oleg wrote: "the new study" presumes that all soldiers returned to the places where they lived before the war which was obviously not the case, for some had no place to return. Nor did it take into account those who were in the filtration camps, or in GULAG.Immediately after the war and by 1949 the military commissariats conducted the so-called ?canvass of yards? where they went to people?s yards and homes with lists of questions for relatives of frontline soldiers who did not return from the war, with the aim of identifying the missing.
Krivosheev book came out in 1993.The study was started in the early 90s with a group of people and is based on individual card file counts. I guess I value a post cold war post SU study over offical SU army claims from 30 years agoI know who he is but his numbers (TSAMO rather0 do not add up. Finally who is fact that Ericson is dead is in any way related to the question on hand. He got the same number overall independently from Krivosheev. Besides that he books came out in the late 90s how is that 30 years ago?Go to the end and look at the tital of the person who wrote this article. That has a lot of credibilty in my opinion.
Kirovsheyev still has missing millions in his own study. For exaple the 1 mil missing who later returned are not accounted for as either discharged or in the army at anytime. Just as one example.
As to disproving a new study using older rus army numbers I´ll wait to see if he provides new ones in his own study. You have to remeber his new study was not aimed at such a wide breath as the old one it concentrated on dead and missing never solved. Working with actual card files of individual soilders the article claims is the 'most exact and complete sources of personnal losses'. It also directly compares with the ger number. Instead of a sample of overall numbers from fronts addded together. Many people seeem to have fallen through the crack. Perhaps many of the new permant losses were incorrectly catagorized by kirovsheyev as only wounded or transfered to NKVD but actually died or went missing.
The ger post war studyies of its armys permant losses both dead and missing never returned are based on the soilders making it home. Overmans goes even further and includes any soiloders who didn´t apply for retirment pay today. He also has some statistical problems with his study. The ger list 3 mil soilders by name know to have died from any and all causes including known POW death totals before and after the war. Added to this is a list of 1 mil names missing never returned or solved. There are ger army post war studies that point to most of this 1 mil going missing in rus custody mainly after the war. A max of 4 mil dead individuals all recorded by name on thier own ger card system. Overmans points to an extra 1 mil missing but his study is flawed and not directly comparable to the ger army numbers either.
In 1949 it seems highly unlikly that the missing rus were in filtration camps. Any rus army person who was in the gulag in 1949 probably deserved to be thier. If they were ignored it would only be a small % of the total missing we are talking about. But the article does say at one point people in prisons were properly accouted for.
PS oleg if you are going to mix quotes in from other sources besides mine make sure you indicate it smoehow. Quote:Darrin Quote:Article