Quote:
Originally Posted by wulfir
Quote:
Originally Posted by IronDuke99
The only reasons that overall casualties in the US, British and Canadian, etc forces were lower in WWII was that A)the infantry, who take by far the most casualties,were a lower proportion of Western Armies in WWII and B) whereas in WWI British and Commonwealth forces -and much later the USA- fought the main part of the German Army. In WWII this was almost never the case, as the major part of the German Army mostly fought on the Eastern Front.
|
I wonder if overall losses are not also impacted by the length of the frontline and the amount of time used for high intensity fighting. If D-Day had taken place earlier and the front had been longer (like in the east) western allied losses would I guess have been greater... |
I have grave doubts that a Western Allied assault on France in 1943 would have succeeded at all. In general terms the German Army was a better fighting force than the Western Allies.
Even in 1944 US, British and Canadian forces generally needed numbers, plus overwhelming artillery and air support to defeat the Germans. The German Army was still very formidable in 1943 and the German Air Force was still a factor.
But certainly the longer and more intense the fighting the higher the casualties, that basic rule always applies.