The Human Cost of WWII

[Subdeacon Joe]

Sobering

 

 

 

[Chantry]

Without condoning the invasion of Ukraine, it's understandable why Russia, in all of its forms, is paranoid about being invaded.  Depending on the population numbers and losses, Russia lost about 12%-15% of it's ENTIRE population during WWII.

 

The United States lost .3% of it's entire population during WWII.

[Injun Ryder, SASS #36201L]

Curious as to why the Philippines had such a high number prior to 12/7/41? 

[Alpo]

That's a very good question, especially considering the Japanese didn't attack the Philippines until December 8th 1941.

[Abilene Slim SASS 81783]

deleted 

[Abilene Slim SASS 81783]

3 hours ago, Injun Ryder, SASS #36201L said:

Curious as to why the Philippines had such a high number prior to 12/7/41? 

Likely, political strife and rebellion against its own government, and by extension, the US which which was the muscle behind President Manuel Quezon and took part in policing the rebels. 
 

One must also consider stats like in the video are very broad and should be viewed as such. 
 

[Marshal Mo Hare, SASS #45984]

Ukraine’s losses are counted under Soviet Union. Stalin guided troop deployments so as to leave open farmland for Russians.

[DocWard]

4 hours ago, Chantry said:

Without condoning the invasion of Ukraine, it's understandable why Russia, in all of its forms, is paranoid about being invaded.  Depending on the population numbers and losses, Russia lost about 12%-15% of it's ENTIRE population during WWII.

 

The United States lost .003% of it's entire population during WWII.

 

That's what I became curious about, overall losses as a percentage of population. 

 

Also, it would be arguable that China and Japan started experiencing losses in 1931 with the invasion of Manchuria.

[Marshal Mo Hare, SASS #45984]

6 minutes ago, DocWard said:

 

That's what I became curious about, overall losses as a percentage of population. 

 

Also, it would be arguable that China and Japan started experiencing losses in 1931 with the invasion of Manchuria.

.003 is .3% not .003%

[DocWard]

11 minutes ago, Marshal Mo Hare, SASS #45984 said:

.003 is .3% not .003%

 

I didn't do the math, nor look closely at Chantry's figures beyond the portion of the whole aspect.

[Marshal Mo Hare, SASS #45984]

Ukrainians have walked through the allied cemeteries and pointed out the many Ukrainian names. One of which in the Iwo Jima cemetery is marine staff sergeant Strank, one of the six flag raisers.

[Chantry]

2 hours ago, DocWard said:

 

That's what I became curious about, overall losses as a percentage of population. 

 

Also, it would be arguable that China and Japan started experiencing losses in 1931 with the invasion of Manchuria.

 

I think China was about 7.5%

[Abilene Slim SASS 81783]

2 hours ago, DocWard said:

 

That's what I became curious about, overall losses as a percentage of population. 

 

Also, it would be arguable that China and Japan started experiencing losses in 1931 with the invasion of Manchuria.

A lot of Chinese casualties were from Maoist and Nationalist forces fighting each other. Chiang Kai Shek diverted significant US aid to fight Mao instead of the Japanese. Mao was less interested in defeating Japan than Chiang. He knew that Japanese gains were only temporary and he could toss them out later after he was supreme ruler. 
 

 

[Cypress Sun]

A little more detailed. Still just as sobering.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties

[Still hand Bill]

2 hours ago, Chantry said:

 

I think China was about 7.5%

I thought it was higher than that if you count what Japan did just prior to ww2. 

[Subdeacon Joe]

1 hour ago, Cypress Sun said:

A little more detailed. Still just as sobering.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties

 

Even more sobering, and even chilling, in the dispassionate way it breaks down the horrific numbers.  Thanks.