User talk:KnowledgeIsPower

Hi Mathias, You asked me why I reverted your link to the Ecuadorian-Peruvian War. Well, the fact that it took place during World War II, does not actually mean it was part of World War II. It was really a war between the two South-American nations Ecuador and Peru, neither of whom declared war on either the Axis Powers or the Allied Powers, nor had war declared on them by those Powers. It does not really belong into the context of the Second World War as such. However, if I should be misinformed about this, do not hesitate to clarify this to me. Dieter Simon 02:07, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

hello, but that is a contemporary war, a war that was fought during ww2. contemporary means not it must have to do with ww2 or must be part of ww2. mathias

Mathias, all other wars have been noted under the section: "Contemporary Wars", which includes the Ecuadorian-Peruvian War. So, it's been taken care of in the article as you can see. Dieter Simon 02:14, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WW 2 Casualties

All information on Wikipedia must have sorrces or it will be removed--Woogie10w (talk) 23:48, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What is your source for the casualties of Portugal?--Woogie10w (talk) 00:55, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

the source for portugal: http://pascal.iseg.utl.pt/~cesa/History_of_Timor.pdf, page 131. i think, it's better to show deaths until 100 in exactly figures, like cuba with 79 civ. deaths and ireland's mil. deaths (10,000) must shown under ireland not only in the sources or under uk, the same for switzerland (300)... KnowledgeIsPower (talk) 01:44, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That would be duplication because they are counted with the UK Army, not Ireland, the same for Switzerland, they were German soldiers not Swiss. Look at the detailed list of US war dead at the National Archives website, there were Irish and Swiss deaths in the US Army and Navy. Also the Nisi in the 442nd Batt were Americans, not Japanese. Military war losses are counted by the flag they served under NOT by ethnic group. It is better to round to 000, the schedule looks neater and professional that way.We count Michael Strank as an American not as a Slovak, the same applies to the Irish that lived in the UK. They served in the UK forces and are counted as British, they were not Irish soldiers.-We count the losses of the 442nd Infantry Regiment (United States) as Americans, not Japanese. The same logic applies to the Irish in the UK forces and the Swiss in German forces. We must be consistant and avoid duplication.--Woogie10w (talk) 04:09, 1 January 2009 (UTC) This is from page 131 of that source"The number of Timorese who died during the war is impossible to calculate with precision but is of the order of 4070,000 out of a total prewar population of around 450,000." Not a reliable source in my opinion--Woogie10w (talk) 04:20, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

you must reading the text under conclusion, there are the 75 portuguese deaths and irish people are irish and swiss are swiss and not british or german etc. is NOT logical and its wrong. the "served under xx flag" is nonsense as a reason, ok for notes under the uk or usa deaths, BUT it must shown also under the original nation like switzerland or ireland. it is also the respect for the mil deaths of this nations, that their shown under the really nation!! as a relative to an irish mil dead, it is a very bad way to shown the irish (eire) mil deaths under uk war deaths not under ireland war deaths. and nobody seen, that also irish or swiss soldiers died in ww2, if its shown under germany and uk war deaths..... KnowledgeIsPower (talk) 16:18, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

They were not Irish, they were British soldiers fighting in British units. They were not fighting as part of the Irish military. Ireland was neutral. The same logic applies to the Japanese in the US Army, they were American war dead not Japanese. Would you classify the men of the 442nd RCT as Americans or Japanese? Yes or no? Military war casualties are NOT counted by ethnic group, they are counted by the country they were fighting for.--Woogie10w (talk) 18:21, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What does this mean?The number of Timorese who died during the war is impossible to calculate with precision but is of the order of 4070,000 out of a total prewar population of around 450,000."--Woogie10w (talk) 18:26, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

you are crazy, irish is irish and british is british, swiss is swiss and german is german etc. the ethnics, the nation is only important, nothing else. i don't understand you, NEVER.
Military war casualties are NOT counted by ethnic group, they are counted by the country they were fighting for.---Woogie10w (talk) 18:55, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We count Michael Strank as an American not as a Slovak, the same applies to the Irish that lived in the UK.--Woogie10w (talk) 18:57, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We count the losses of the 442nd Infantry Regiment (United States) as Americans, not Japanese. The same logic applies to the Irish in the UK forces and the Swiss in German forces.--Woogie10w (talk) 18:57, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Henry Kissinger, in WW2 was he a an American or a German?[1]--Woogie10w (talk) 20:18, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Please respond on WW2 Casulaties, if you propose changes please list reliable sources that can be verified. --Woogie10w (talk) 02:29, 17 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Casualties WW2

There is no reliable breakdown of WW2 casualties by ethnic group. For example, there were Irish citizens in the US Armed Forces. They fought for the US and are counted as US war dead. Germany conscripted men in Poland, they were German not Polish war dead. However in the footnotes of Poland we should mention that they died in the German uniform.--Woogie10w (talk) 22:03, 4 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Also Re that Handbook of Losses published in Russia in 2004, it is available in libraries, request it by interlibrary loan. The author a Russian journalist V. Erlikman lists his own estimates of losses in Africa and Asia that are already included with the French and UK forces. Bear in mind the French and UK governments have never published a breakdown of war dead by region of origin. The US has never published a breakdown of war dead by place of birth or ethnic background. There is no total for African American war dead in the US Armed forces. --Woogie10w (talk) 22:20, 4 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, please post your comments here at Talk:World War II casualties. I would like other editors involved in the discussion. Regards--Woogie10w (talk) 20:54, 23 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

My Family

An ancestor of mine from Pennsylvania Mathius Bauser was a soldier in the American Revolution, he was born in Switzerland however he was an American soldier. Another ancestor Michael Bornheimer was a German soldier in British service who remained in the US after 1783, he was a British not a German soldier. Regards.--Woogie10w (talk) 20:48, 17 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ww2 casualties/hungarian jews

hello, the deaths of hungarian jews are higher, about 500000 to 565000, see yad vashem center, us holocaust memorial museum and other sources (authors/books/wikipedia articles).