What war do you believe to be the bloodiest in US Hist.

Bloodiest war

  • Persain gulf war (1991)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Vietnam War (1961-1973)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Korean War (1950-1953)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • World War 1 (1917-1918)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • war with China (1900)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Philippine-American War (1899)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • The Spanish American War (1898)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Nez Perce war (1877)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Wakarusa War (1855, 1856)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • War with Mexico a.k.a Mexican-American War (1846-1848)

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
Civil War without a doubt. I have relatives that were with Quantrill's Raiders and later rode with Jesse James.
Yeah without a doubt its the Civil War. But I see you forgot the American Rev. War and War of 1812 to. What about the Quasi War? :p. But CW was easily the bloodiest war with casualtys over 600,000 and a nation devastated with a war of attrition.
One of you guys was wondering about the spelling of a battle:


I think WW2 was. Although i dont know a loit about the CW. I thought that the reason was that there were more American casualties that died in the Civil War than in any other war. I thought WW2 would be because you have: America :D 8) :biggun:
Britain :)
France............."Resistance" :roll:
Germany :x
Italy :x
Canada :roll:
Russia :)
Japan :x
I Dont know if there is more but...
I would think that WW2 would have the most casualties.Hmmmm. Maybe im wrong. Correct me if im wrong. :)
Most casualties? I thin you're probably right. The eastern front was a casualty-making-machine. Anyone know the numbers (million+ right?)?

And while you're at it factor in the Jews ect.
FutureRANGER said:
Most casualties? I thin you're probably right. The eastern front was a casualty-making-machine. Anyone know the numbers (million+ right?)

Numbers vary with 7.7 civilian casualties, 13.6 Million military casualties with a total of 20+ millions casualties is what most people suggest.

German casualties are around 3.8 million civilian, 3.2 million military casualties.
Hungary: 280,000 civilian, 120,000 military
Italy: 330,000 military (most in north africa and italian campaigns.)
Rumania: 465,000 civilian, 200,000 military
Finland: minimal civilian (someone from Finland may have more info on the civilian casualties.), 90,000 military

But the sources vary and the true number will never be known.
Just for a fun fact. The Union had about 20 million soldiers in its army, while the South had 10 million in its army. Oh ya! 6 of that 10 million were slaves which would never be used in battle really. So when you think about it, if the South had had more industry they could of won the war. When the Civil War started, the South had ONE artillery factory that could produce cannons. Trains were not as normal as they were in the north. Only thing the South had that the Union didnt was more supplies.
yea ACW, and Sharpsburg(hehe you can tell I am from Louisiana) was the bloodiest battle. 23k soldiers were killed or wounded compared to something like 1,100 killed and nearly 2,300 wounded at Tarawa
If we're still talking about American Wars the clearly with over 600,000 casualties, the Civil War was the bloodiest.

As for battles, that's a tougher one. Tarawa (WWII) has been mentioned. In it, 4,500 Japanese were killed (only 20 were left alive), 3,000 U.S. Marines were killed or wounded in 4 days of fighting.

In comparison, the Civil War's costliest battles were:
1. Gettysburg - 51,112 (23,049 Union and 28,063 Confederate)
2. Chickamauga - 34,624 (16,170 Union and 18,454 Confederate)
3. Chacellorsville - 30,099 (17,278 Union and 12,821 Confederate)
4. Spotsylvania - 27,399 (18,399 Union and 9,000 Confederate)
5. Antietam - 26,134 (12,410 Union and 13,724 Confederate)
These are followed in order by The Wilderness, Second Manassas, Stone's River, Shiloh, and Fort Donelson. Sorry but Sharpsburg didn't make the top 10 although you're right there were a staggering 23,100 casualties.

See http://www.civilwarhome.com/Battles.htm for more details.
Wow, Top, numbers like that are hard to even comprehend. Each one of those battles killed more people than live in my entire county.
Yes, I agree those seem like incredible numbers. I don't know if you have ever had the opportunity to walk through any of these battlefields. If not, you should put them on your list of things to do. They are truly solemn and stirring places to walk. If you do get the chance to go to at least one, bone up on exactly what happened in that particular place before you go. You can then virtually walk in the footsteps of those fallen soldiers and you will be moved by the very concept of the carnage and courage that took place right where you are standing.
I have had that privilege, the most moving one was Fredericksburg and walking around the slaughterhouse below the Sunken Road on Marie's Heights. It's amazing to me that 12,600 Union and 5,000 Confederate soldiers died or were wounded in that little cramped space a couple hundred yards wide. Standing up on the Heights, you can see just how suicidal a direct assault would be. What I have always found most moving about historic battlefields are the stories of individuals in the battle (in this case, CSA Sgt Richard Kirkland, so-called "Angel of Fredericksburg").

On a side note, I actually found two Minnie balls there near the stone wall.
an enteresting fact about WWII. Very few Japanese soldiars ever surrendered, forcing the GIs to slaughter them to win an island
i know, the japs fought as if all hell was burning at their back door(which probably was) but then again, the russians used their dead comrades to climb over the german lines during WWII.