The Worst Killer of All time?

[I can't think of a name]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vasili_Blokhin

Has anyone killed people personally than this NKVD guy apparently did?

[Jurinko]

Wonder what St. Peter thought when this person reported at the gate.

My idea of hell is to repeat something wholly unpleasant, with eternal perspective. This guy would then spent eternity in the Leninist Room.

[rgjbloke]

To be honest, it's pretty unbelievable and extraordinary that a human being could do this. I hope he's rotting in hell.

[Atlantic Friend]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vasili_Blokhin

Has anyone killed people personally than this NKVD guy apparently did?

My lawyer advised me not to answer to that question.

[BlackFlag]

Definitely up there with the likes of Mengele, and such.

[SniperLane]

Wonder what St. Peter thought when this person reported at the gate.

My idea of hell is to repeat something wholly unpleasant, with eternal perspective. This guy would then spent eternity in the Leninist Room.

dude we cant know for sure how hell works and looking at him, i cant help but think he became the devils right hand man by now. :)

[Herman the II]

He reportedly sank into alcoholism, went insane, and died in February 1955 with the official cause of death listed as "suicide".


Who would have thought...

[Holycrusader]

Somehow that was lyrics I thought when I read this thread

Boozer of murderers

Don’t seek a way, find it in heart

boozer of former murderers is sad

Don’t let alarm you, when you’ll enter

Burning in dark eyes of a murderer

invalid fearsome girimace on mug

murderer’s hearts are very shy

band, army, gang, detachment black

yesterday knights, unwaged tonight

vacuum and coolness is all around

old killer’s clearing glasses form bar

juke is performing pieces touching

murderers sitting snapping matches

whiles flash and vanish will alien look

one right of hand raises from deuce

coming back morrow indistinct face

will cuss on life and put a vase

each one to him swarms right now

above the glasses eyes glitter round

and shortly each one better feels

yet of a murderer someone needs

maybe finally at morning some

anew will start one great brawl

moments of envy will come back

once more they paying ‘ll be for delights

once more in hand vice bottle flat

known shape of flask from a gun

and vibrates secretly at the finger’s end

just like a tickle: here life, here death

come back sweet hours of praise

famous shots and famous chase

only that way young again

to kill and proudly for reward wait

in boozer of murderers not saying boo

urges tire, dreams of fight too

but who today may have faith in killers

then silver bullets sleep in black barrels

from woods and fields effacing colour

night balloon from boozer speeds in gondola

once so brightly today so darkly

foe I don’t see foe in front of me

from booze torture tears his hair out

but amidst china and nickel pipe

like half-god man feels again

face-to-face with foe since he stands

bullet like silver viper ’ll pop out

eyes will wane in mirror per-tap

bodies of murderers sprinkled by sweat spark

when tacitly carrying body outside

when midnight strikes…

Translation from here http://biala-neska-z-cukrem.blog.onet.pl/

[JCR]

I think some japanese tried to set world records in beheading during WW2 in China.
Also, conquistadores often claimed they killed thousands of aztecs during a single day, but that was in battle
There was a battle during Cortez' conquest of Mexico in which, to explain aztec losses, each of Cortez' men must have killed around 2000 aztecs in a single day.

[Panchito12]

I think some japanese tried to set world records in beheading during WW2 in China.
Also, conquistadores often claimed they killed thousands of aztecs during a single day, but that was in battle
There was a battle during Cortez' conquest of Mexico in which, to explain aztec losses, each of Cortez' men must have killed around 2000 aztecs in a single day.

1. Conquistadores were known to exagerate
2. Cortez's largest forces were.....other tribes, such as the Tlaxcalans (who hated the hated Aztecs).
3. 2,000 indians per day? C'mon the used cold steel back then, the Spaniards arms would've been dead tired in a few minutes.

[JCR]

Of course they exaggerated, but still they slaughtered a lot.
Toledo blades versus clubs with obsidian shards?
Swordsmen trained to kill versus warriors trained to capture?
I included the conquistadores because this was more like execution than like a real war.
Individual machine gunners killed a lot of people in both world wars, but that was in battle.

Btw, professional executioners definitely killed a lot, too.
In Germany the death penalty was carried out by beheading until around 1948, and serveral professional executioners carried out close to a hundred sentences.
Most of them even came from executioner's families and practiced that job for generations.

[playtym]

One could make the argument that he was actually the best killer of all time rather than the worst. The worst killer would be the one who never actually managed to kill anyone. p-)

[lteep]

One could make the argument that he was actually the best killer of all time rather than the worst. The worst killer would be the one who never actually managed to kill anyone. p-)
exactly...well the worst killer is one who has the will to kill but never got to do it... cant consider killer one who doesnt want to kill =D
also "worst killer", "worst" could stand for how rude and bloodthirsty he was while "killer" stands for what he really was....

btw if he killed so many people in 26 years, means he used to kill more than 1 human per day....damn.... how can somebody reach that level.... insane...

[Niall]

Of course they exaggerated, but still they slaughtered a lot.
Toledo blades versus clubs with obsidian shards?
Swordsmen trained to kill versus warriors trained to capture?
I included the conquistadores because this was more like execution than like a real war.
Individual machine gunners killed a lot of people in both world wars, but that was in battle.

Btw, professional executioners definitely killed a lot, too.
In Germany the death penalty was carried out by beheading until around 1948, and serveral professional executioners carried out close to a hundred sentences.
Most of them even came from executioner's families and practiced that job for generations.

That was the time when there were only a handful of Spanish and a huge procession of unarmed natives came up to them and they slaughtered them all wasn't it?

[Winger]

Wonder what St. Peter thought when this person reported at the gate.

My idea of hell is to repeat something wholly unpleasant, with eternal perspective. This guy would then spent eternity in the Leninist Room.

Depends, at a Soviet Stalin controlled St. Peter's gate, free pass. p-) However, it was good how it ended for him, not really justice but at least he wasn't buried as a Great Hero.

[John R.]

Heinrich Severloh (23 June 1923 – 14 January 2006) was a soldier in the German 352nd Infantry Division, which was stationed in Normandy in 1944. He has been referred to as the “Beast of Omaha Beach” by the media of English speaking countries. He rose to notoriety as a gunner in a machine gun emplacement known as WN 62 “Widerstandsnest 62”, whose position enabled him to inflict 1500-2000 casualties while American soldiers were landing on Omaha Beach as part of Operation Overlord.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinrich_Severloh

For more info read The Germans in Normandy by Richard Hargreaves.

[deagle]

The reason newborn babies cry is because they know they have just entered a world with Chuck Norris.

then

Chuck Norris eats babies for breakfast.


don't get any more even than that !

[zad]

That was the time when there were only a handful of Spanish and a huge procession of unarmed natives came up to them and they slaughtered them all wasn't it?

Oh please, we were just triying to stop a human sacrifice festival. p-)

[Mablod]

"Heinrich Severloh (23 June 1923 – 14 January 2006) was a soldier in the German 352nd Infantry Division, which was stationed in Normandy in 1944. He has been referred to as the “Beast of Omaha Beach” by the media of English speaking countries. He rose to notoriety as a gunner in a machine gun emplacement known as WN 62 “Widerstandsnest 62”, whose position enabled him to inflict 1500-2000 casualties while American soldiers were landing on Omaha Beach as part of Operation Overlord."

He wasn't a killer, he was a soldier doing his duty.

[JCR]

I don't regard machine gunners as "killers" either.
There were other examples, AFAIK a single machine gun team of a bavarian division killed over 800 british soldiers during the battle of the Somme.

Re Cortez, his people killed lots of atztec warriors in various open battles, but also did serveral massacres of unarmed atzecs, for example at the great temple.
I don't really think the Aztecs had any rights to complain though, they just met a bigger fish.

[Domen]

Charles Sweeney - killed 74,000 people and many more died later as the result of his action:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/29/669923249_m.jpg/460px-669923249_m.jpg

Paul Tibbets - killed 78,000 people (further 14,000 were reported missing):

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6b/Tibbets-wave02.jpg

Willi Mentz - killed over 6,000 men, women and children during his service as the neck-shooter at Treblinka's sham hospital:

http://www.elholocausto.net/imagenes/caras/Willy%20Mentz.JPG

[Abyr]

This gives me a question - what did the Enola Gay's bombardier think about what he have done? Was he proud or ashamed of a fact that his actions (a simple push of a few buttons/levers) led to 80 thousand people killed, most of whom were civilians, in a few seconds?
Same goes to the Nagasaki's bombardier.

[Domen]

Heinrich Severloh (23 June 1923 – 14 January 2006) was a soldier in the German 352nd Infantry Division, which was stationed in Normandy in 1944. He has been referred to as the “Beast of Omaha Beach” by the media of English speaking countries. He rose to notoriety as a gunner in a machine gun emplacement known as WN 62 “Widerstandsnest 62”, whose position enabled him to inflict 1500-2000 casualties while American soldiers were landing on Omaha Beach as part of Operation Overlord.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinrich_Severloh (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinrich_Severloh)

For more info read The Germans in Normandy by Richard Hargreaves.


He could not inflict "1500 - 2000" casualties by any means.

American TOTAL casualties at Omaha beach amounted to some 2,000 dead / wounded / missing, of which around 1/3 (so around 650 - 700) were fatalities (http://warchronicle.com/numbers/WWII/ddaycasualtyest.htm). Around 1,200 German soldiers defended the beach. If you want to estimate how many casualties were inflicted by this single soldier (who fired 12,000 - 12,500 rounds from his MG during the battle), you should find out how many rounds were fired by all 1,200 defenders and then you should use mathematics. http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/./images/smilies/icon_rolleyes.gif

I seriously doubt his MG could kill more than 100 enemy soldiers - in fact he might have killed "just" several dozens.

And it wouldn't be anything strange at all that he fired 12,500 bullets and killed some 100 soldiers. If you compare statistics on ammo expenditure / losses you see that this is a very "normal" efficiency, even in Omaha conditions.

[JCR]

The infantry regiment defending Omaha had 1200 soldiers, yes, but most of them were either fleeing or were pinned down or dead by the time of the landing.
There are only two known machine gunners, Severloh in his observation point with a MG 42 and another gunner in a bunker with a maxim type gun.
Also the landing craft Severloh fired at were those hardest hit.
But all US casualties on Omaha beach came from those two gunners, the 352nds division artillery and a few mortars that survived.

[Domen]

Still - it is clearly not possible that Heinz Severloh inflicted close to 99% of all American casualties on Omaha beach.

It was established that for one KIA the small ammo expenditure during WWII was of 10,000 bullets or equivalent (so ca. 2,500 bullets or equivalent for one casualty - KIA or WIA). Of course Omaha conditions were extraordinary (huge number of American soldiers + open terrain with few places to hide + frontal assault), but still 2,000 casualties with 12,000 bullets from MG (which is a very fast and not very accurate weapon) = great exaggeration.

E.g. in the Polish campaign for one Polish casualty (dead or wounded) Wehrmacht had to fire on average the following amount of ammo of all types:

- 2371 rounds of rifle / MG / MP / pistol ammo
- 14,5 rounds of AT guns ammo
- 8 rounds of mortar / grenade launcher ammo
- 29 rounds of tank guns (20mm, 37mm, 75mm) ammo
- 15 rounds of field artillery ammo
- 6,8 hand grenades
- 121 kg (~2,26 pieces) of air bombs

Artillery was much more lethal than machine guns.

Assuming that at least 50 - 60% of Polish losses were inflicted by artillery, 30 - 20 rounds of artillery ammo were necessary to inflict a Polish casualty (dead or WIA). This is probable (in WW2 armies with powerful artillery had ratio of ca. 50% - 75% of enemy losses inflicted by artillery & mortars).



But all US casualties on Omaha beach came from those two gunners, the 352nds division artillery and a few mortars that survived.


And rifles, and friendly fire, etc.

Most probably artillery of 352. Inf.Div. was responsible for at least 50% of American losses on Omaha beach. Splinters are deadly in open terrain.

Mortar fire is also very efficient and lethal. First of all - mortar fire is very accurate, if only mortars are handled by well-trained crews.

[Kitsune]

Around 1,200 German soldiers defended the beach.
No, definitely not. The exact number is unclear to this day - according to Severloh it were just thirty (in numbers: 30) soldiers, who defended the infamous crescent. Its possible that this is true, if not, it were perhaps fifty or, at best, around a hundred. In any case, it were nowhere near 1200.
The exact number of soldiers killed by Severloh is unknown, apparently even to him. Please note that the exact phrasing was that he inflicted 1500 to 2000 casualties - which is a pretty vague statement, since a "casualty" is not the same as dead! If, for instance, a soldier gets shot in the arm and drops out of the fight because of it, he is usually counted as a casualty for this fight. But it is quite likely that he recovers and sees action again three weeks later. So, Severloh may have actually killed "only" some hundreds of soldiers. I have no doubt that, would he have been an American and killed German soldiers (aka evil Nazi pigs for many), he would be considered a war hero today. Not that he ever claimed anything like that for himself. The one heroic thing he did was to stay and fight (from a well entrenched position) against a very large number of enemy soldiers. Other than that he was a pretty normal guy who had not seen much fighting before the beach at all.

[navybrook]

No one approaches Stalin for total deaths. No one. Per Wiki: "Accordingly, if famine victims are included, a minimum of around 10 million deaths—6 million from famine and 4 million from other causes—are attributable to the regime,[91] (http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/#cite_note-90) with a number of recent historians suggesting a likely total of around 20 million, citing much higher victim totals from executions, gulags, deportations and other causes.[92] (http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/#cite_note-91) Adding 6–8 million famine victims to Erlikman's estimates above, for example, would yield a total of between 15 and 17 million victims. Researcher Robert Conquest (http://www.militaryphotos.net/wiki/Robert_Conquest), meanwhile, has revised his original estimate of up to 30 million victims down to 20 million.[93] (http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/#cite_note-92) In his most recent edition of The Great Terror (http://www.militaryphotos.net/wiki/The_Great_Terror) (2007), Conquest states that while exact numbers may never be known with complete certainty, the various terror campaigns launched by the Soviet government claimed no fewer than 15 million lives.[94] (http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/#cite_note-Conquest2007Reassessment-93) Others maintain that their earlier higher victim total estimates are correct.[95] (http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/#cite_note-94)[96] (http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/#cite_note-95)

[[WDW]Megaraptor]

No, definitely not. The exact number is unclear to this day - according to Severloh it were just thirty (in numbers: 30) soldiers, who defended the infamous crescent. Its possible that this is true, if not, it were perhaps fifty or, at best, around a hundred. In any case, it were nowhere near 1200.

I though Severloh's figure of 30 was just for the number of soldiers defending the area in and around WN 62 on Easy Red Sector, not the entire beach.

I find it impossible to believe there were only 2 German machine gunners on all of Omaha. Remember, landings took place on seven different sectors of beach, with 13 fortified German strong points along those sectors.

[JCR]

There were more guns for certain, but only 2 were able to keep up a sustained fire on the beach. The others were destroyed or jammed or the gunners simply ran.
Also WN62 wasn't deadly just because of Severloh. His post was an artillery observation post and his Lt. (who was later killed by a stray bullet) was the 352nds division artillery observer.
But Severloh was certainly a very unlikely war hero.
A man who came very close to draft evading , who was quite sick and previously had done everything to get the easiest and most far away post from combat as possible.
Yet suddenly he empties belt after belt into the american forces and when he runs out of ammo, he grabs a Kar98 and starts amateur sniping until he runs out of rifle ammo, too.
Shows you never know how people react in combat until combat.

[[WDW]Megaraptor]

How are you defining "sustained fire on the beach?" Several hours? Most of the day?

[Jµµso]

This gives me a question - what did the Enola Gay's bombardier think about what he have done? Was he proud or ashamed of a fact that his actions (a simple push of a few buttons/levers) led to 80 thousand people killed, most of whom were civilians, in a few seconds?
Same goes to the Nagasaki's bombardier.

Tibbets said he would do it again if ordered to.

[JCR]

[WDW]Megaraptor;4908300
Megaraptor;4908300']How are you defining "sustained fire on the beach?" Several hours? Most of the day?

It seems pretty much the whole beach defenses were abandoned or destroyed before the landing.
The bombardment was pretty effective, also the occupants were german, not japanese.
They were not prepared to die in the bunkers, so the bombardment had an effect which it lacked on Tarawa or other pacific places.
But as in many cases in WW1, one surviving machine gun can hold up a division for some time.
Severloh also noticed the hull number of the Landing craft infantry (LCI) he concentrated his fire on for some time. Postwar research showed that everyone aboard this craft was either killed or wounded, so these alone would be around 300 people.


But as I said, machine gunners shouldn't count as killers. These were soldiers doing their duty.
Same for the atomic bomber crews. No matter wether you agree with the bombings or not, the crews did their duty.

[Kitsune]

I though Severloh's figure of 30 was just for the number of soldiers defending the area in and around WN 62 on Easy Red Sector, not the entire beach.
Yes, you are absolutely right. I screwed up with my use of the word "crescent". As far as all of Omaha beach is concerned, there were two companies from the 716 Infantry Division and two companies from the 352 Infantry Division defending it, so the overall number was probably somewhere between 400 and 500 soldiers.

[KoTeMoRe]

No one approaches Stalin for total deaths. No one. Per Wiki: "Accordingly, if famine victims are included, a minimum of around 10 million deaths—6 million from famine and 4 million from other causes—are attributable to the regime,[91] (http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/#cite_note-90) with a number of recent historians suggesting a likely total of around 20 million, citing much higher victim totals from executions, gulags, deportations and other causes.[92] (http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/#cite_note-91) Adding 6–8 million famine victims to Erlikman's estimates above, for example, would yield a total of between 15 and 17 million victims. Researcher Robert Conquest (http://www.militaryphotos.net/wiki/Robert_Conquest), meanwhile, has revised his original estimate of up to 30 million victims down to 20 million.[93] (http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/#cite_note-92) In his most recent edition of The Great Terror (http://www.militaryphotos.net/wiki/The_Great_Terror) (2007), Conquest states that while exact numbers may never be known with complete certainty, the various terror campaigns launched by the Soviet government claimed no fewer than 15 million lives.[94] (http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/#cite_note-Conquest2007Reassessment-93) Others maintain that their earlier higher victim total estimates are correct.[95] (http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/#cite_note-94)[96] (http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/#cite_note-95)

Did I read Conquest? Kthxbye.

[Domen]

But as in many cases in WW1, one surviving machine gun can hold up a division for some time.


Apart from "specific situations" - like seashores during such operations - I really don't think so. WW2 was a completely different reality than WW1. And I'm not only talking about introduction of new weapons (tacical bombers, tanks, etc.), but about completely different infantry tactics, different infantry formations, etc. First of all in WW2 all armies prefered envelopments or flank attacks rather than frontal assaults. Infantry was fighting in less dense formations (infantry squad numbering 10 - 20 men, while fighting in extended line, was about 100 metres width), in offensive infantry relied more on fire support (MGs, mortars, grenade launchers, etc.), while in WW1 machine guns were used mostly in defensive (by the end of WW1 it started to change).



But it is quite likely that he recovers and sees action again three weeks later.


Not so quickly. For example during the first year of the Soviet-German war (1941 - 1942), 22.9% of all German "bloody casualties" were immediate dead, ca. 8.6% died of their wounds within 3 months, 2.5% became unfit for duty, 10% were only to be used for work or garrison duties, and the remaining 56% of the wounded became ready for duty again in the average time of about 98 days (so more than 3 months, not just 3 weeks).

So out of 1000 "bloody losses", only 229 were immediate dead and 86 died of wounds - but further 125 were never again able to return to frontline service. The remaining 560 of the wounded were able to see action on the frontline again, but the average time of their recovering was 98 days.

There is also another, very similar German statistics. During WW2, the German Central Archives for Military Medicine analyzed some 3,015,589 wounded soldiers with extremely detailed results. Overall, they found out that of every 100 "bloody" casualties, 24% were killed in action, 30% were seriously wounded and 46% were classified äs lightly wounded. This compared to a casualty rate of 13.8% killed and 86.2% wounded in WW1. Surprising.

Just the fact that in WW1 there were much more soldiers wounded per each soldier killed than in WW2 (but also - due to more primitive medicine and more primitive living conditions on the battlefield - much more died of wounds per each 100 wounded) shows these were very different conflicts.

[Abyr]

Same for the atomic bomber crews. No matter wether you agree with the bombings or not, the crews did their duty.
Then all killings, even those that were committed in death camps can be similarly dismissed - "they did their duty of killing prisoners", while bomber crews that dropped atomic bombs did theirs - they destroyed whole towns and civilian population, those weren't attacks on military infrastructure.

[SpeedyHedgehog]

Then all killings, even those that were committed in death camps can be similarly dismissed - "they did their duty of killing prisoners", while bomber crews that dropped atomic bombs did theirs - they destroyed whole towns and civilian population, those weren't attacks on military infrastructure.

I think you'll find that an attempt to equate Nazi concentration camp personnel with USAAF pilots/bomber crewmen will not get you far on this forum.

I'm not going to debate the merits of the bombings of Nagasaki & Hiroshima with you. It was an attempt (successful, I might add) to bring an end to the war as quickly as possible. An argument can be made that fewer people died in the long run because of the dropping of those two bombs.

What happened in Nazi death camps did NOTHING to shorten the war or reduce deaths. I hope you don't seriously believe what you posted.

[kahn267]

I think you'll find that an attempt to equate Nazi concentration camp personnel with USAAF pilots/bomber crewmen will not get you far on this forum.

I'm not going to debate the merits of the bombings of Nagasaki & Hiroshima with you. It was an attempt (successful, I might add) to bring an end to the war as quickly as possible. An argument can be made that fewer people died in the long run because of the dropping of those two bombs.

What happened in Nazi death camps did NOTHING to shorten the war or reduce deaths. I hope you don't seriously believe what you posted.

Not to mention that the Nazis tried to conceal the activities of the death camps

[Abyr]

I think you'll find that an attempt to equate Nazi concentration camp personnel with USAAF pilots/bomber crewmen will not get you far on this forum.



What happened in Nazi death camps did NOTHING to shorten the war or reduce deaths. I hope you don't seriously believe what you posted.

Yes, I agree, that was over-the-top comparison from my side, they aren't on the same level, I'm sorry.


I'm not going to debate the merits of the bombings of Nagasaki & Hiroshima with you. It was an attempt (successful, I might add) to bring an end to the war as quickly as possible. An argument can be made that fewer people died in the long run because of the dropping of those two bombs.
OK, in order to avoid going far off-topic, let's just agree to disagree.

[Laworkerbee]

Then all killings, even those that were committed in death camps can be similarly dismissed - "they did their duty of killing prisoners", while bomber crews that dropped atomic bombs did theirs - they destroyed whole towns and civilian population, those weren't attacks on military infrastructure.

Way to put things in context there sport.

Those bombs literally saved millions of lives.


let's just agree to disagree

No, how about we all disagree with you and you read a book or four.

[Noons86]

Before this gets out of control, there is, at least psychologically, a big difference between killing someone right in front of you, or watching people walk to their death in a gas chamber, and dropping bombs. In the former, you see the people you're killing. In the latter, they are very removed from the effects of their actions. Even in a dogfight, you're basically shooting at a big machine. Essentially, killing in combat cannot be compared to any other kind of killing.

[shilka234]

Shows you never know how people react in combat until combat.
How true...

[Domen]

I think you'll find that an attempt to equate Nazi concentration camp personnel with USAAF pilots/bomber crewmen will not get you far on this forum


The above answer was not directed to me, but I'm just wondering:

Why? Because they were US or because they were pilots / crewmen?



Those bombs literally saved millions of lives.


Fully agreed.

But the thread is about the biggest killer (no matter what was his purpose in killing) - and find someone who killed more.

[Abyr]

Way to put things in context there sport.

Those bombs literally saved millions of lives.



No, how about we all disagree with you and you read a book or four.
PM'ed

1234567890

[[WDW]Megaraptor]

[WDW]Megaraptor;4908300

It seems pretty much the whole beach defenses were abandoned or destroyed before the landing.
The bombardment was pretty effective, also the occupants were german, not japanese.

That's not what I've read in any account of the fighting at Omaha. The pre-landing bombardment was completely ineffective and missed almost all the bunkers, with the shells landing further inland.

[domokun]

Still - it is clearly not possible that Heinz Severloh inflicted close to 99% of all American casualties on Omaha beach.

Domen, there is three kinds of lies: lies, damn lies and statistics.

If sample size is big enough extremely unlikely becomes practically inevitable. WWII is relatively large sample from statistical point of view.



It was established that for one KIA the small ammo expenditure during WWII was of 10,000 bullets or equivalent (so ca. 2,500 bullets or equivalent for one casualty - KIA or WIA). Of course Omaha conditions were extraordinary (huge number of American soldiers + open terrain with few places to hide + frontal assault), but still 2,000 casualties with 12,000 bullets from MG (which is a very fast and not very accurate weapon) = great exaggeration.

Sole reason why it's plausible that single machine gun can kill massive number of enemy soldiers is quite simply exactly what you already said, perfect conditions. When we have right conditions like for example civilians lined up in straight row it is possible to kill about five or so people with single shot from rifle. I personally don't believe that he actually caused 99% American casualties on the beach, something like 1000 to 1500 casualties is far more likely.



E.g. in the Polish campaign for one Polish casualty (dead or wounded) Wehrmacht had to fire on average the following amount of ammo of all types:

- 2371 rounds of rifle / MG / MP / pistol ammo
- 14,5 rounds of AT guns ammo
- 8 rounds of mortar / grenade launcher ammo
- 29 rounds of tank guns (20mm, 37mm, 75mm) ammo
- 15 rounds of field artillery ammo
- 6,8 hand grenades
- 121 kg (~2,26 pieces) of air bombs

Artillery was much more lethal than machine guns.

We have single machine gun that kills or wounds approximately 1500 enemy soldiers with approximately 12 000 rounds. We may also have lot of machine guns that spray 100 000 rounds without single kill. Statistic is by it's nature collection of single events, extreme variations at opposing ends of material cancel themselves.

Dividing by zero funny and as we know any number divided by zero is infinite. Let take little bit modified classic example of probability, money punching typewriter randomly is quite unlikely to produce perfect copy of Heinz Guderian's Panzer Leader. If time given to event to happen is infinite, it will occur sooner or later, inevitably. If number of monkeys punching typewriters is infinite it is happening all the time. Theoretically it is possible that there never was individual called Heinz Guderian in German army and as he didn't exist he had no what so ever effect on development of armored warfare doctrine. It could all be just propaganda and actually whole doctrine was developed by bunch monkeys punching typewriters randomly in basement of German high command. It is extremely unlikely but possible.



Assuming that at least 50 - 60% of Polish losses were inflicted by artillery, 30 - 20 rounds of artillery ammo were necessary to inflict a Polish casualty (dead or WIA). This is probable (in WW2 armies with powerful artillery had ratio of ca. 50% - 75% of enemy losses inflicted by artillery & mortars).

And rifles, and friendly fire, etc.

Most probably artillery of 352. Inf.Div. was responsible for at least 50% of American losses on Omaha beach. Splinters are deadly in open terrain.

Mortar fire is also very efficient and lethal. First of all - mortar fire is very accurate, if only mortars are handled by well-trained crews.

It is also possible that number of casualties received wounds from multiple causes. As an example three 80mm mortar shell fragments to left leg, 7.92mm bullet from K98 to right arm and two bullets 7.92mm from MG42 to chest.

[matthew.manhorn]

The pilot of the plane that carried the atomic bomb during WW2 killed more imo.

[Domen]

Statistic is by it's nature collection of single events, extreme variations at opposing ends of material cancel themselves.


I know. One military theoretician even said more or less something like:

"It is possible that one lucky soldier suddenly kills 10 enemy soldiers. But is not possible that one lucky division suddenly destroys 10 divisions".

But still in this case I consider this data on Severloh hardly probable. Especially that there is no reliable source to confirm this figure.



Domen, there is three kinds of lies: lies, damn lies and statistics.


Domokun, the point is, that we will never really know how many soldiers were killed or wounded by Severloh on Omaha beach. Nobody in fact conducted any kind of bodycount. This is only a claim and not even claim like those of snipers or tank killers (which are also very inaccurate):

http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?f=50&t=164455

, but a completeley estimated claim.

And here we don't even have any exact figures. Just "1500 - 2000", which makes 35% difference or "1000 - 2000", so 100% difference.



We have single machine gun that kills or wounds approximately 1500 enemy soldiers with approximately 12 000 rounds.


What the hell is the origin of this "1500" figure. Anybody counted this? How? Don't you see that this is just one of those fairy tales?

This is not the only case in history when one soldier claims "I killed all of them, all other guys from my company escaped and didn't contribute".

I know one such story from my neighbourhood. The story says that there was a corporal who - fighting alone - stopped the advance of entire German tank battalion + motorized infantry battalion for 2 hours. The story says that his company (8. company in this case) retreated and he volunteered to cover their retreat, carefully preparing his "battlefield" before the battle. The story says he knocked out 6 tanks, 1 motorcycle and killed 11 Germans (using grenades, MG, anti-tank mines planted by himself, AT rifle, etc.) before he was finally killed by the Germans. The reality was a bit different. Numbers of German losses are true - but they were inflicted by his entire company, which - in fact - did not withdraw. The legend was created because one of corporals from this company was seen by local civilians while throwing a bunch of grenades towards German tanks.

And if it comes to those AT mines - in fact they were not planted by that corporal, but by divisional sappers. And that's all.

The corporal was of course real - his grave is still there. He was a hero indeed, but the rest of the story is fictional.



something like 1000 to 1500 casualties is far more likely.


Someone wrote that there was at least one more MG 42 as well positioned as Severloh's one on Omaha beach.

So why should we assume that Severloh (and the rest of his crew - no MG is handled by 1 man) killed more men than the other guy's MG?

Just because his surname is unknown (maybe he simply did not survive the battle)?

[Kitsune]

The legend was created because one of corporals from this company was seen by local civilians while throwing a bunch of grenades towards German tanks.
And because people need heroes. The thought that a single person can make a big difference is very appealing, isn't it?

[[WDW]Megaraptor]

The truth is, Severloh did in fact man an extremely deadly machine gun that remained in action for far longer than the other WN nests on Omaha. As for the exact number of people he killed, we will never know and neither did Severloh, he just made a wild guess when asked ~50 years after the fact.

The only way we can get anything resembling an accurate number would be to get a count of the American killed and wounded on Easy Red sector alone, but I'm not sure if that's been done.

[Domen]

The thought that a single person can make a big difference is very appealing, isn't it?


Of course it is. But the reality was a bit different. Even great fighter aces needed entire squadrons for protection while "tamping scores".

That's how already famous German fighter aces fought. Ace was downing enemy aircrafts while the rest of his unit was protecting him.

That's also how later the "labor foremen" of the Communist Europe worked while breaking the records, for example of extracting something.

But in fact fighter squadrons were more efficient as collectives when fighting normally instead of doing such things for the propaganda machine.

The same applies to Communist industry.



would be to get a count of the American killed and wounded on Easy Red sector alone, but I'm not sure if that's been done.


According to this website:

http://www.battleofnormandytours.com/omaha-beach.html

There were around 700 casualties on Easy Red (WN 62) sector in total. So the myth of 2000 casualties inflicted by Severloh alone is busted.

[Domen]

According to this website and links provided there:

http://www.dws.org.pl/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=4497&p=145702&hilit=Severloh#p145702

WN 62 was located at the edge of Easy Red and Fox Green. But also other pillboxes / resistance nests could fire at these two sectors (e.g. WN 64).

WN 62 defense consisted of 2 x 75mm field guns, 2 x 50mm AT guns, 2 x mortars, 1 x AA MG, 1 x flamethrower, 4 x heavy MG, 1 observation post for artillery and over 30 soldiers. Defenders of WN 62 could fire towards American forces landing at Easy Red sector and partially also those landing at Fox Green sector. American forces landing at the Fox Green and Easy Red sectors in the first wave (landing at 6:30 in the morning) were:

- companies E and F from 16. Inf.Rgt. of 1. Inf.Div.
- company E from 116. Inf.Rgt. of 29. Inf.Div.

Three companies = 450 - 600 men.

Both sectors (Fox Green and Easy Red) were also under heavy fire of German divisional field artillery.

30 minutes later, at 7:00, the second wave landed there (how numerous was it?).

10:00 - the neighbouring WN 64 is captured

11:00 - American success in Fox Green sector

14:30 - WN 62 is captured, only 3 Germans from its crew manage to escape (Severloh, Glockel, Warnecke)

During 9 (?) hours (probably 5:30 - 14:30 ?) Severloh fired around 12,500 bullets. He was 21 years old.

Despite retreating from Omaha, Severloh was captured by the Allies one day later - on June 7th 1944.