Soviet Casualties and Combat Losses in the Twentieth Century

Brief Summary

Soviet Casualties and Combat Losses in the Twentieth Century by G. F. Krivosheev is an in-depth technical reference that comprehensively covers the personnel and equipment losses experienced by the Soviet Union in various military conflicts. The book spans from the 1918 civil war through to the Soviet war in Afghanistan, providing a detailed account of the human and material toll of each engagement. This meticulous compilation is essential for those interested in military history and Soviet studies, offering a unique statistical perspective on the consequences of war.

Main Themes and Topics

The primary themes of Soviet Casualties and Combat Losses in the Twentieth Century are the detailed analysis of military losses and the impact of warfare on Soviet armed forces throughout significant historical conflicts. By cataloging different wars and skirmishes, Krivosheev seeks to present an authoritative account of the Soviet Union's losses, often correcting the inaccuracies and omissions found in previous reports. The book delves into topics such as the disparity between reported and actual casualties, the challenges of logistical support in combat, and the strategic decisions that influenced the scale of these losses.

Writing Style and Tone

G. F. Krivosheev writes with a formal and analytical tone, suited to the subject matter's technical nature. The book is characterized by its dense statistical analysis and methodical presentation of data. Despite the complexity of the information, Krivosheev's writing remains clear and precise, allowing readers with a genuine interest in military history to closely follow the presented figures and findings. However, the focus on data and technical details means the book may not appeal to those seeking a narrative-driven account of Soviet military history.

Criticism

While Soviet Casualties and Combat Losses in the Twentieth Century is praised for its thorough research and the valuable statistical insights it provides, some critics point to its narrow focus as a potential drawback. The emphasis on quantitative analysis can be overwhelming for readers who are not well-versed in statistical interpretation or those who prefer a more nuanced exploration of historical contexts and personal stories. Additionally, some critics have noted that the reliance on available Soviet records, which may be biased or incomplete, could affect the comprehensiveness of the data presented. Nevertheless, the work is considered a significant contribution to the field of military history.