WAR LOSSES

Wairarapa Times-Age, 28 August 1941, Page 7

WAR LOSSES

ESTIMATES OF CASUALTIES. It is a general truth in war that both sides under-estimate their own losses and. fantastically exaggerate those of the enemy, writes “Critic” in the “New Statesman and Nation.” If you want evidence of this in the last, war you will find it in Mr Lloyd George’s “War Memoirs." If you want to be convinced that the same habit persists now you will find it in the rival statements of British and German propaganda about losses in the Balkans. Since the British authorities cannot possibly know what the German casualties are they would have been wiser not to guess at a figure like 70,000, which is unlikely in view of the nature and speed of the campaign. I am not suggesting that Hitler's figure of a thousand or so killed is likely to be true; he may have "forgotten” the Austrian troops he used, or more likely just wanted a figure that sounded well in Germany. But notice that the figures of killed and wounded in this war have never so far been high. General Wavell’s advance was astonishingly cheap, and the Germans in North Africa have apparently lost very few men. The Abyssinian campaign resembles the others in producing many prisoners and comparatively few casualties. Hitler conquered Holland, Belgium and France without any large losses. ' That is the nature of mechanised war. Civilians may get massacred and the percentage of airmen killed is large. But- the knights in their plated-armour tanks aim at no prolonged slaughter; if they get through, the position is turned and the troops cut off may have to surrender. Part of the tactics is to throw everything into the attack together so that, at the beginning, the attackers lose large numbers in a short time.