What army suffered the highest casualty rates in the history of all of armed conflict?
>>449409
>casualty rates
Military or civilian?
>>449422
military
>>449432
Russian Army in WW2.
It's something like 8 to 10 million casualties.
>>449409
Are we speaking about rates or total loss numbers here?
German U-Boat crews suffered a 82% loss of all personal in ww2. Hard to beat, but I'm curious of more devastating ratios. Heard of single units of infantry in ww1 (Anzacs in Gallipoli are on thing i can remember with source) being totally wiped out, but not on a larger scale.
>>449449
I guess total loss.
Single units instantly gets beaten out by last stands and massacres. I can't recall any moment in history when an entire military gets slaughtered to a man. Seems difficult, no?
Serbia in WW1. The had population of 4,5mln and army of 450k, they lost 400k military deaths and 800k civilian deaths, i.e. ~88% of army and ~27% of all population. So much for Austria did nuffing wrong.
>>449486 (You)
Yeah, the picrel is about WW2, Russians had it worse. Still, not as bad as Serbia in WW1.
Civil wars take a pretty big chunk out of a nation. How bout China's civil war?
>>449486
>~88% of army and ~27% of all population
Holy fuck, that is Paraguay-tier annihilation.
>>449499
Pretty sure Taiping Rebellion was even worse
>With no reliable census at the time, estimates are necessarily based on projections, but the most widely cited sources put the total number of deaths during the 15 years of the rebellion at about 20–30 million civilians and soldiers.[13] [14] Most of the deaths were attributed to plague and famine. At the Third Battle of Nanking in 1864, more than 100,000 were killed in three days.
>>449503
Waht were thos numbers again?
>>449507
>The traditional estimate was that the War cost Paraguay at least half her population including military and civilian casualties (the latter mainly owing to disease, dislocation and malnutrition) and that 90% of males of military age died. If that was so the Paraguayan war must have been 10 to 20 times more lethal than the slightly earlier American Civil War. The traditional estimate was based partly on anecdotal evidence and partly on a supposed census of 1857 which gave Paraguay a population of about 1.3 million, which, if correct, implied an utterly catastrophic decline in the subsequent War. The following extract from an unsigned article in the 1911 edition of the Encyclopædia Britannica:[1] is illustrative of the spurious precision of the era.[2]
>During this warfare every male Paraguayan capable of bearing arms was forced to fight, whole regiments being formed of boys from 12 to 15 years of age. Even women were used as beasts of burden to carry ammunition and stores, and when no longer capable of work were left to die by the roadside or murdered to avoid any ill consequences occurring from their capture. When the war broke out the population of Paraguay was 1,337,439; when hostilities ceased it consisted of 28,746 men, 106,254 women above 15 years, and 86,079 children. During the retreat of the Paraguayans the dictator ordered every town and village passed through to be razed to the ground, and every living animal for which no use could be found to be slaughtered. When the end came the country and people were in a state of absolute prostration.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paraguayan_War_casualties
>>449516
thanks for the answer. good dammit what a moronic leader and concept...
>>449516
Didn't Paraguay temporarily legalize polygamy after the war in order to get their population back up?
I have heard that Paraguay los 70% of its male population during the war with Brazil, Uruguay and Argentina, plus a lot of other people died from disease afterwards. So maybe up to 50% of the country died in the war, with entire armies being annihilated to the last man.
Also, Venezuela lost 40% of its population during the independence wars, which has to be very high body-count wise.
>>451314
What a shitty joke
>>451317
what a shitty post
>>451324
No u
