Kill ratio

The Wermacht had a 20-1 sometimes bigger kill ratio over the Soviet troops, I can not think of any other conflict in modern history with that high number kill ratio against foreign Army's

 

Do you have reliable figures for that assertion?

 

Yes I do, the last4 years I have been studying Wehrmact military history, I read a book by von Mellenthin, the Soviets, Russians have stats to pretty much back that up along with German figures, 20-1 kill ratio in men, 8-1 in tanks,7-1, sources, Manstein,Guderian, Mellenthin, Erhard Raus, Anglo- American-French interrogators and stat estimates also match! Attributed for several reasons, the Wermacht had inferior tanks, but better commanders, crews; troops better fighters, trained, and lead, the Wermacht encouraged free thinking of forward battle lower level officers to exploit, Wermacht troops kept in groupings of same area of Germany, promoting things in common, area, team work etc. the Germans only military problem was their brilliant field marshal Generals to out standing middle to lower ranking officers, well qualified NCO's and troops divided by area of origin and thoroughly trained combined warfare troops, they all had to list ion to am idiot with the military thinking of a WW1 trench corporal

 

Can you cite some specific cases in detail? I remain skeptical.

 

Believable. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties_of_the_Soviet_Union
Modern estimates put total Soviet losses, civilian and military between 25 and 50 million.

 

I'm sure the atrocity kill ratio could exceed 20:1, but even that would be skewed by red-on-red incidents. The idea that single German battalions were routinely traded for a couple of Russian divisions is a bit unbelievable.

Have you read the US-commissioned German-written reports on select Eastern Front engagements to see what they say? I suspect they would have been chosen to highlight the most impressive results.

 

Surely the kill ratio can only be determined by the numbers involved.
Training,leadership is all immaterial.

If a machine gun post manned by 2 men, is being attacked by a 100 men.
Then their kill ratio is always going to be greater as the attacking force can only kill 2.

 

It is the usual drivel where part of German losses are compared to the entire Soviet losses. However there is no denying the Germans killed more people than any other army in WW2. I am sure they will win in every individual 'kill' class as well. No one can beat them for their impressive 'POW starved to death ' totals nor the 'women and childeren burnt alive in a church' category.

 

http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/aw/d/1853671819

 

Many of the deaths in Russia would be from starvation and exposure to extreme conditions of weather.
Also those who had joined the Axis were forced to return after the war and were executed by the Russians.

 

Tghe comparison also ignores the non German Axis losses.

 

Those are combat kill ratios, confirmed after Anglo-American-French debriefing, the Soviets committed far mor atrocities than any Wermacht unit, study Hubes pocket, Hans Valente Hube lead his Army group out of a numerically superior Soviet envelop meant with not only his troops , but approximately 35,500 anti Soviet civilians, minimal losses by Hube major losses by the Soviets, the German Command treated their troops as men and people, the Soviets treated their Infantry as Cannon fodder hoping one failed mass human wave attack resulting in near all losses followed by another human wave attack, followed by all day wave attacks, just wasting lives failed time and time again. Soviet leadership was not flexible, viewed their troops lives less than supplies, and had political commissars shot troops he refused to throw himself into another futile wave attack, and for the record who do you think taught the world of the advantages of combined arms warfare, commanding from the front, and letting lower ranking officers take their own initiative and exploit on a lower tactical level counter strokes. The kill ratio is very accurate, possibly even higher that was a low estimate for soldier on soldier combat, it also backs the theory of an elastic and flexible defense, and the old double pincer envelopment, where you create a pocket, compact the pocket and destroy the pocket, which the Soviets never understood how to do, I site Hube's pocket, the Korsun pocket and numerous other pockets. And for the record I was talking about front line operations and kill ratios, not atrocities, Joe Stalin killed more people than any single man on this planet !

 

The non German Axis losses on the eastern front were high, the Italians who seemed to run from every battle, were low, higher Chzech , Bulgarian and Rumanian losses though, they were not trained like the Wermacht soldier, and had poor XO leadership, the Finns proved to be just as able as the Germans in mastering Soviet numerically superior numbers, but Mannerheim was ignored time and time again on suggestions he would make to OKW and OKH , but the Finns also had a very high kill ratio against soviet Forces and how many atrocities did the Finns commit in the Winter war or on the Eastern front? Zero , the Finnish troop , back to training and soldiering were a superior troop to the Soviet conscripted, barely trained , thrown into battle at gun point, cannon Fodder. Please do not Jack the thread, I am new here and was talking about combat kill ratios not atrocities committed, big difference in combat kill ratio versus atrocities, the Germans would evac a town leaving behind wounded and medical personnel to tend for the wounded, they would retake the town and find their wounded and medical personnel, all killed and mutilated, eyeballs gouged out, genitalia cut off, dismemberment, etc. please stick to the combat kill ratio instead of side tracking the thread I started with atrocities, atrocities happen in every war/ conflict, I was discussing soldier on soldier , army piece on army puce kill ratios, if you do not want to discuss that , go start your own thread about war atrocities, so please stick to the topic, or do not post or Jack the topic, thanks,JP

 

No. They are the words of the defeated Generals explaining how they managed to lose the war despite being the no 1 Army at everything. They could not say 'we were outfought' so they settled on the default 'we wuz outnumbered' fable.

Bollocks. Total and utter bollocks at that!

'Pockets' are, be definition, a defeat. You only get 'pocketed' if the enemy surrounds you. So what if some in the pocket escaped?

Now you contradict yourself. I thought you said the German soldier was the number 1 killer on the planet?

 

I suggest you check on the number of Russian POWs who starved to death in Finland and get your eyes opened.

 

m.kinny released Soviet figures concur the combat loss reports, the Generals were hampered by their Supreme commander, who decided he knew more than his Field Marshal's and Generals or the Germans would have thrust into Moscow in 1941, um fighting out of a pocket with less losses plus safe guarding civilians is not a defeat but a defensive operational win, so you say fighting out of a pocket against numerically , echeloned forces is a defeat, I call it an excellent tactical withdrawal, the numbers are the same fro multi forces, 20-1 , superior German Army, the T-34's and KV1 and KV2 were better tanks, their killer was an 88 Flak gun, Bollocks, you must be a Limey, I have a Brit Girlfriend from London, whose father escaped from East Germany during the Cold War, he agrees with my numbers, so do all the figures I have seen in various books, um last time I checked Joe Stalin through purged has estimated to be attributed to 12 million non combat deaths, you talk P.O.W.'s the German 6'th army who surrendered 250,000 troops only to see 10,000 return from Germany post war, um what happened to the other 240,000 personnel? I suggest you check your facts before quoting me and popping off at the mouth about opinions, lost generals blaming a defeat on numerically superior numbers, those generals detained never blamed defeat on numerically superior numbers all blamed defeat on one German and one German alone, and keep checking you will find book after book with the same 20-1 kill ratio on the Eastern front! Obviously you are very biased , I did a combat tour in Iraq, did you? I have been studying the Wermacht, from 1939-1945 and the numbers from many sources all correspond, unless you have facts that contradict the OFFICIAL FACTS I stated I suggest you keep your opinion to your self you Limey!

 

No I am a Paddy.

No but I have done a tour of Bowes Museum. Did you?

I am going to be gentle with you. You are out of your depth here. I suggest you register at a 'World Of Tanks' gamer type forum where you can dazzle them with your facts. All you are doing here is making people cringe as you parade yourignorance.

 

Out of my depth, carried the rank of Major , XO on a combat tour, I assume your museum education exceeds a military education? I suggest you keep personal opinions that can not be based with facts but opinions, and you stand down, you probably bombed a museum you I.R.A. Terrorist, you seem to like personal attacks about my person when you know nothing about me, nor research I have done, also a Military Education and combat tour sure beats an I.R.A. Meeting, and planned bombing of civilian targets, also you held no rank in a combat theatre, therefore I assume your intelligence on military operations and tactics is limited, furthermore every thing you kept quoting and saying of me, you had an opinion behind the quote, not facts, I suggest you go hire a military tutor, keep opinions to yourself, and unless you have something factually based to contradict 4 years of research , pipe up! And you never commented on Soviet mass murders of Wermacht P.O.W.'s you just picked and chose what to quote then state your opinion on, you did not even have replys for other factual statements I made, nor would you quote them, because your education on the Russo - German war on the Eastern front is obviously limited and biased! So if you are going to quote me, then toss your opinion out there, quote all of it and address all of it with facts not opinions, further more I am 41 , do not play but one game and that is Chess which I have been playing since age 5, I received a University education, military studies, I.Q. 134 and have actual combat experience as an officer in a live fire combat zone, so I suggest you find out something about someone before you pick and choose what to quote they said and then put opinions behind the quotes, quote it all and address it all with facts, don't pick and choose quotes and then type your in factual opinion!

 

I suggest that you "go study" punctuation because, quite frankly, your posts are nigh-on unintelligible. I rather dread to think which of the world's present-day armies might accept reports written in such a style by a commissioned officer.

By the way, "pipe up" doesn't mean quite the same thing as "pipe down" nor "shut up"...Which did you actually intend ?

 

Typing on an iPhone, spelling mistakes will happen, I said Stand Down then Pipe up they mean two different things, I regret joining this site with the collection of trolls I have encountered so far but I will not let trolls force me off a public internet site, like I said I made factual posts, that have been replied to with opinions and trolling my topic, I simply asked if anyone knew in modern day warfare of higher percentage kill ratio than 20 -1 , go troll somewhere else unless you can educate me on the original question I asked! What a bunch of trolls and tools? I never in my life,,,,,,,