an accident, and all started at the end of a war that was truly meaningless, WW1.

[@danielainger]

The sheer scale of WW2 is just mind boggling.

[@briannewman6216]

WW2 was a complete waste of life, time and resources.

[@didymussumydid9726]

That’s gambling.

[@surplusking2425]

We've learned that centrism isn't (both practically and morally) superior than extremism, with blood of the people. Unfortunately a lot of people forgot those facts today.

[@cptant7610]

At least it got rid of most of fascism.

[@yahya_elistinsary]

but the was the reason the jews got to have a state, so for them it was a win.

[@ronaldderooij1774]

@@cptant7610 ....for 80 years, at least.

[@tieyoung8003]

For all navies, shore installation personnel probably had the best survival rate...

[@CthulhuInc]

yes, but, how does this compare to the allied forces?

[@didymussumydid9726]

Nobody knows because Soviet numbers are garbage propaganda

[@samsonsoturian6013]

@@didymussumydid9726 The Soviets and Allies are considered separate and the casualty figures given after the war weren't altered.

[@aleksazunjic9672]

Around 10 million dead Soviet soldiers (15-17 million civilians) . US lost 400-500 000 in European theatre (including N Africa) . British slightly more.

[@SSWiking-l4q]

so obviously the soviets won the war. and there no reason for the US to get involved in this conflict at all.

[@didymussumydid9726]

@@SSWiking-l4qThe reason for the USA to get involved in the war is related to the political needs of FDR in the economic situation of the United States after 1938. Without a world war and without an American involvement in this war FDR would have been a political failure

[@leewoehlke5099]

My grandfather was the only one from his class that survived ww2. He said when the war was over, every man over 16 was dead from his village.

[@micodiomicodio4420]

Such a tragic loss of human potential

[@utvara1]

They knocked on the wrong door.

[@strongback6550]

Well, it was either continuing existence as Weimar Germany and have to pay 5 promissary notes for one sheet of toilet paper or give everyone free meth see where that rabbit hole goes. Turns out that yea, that rabbit hole leads to Poland.

[@arclight8479]

Understatement of the century, and unfortunately true

[@einfachignorieren6156]

​@@utvara1poland started it

[@billyosullivan3192]

​@@strongback6550Germany stopped paying all war reparations as of 1931 and officially in 1932.

[@grandengineernathan]

Can you make one on soviet losses next

[@Amboss_d_Triumphator]

360.000 death in Soviet captivity sounds way too low.....

[@urlauburlaub2222]

I think, that only accounts to those, which actually got there, which means basically those, which gave up later, not those encircled.

[@artificialintelligence8328]

Surprising that the Bolsheviks actually care about human life, huh?

[@flarvin8945]

Based on a west German commission, a little over 1 million German POWs died in Soviet captivity, out of ~3 million POWs taken. About half died after the war. Compared to the ~3 million Soviet POWs that died in German captivity, out of ~6 million taken. Not a very good record for neither side.

[@einfachignorieren6156]

He also forgets the rhine meadows

[@cheften2mk]

@@einfachignorieren6156 Basically irellevant, a high estimate is 6000 deaths.

[@njake19]

Another possibility for lower percentages for Austrian casualties is what were their jobs/positions while serving? I don’t know if they were giving support jobs over combat arms on purpose or that was the way the dice were rolled? Too many variables to have a clear and simple answer for. However, that would be interesting to see a possible video on the break down of casualties by what branch within the Heer, Luftwaffe, etc., and by the years, to help show how rushed training was. Food for thought.

[@JohnSmith-ct5jd]

I am glad you mentioned that Stalin murdered perhaps as many as a million captured German soldiers, AFTER the war ended. This is a wartime atrocity seldom mentioned in our biased history. But, as has often been said, history is written by the victors.

[@michaelcodelmar9547]

Wow! How did you even get that data?

[@micumatrix]

1941 you had first conquering the Balkan with very high losses of the Fallschirmjäger on Krete (=Luftwaffe). Luftwaffe was not only the people maintaining airplanes and airports, but also AA. I think here most losses of the Luftwaffe were bomber- and fighter pilots + Fallschirmjäger (which should have had probably higher losses than Waffen SS ->Krete or Monte Cassino)

[@DemolitionManDemolishes]

Makes me wonder if those huge loses in defensive in 1944 and 1945 were caused by Soviets executing encircled/captured troops on the spot.

[@MrZauberelefant]

No. The Red Army did not mass execute prisoners as a policy. That's something the Nazis did regularly, however. More to do with Hitler's hold orders in the period, preventing evasion and resulting in unnecessary losses.

[@vinny142]

" by Soviets executing encircled/captured troops on the spot." You could look up what battles were happening in those months, but my guess is that it's just a logical consequence of losing a war: you lose a lot of men. Germany was being basically being overrun so it stands to reason that they'd lose a metric f-ton of poeple, just like how the rest of europe lost lots of people at the start of the war when Germany ran over them.

[@creely123]

​@@MrZauberelefant Katyn Massacres would like a word with you. Nice spreading propaganda.

[@MrZauberelefant]

​@@creely123Katyn was miniscule to what the Germans did on their side. A war crime, but over 200.000 polish soldiers (and a bear) were released by the USSR to fight for the allies in 1943. The Germans didn't stop at murdering a couple of thousand officers, but priests, intellectuals, teachers, literates and anyone crossing them. There are degrees to depravity, my apologist friend

[@harrym740]

Although there were probably executions carried out. I don't think it would have been on a big scale. In those years retreating Hitler wanted to cling on and declared every major city a fortress-city. To be defended to the last and of course deserters would be executed. This was in my opinion the reasons for the numbers.

[@NUCATMID]

I served in Vietnam. The accepted wisdom was that, as a general rule, newbies were more likely to die in the first 30 days of a deployment because they didn’t know very much about the things that got you killed, despite the training you received before deploying. If you survived the first 30-days your chances dramatically improved. My unit did six-month tours instead of the usual 13-month tours. That way your training was more current since the guys who with units doing were more current in their tactics, techniques and procedures (TTP)s.

[@rokker333]

Too many.

[@darkstarZ74]

Thank you for this interesting study of a subject which interests me very much as well. I disagree with Professor Overmans' higher numbers for 1945 especially for the West Front. You gave a higher number overall for 1945 but smaller for the West Front which makes more sense. Have you read Niklas Zetterling's book Normandy 1944? In the last chapter he argues that Overmans made a common mistake for amateurs in statistics mixing diferent sets of cards from different times and places which leads to "spurious results", his phrase. It is why Overmans has such a large + or - ratio for that year (200,000). He also does not take into account that there would have been a large number of deserters from the West Front at the end of March and April that might, in the general chaos, simply be listed as missing presumed dead. Still 5.3 million is possible due to the massive loses in the East due to trying to defend fortress cities from the Soviet juggernaut. I myself believe that the actual number is 5.1 million dead and missing based on the captured Wehrmacht records in the KGB archives in Moscow but who can really know. Great channel.

[@omarrp14]

Yet some people still believe Germany could have won the war.

[@stevek343]

Germany could of won the war if Trump was in charge.

[@J.Panxer]

Are you assuming they tried to win it? They did everything to not... Then tried to blow up their leader and sue for peace terms.

[@brianlong2334]

How does that comment relate to the video.... lol Germany could have but done it the way it did, no, obviously not, I think that's what you mean.

[@omarrp14]

@@brianlong2334 this is a video about casualties. As we saw in the video Germany had a lot of casualties, so because of that and many other reasons I don’t think they could have ever won the war. Despite this information there are people out there that say Germany almost won.

[@brianlong2334]

@omarrp14 The USSR had more casualties.... As I said, they could have, but not the way it happened. If you want to talk about how close the USSR was to defeat, now that's a debate. With the USSR out of the war, the war would have been basically over.

[@goetzliedtke]

My grandfather had retired as a Stabsfeldwebel from the Riechswehr in the mid 1930s and became a railroad inspector. Since he married my grandmother after submitting paperwork showing both of them were Aryan/not Jewish for three generations he was probably a member of some Nazi group. In 1939 or 1940, he signed up to go to war. He ended up in the Ostfront, was captured, and did not return until 1949. My grandmother divorced him because all he wanted to do was go live off his relatives in the Schwarzwald. I suppose this made him an outlier among his contemporaries, both in age and in survival.

[@yt_geezuz785]

What people don't realize, especially wehraboos, is that the first few months of Barbarossa was absolutely bloody for the Germans. Sure, The Soviets had it worse - MUCH WORSE. But the soviets lost their large but mostly green/untrained armies with largely obsolete equipment; Whilst the Germans got their battle-hardened armies decimated, with the mobile formations (tank, motorized divisions, etc.) taking disproportionate losses. The Germans made STUNNING progress in June-July, but even their generals and officers noted that the losses were absolutely unsustainable.

[@urlauburlaub2222]

I think, that there is also a statistical error in the numbers presented. I don't agree to you, that the Soviets lost untrained armies. Instead, mostly those Ukrainians, which had basically German military training from either Austria or Germany from Zsarist Russian times, but couldn't flee to the West back then and were captives of the Soviet Union. So on both sides the veterans died early on, while the Soviet could train more from their sheer numbers and supplies, while Germany got trapped because of the Western support for the Soviets and not much equipment to begin with. The statistical error I mentioned comes from the German veterans, and I think that many which were wounded in 1941/42, just died later in 1943/44/45 similar to those in concentration camps and those on the retreat because they couldn't be supplied or protected anymore. So, the actual fighting was less bloody for Germany, but the numberous and material advantage of the Soviets was much higher then.

[@SigurdGR]

Don't believe Glantz, believe Forczyk.

[@lovablesnowman]

That's just not true. The Soviets had placed pretty much their entire army in the Western military districts and were caught totally and utterly by surprise (somehow). The first weeks of the war are the soviets desperately scrambling, trying to figure out where the German and soviet armies are and where and how they can form a somewhat coherent front line. During this mess the soviets suffer the greatest military defeats in human history taking absurd casualties. In the battle for Kiev alone the soviets take more casualties in one battle than the UK did during the entire 6 years they fought ww2. Pretty much the entirety of the professional part of the red army was destroyed. The red army was always playing catch up from here and it's one of the reasons why the soviets always take higher casualties than the Germans even when they're winning until well into 1945. The red army was all but destroyed during Barbarossa and had to be rebuilt from the ground up.

[@Robert6889]

@@lovablesnowman The record for the number of troops surrounded was set in France. Then, Kleist's tank group, breaking through the Ardennes, reached the coast of the English Channel. The Germans called this breakthrough 'Sickle Cut'. Large forces of the French, Dutch, Belgian armies, as well as British expeditionary forces, were cut off, isolated, and pushed against the coast. Even without counting the Dutch army that surrendered on May 15, more than 1 million 300 thousand people were surrounded, making the 'Sickle Cut' the largest 'cauldron' in the history of wars in terms of the number of soldiers and officers trapped. This number included 400 thousand French and 650 thousand Belgians. Only about 370 thousand people, mainly English units, were evacuated from Dunkirk, which is now celebrated in the war drama 'Dunkirk'. In the end, according to official reports, around 800 thousand people laid down their arms. This exceeds any 'cauldron' on the territory of the USSR in terms of the number of troops trapped.

[@aleksazunjic9672]

@@urlauburlaub2222 BS 😁First of all, Ukraine (except Galicia) was part of Russian Empire before WW1. It was called Malorussia (Little Russia) . Second, most of the soldiers in Red Army were 20-something, i.e. born after 1920.

[@tfwwhennofitlitgf3300]

You should do a breakdown of Soviet losses by Republic.

[@mrandersson1082]

You think there is any solid Soviet data for this? Even today in 2024 Russians data for this BS "special operation" isn't legit.

[@FrancisFjordCupola]

To put it in perspective; the Russians in Ukraine seem to suffer more than 1000 losses of men each day for quite a while now. Way more than those 670 Germans per day.

[@PLMilisic]

Source please.

[@hello-rq8kf]

source: vladimir zelenski like i have a hard time believing you could be this willingly delusional

[@Robert6889]

If either side had suffered such losses, the war would have ended in half a year or one year due to complete exhaustion, but this didn't happen, therefore the losses are much smaller.

[@joshuazarate9780]

Everyone is now dumber for having read your comment. I award you one dislike and may God have mercy on your soul.

[@aleksazunjic9672]

Actually, Ukrainians have lost (KIA) around 900 000 men by now. They daily losses are around 1500 men on average, recently increased. Russians have lost 10-15 times less than that. Thus, they are somewhere at 100-150 killed daily.

[@IrlandsCall]

Danke

[@J.Panxer]

Ok, do you have any data on the 2 million German pow's that were starved to death after the war, under the Morganthau (sp idc) plan? Or what're your thoughts on the Zhukov admission from his autobiography? Or the Brüning letter?

[@papaaaaaaa2625]

The Morgenthau Plan wasn't a real thing, just a template and never became more than a mind game. There're no 2 million planned dead German soldiers in western allied custody, that's old revisionist nonsense.

[@billyosullivan3192]

The Morgenthau plan wasn't implemented but it was functionally identical to Hitler's Nero Decree

[@J.Panxer]

Oh, so German POW's weren't declared "Disarmed Enemy Combatants", so they could bypass the Geneva convention rules for prisoner treatment? So they implemented all the points of the plan without declaration of implementation? How simple are you? And I see I got the two commenters that don't have a conspiratorial view of history, when the whole war itself was a MASSIVE conspiracy (Same as the first war); and they also didn't address the Brüning letter or the Zhukov admission... Handwaving normies. Normi ite domum!

[@billyosullivan3192]

​@@J.Panxerexplain how the morgenthau plan is any different to Hitlers Nero Decree?

[@J.Panxer]

​​​​@@billyosullivan3192 One was after the war had ended and the Wermacht had surrendered, and the allies consciously starved and murdered legal pow's because the allies changed the words on paper to "disarmed enemy combatants" to keep aid and the red cross away during ante bellum peacetime; and the other was a war measure to keep the western forces from advancing. And you've seemed to conveniently forgotten that jews and pow's had been transported back to poland and germany for their protection against advancing starving Russo forces that were marauding and burning everything in their path. Also you've conveniently omitted that Churchill destroyed civilian roads and rail lines into/out of Germany in an attempt to starve and expose German civilians (which would include jews and pow's). Neither sides were as gallant as your history channel would mislead you into believing. Despite the enigma code being cracked early on into the war: There has still yet to produce into evidence a single standing order from the reich, at any level, to exterminate any prisoners they held. I presume at the losing end of a three front war, I would imagine bullets, bears and eagles were somewhat scarce for the numbers that are claimed to have been disposed of. Now, the Brüning letter, and the Zhukov admission please...

[@mauersegler9894]

I find it always a bit confusing, when people speak about loses, some talk about dead others about dead and wounded. makes me also wonder about how serious the wound would be. completly out of action or coming back in 1...6 ... 12 month? Currently with the ukraine war, a lot of news newspapers getting it mixed up as well.

[@SAS1122334455]

what about german civilian losses? who was more deadly - allied bombers or red army?

[@MrZauberelefant]

Their own government, giving up in 1944 would have saved several million dead.

[@cvr527]

Interesting question, but not directly comparable. Allied bombers bombed the entire country and over a longer period. The Red Army was only in the eastern portion of Germany.

[@didymussumydid9726]

Allied bombing, certainly. Stalin didn’t want to exterminate germans, but only to brutalize and enslave them

[@MrZauberelefant]

​@@didymussumydid9726but then again, 2 million died fleeing the red army. That's certainly more than the, I believe 400k in the bombing campaign. But is that caused by the red army or the Nazi leadership?

[@billyosullivan3192]

​@@didymussumydid9726if the goal was extermination why did the allies stop bombing after the fighting stopped? Nazis didn't stop killing poles after Poland surrendered

[@angelpalos4793]

Great! Congratulations for your espectacular video!!! I hold one similar but with soviet side

[@benwilson6145]

Let us never forget the deaths these men caused. The murder of civilians and POW. The death and concentration camps , 7 million, Russian POW 3 million, starvation in captured territories 1o million and much more. Never forget!

[@einfachignorieren6156]

Cope and seeth

[@MrZauberelefant]

​@@einfachignorieren6156Deine Vorfahren wären auch besser draußen geblieben.

[@J.Panxer]

​@@MrZauberelefant You're as evil as they are. Remember that.

[@Keckegenkai]

@@MrZauberelefant der deutsche hahnrei

[@Saeronor]

@@J.Panxer Yeah, he totally murdered people or carried water for those murdering. Oh, wait. You "muh both sides" chumps are a hilarious case of smoothbrains larping as humanists, with supposed "morals" being exposed as garbage by your own absurd takes like the one above. If this is what you can present to the public, then either you are winging it or this is your absolute best, the highest intellectual bar. My non-genuine condolences.

[@theodred9193]

Where does the Volkssturm fit in regards to the branches? Army or SS?

[@garlicgorilla6540]

The cost of opposing usury banking

[@MrZauberelefant]

I found the antisemite. I doubt that the SS killed bankers exclusively.

[@kalebk9595]

Mf will say stuff like this, and then defend capitalism

[@YAHWEH-IS-HIS-NAME]

@@MrZauberelefant No, they only defended their country, that's all.

[@billyosullivan3192]

Do you think the USSR was defending usury banking?

[@MrZauberelefant]

​@@YAHWEH-IS-HIS-NAMEfrom what? Loans?

[@gareththompson2708]

It makes perfect sense that men recruited in 1939 would survive longer on average than men recruited in 1945. First, because much of the time they spent in service was during the lower intensity years when Germany was doing relatively well, and second because men recruited early in the war would have been trained to a higher standard than men recruited later in the war. What surprised me was just how massive the difference was. I would not have guessed that the difference in how long a 1939 recruit would live vs how long a 1945 recruit would live would be a staggering factor of 48.

[@KornelTomaszewski]

For a reason which remains obscure to me, a German mutilating English (language) hurts less than an Englishman mutilating German. I am a Pole. WTF?

[@P4Tri0t420]

5 Millions lifes lost... im so glad my grand father made it out of stalingrad wounded and not dead

[@expatalan6511]

If 5 million died and 17 million survived Why so many child soldiers at the end of the war then?

[@DanTrue]

Millions were in allied or soviet captivity at that point. Many more were caught in northern italy, latvia or central europe where they could not be pulled back to defend germany proper.

[@EzekielDeLaCroix]

Nice thumbnail.

[@JustPeasant]

I wonder. How many losses was among Imperial Japanese servicemen from 1937 to 1945? As for the youth compose the main loses in the war(s) isn't surprising at all. Median age during WWII-era was 21 and lower. Some were underaged teens.

[@dobridjordje]

About 2,1 million IJA and IJN troops died during the war, killing 1,5 million Chinese troops, 150 000 US troops, 82 000 British, 40 000 Australian and 300 000 Philippinos, Vietnamese, Cambodian, Indonesians, Malaysians and such.

[@andreastiefenthaler3811]

Austrian here: definitely a skill issue. what else? we definitely don't follow order's without thinking...