Option A: Wrong
This statement reeks of repetition because it doesn't offer enough explanation as to the aim of the original statements which seeks to be represented in a more logical way though still retaining its meaning.

Option B: Wrong
This is a futuristic statement. It shows that the writer envisages a case of what was going to happen in a similar manner relative to what has happened in time past.

Option C: Wrong
This is expressive in every sense but lacks the modernity a sentence needs to thrive more logically and less verbose with regards to the use of "than". A much similar comparative tense agreement could have been better fitting here.

Option D: Wrong
The statement here does not state in actual terms the agreement between the major players in the sentence. The use of "than" makes the rather been explanatory without limitation, more of comparisons.

Option E: Right
This appear to be the most correct and appropriate fitting of all the options. Brief, concise, accurate and less verbose. It seeks to to explain that twice as many lives were killed in the world war I as with what happened in War II.