Allied war crimes during World War II
Printed From: History Community ~ All Empires
Category: General History
Forum Name: Military History
Forum Discription: Discussions related to military history: generals, battles, campaigns, etc.
URL: http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=33216
Printed Date: 16-Apr-2024 at 08:13
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 9.56a - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Allied war crimes during World War II
Posted By: Menumorut
Subject: Allied war crimes during World War II
Date Posted: 06-Feb-2013 at 01:41
|
This is a completion to Monsters in Uniform thread, this info being put in another thread because Allied war crimes were not such terrible (except the Russian ones) to be posted on that thread, and to not have the aspect of a competition.
It is claimed that the Allied countries did not engage in mass terror or commit genocide, in spite of the fire bombing of civilians in Dresden, Tokyo and other German and Japanese towns and cities, plus the use of atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The military of the Soviet Union also frequently committed war crimes, which are today known to have been at the direction of its government. These crimes included waging wars of aggression, mass murder of prisoners of war and repressing the population of conquered countries. Antony Beevor describes the rape of German women during the occupation of Germany as the "greatest phenomenon of mass rape in history", and has concluded that at least 1.4 million women were raped in East Prussia, Pomerania and Silesia alone. Russian and Polish women and girls liberated from concentration camps were also violated. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allied_war_crimes_during_World_War_II - Wikipedia -------------  |
Replies:
Posted By: Menumorut
Date Posted: 06-Feb-2013 at 01:52
|
Comparative death rates of POWs
Held by Axis powers -U.S. and British Commonwealth POWs held by Germany: 4% -Soviet POWs held by Germany: 57.5% -Western Allied POWs held by Japan: 27% Held by the Allies -German POWs in East European (not including the Soviet Union) hands 32.9% -German soldiers held by Soviet Union: 15–33% -Japanese POWs held by Soviet Union: 10%[citation needed] -German POWs in British hands 0.03% -German POWs in American hands 0.15% -German POWs in French hands 2.58% http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allied_war_crimes_during_World_War_II - Wikipedia ------------- |
Posted By: Menumorut
Date Posted: 06-Feb-2013 at 02:01
|
Bombing of Dresden
The British, like all participant nations, carried out air raids against enemy cities during World War II, including the bombing of Dresden, which killed over 25,000 people. While "no agreement, treaty, convention or any other instrument governing the protection of the civilian population or civilian property" from aerial attack was adopted before the war, the Hague Conventions did prohibit the bombardment of undefended cities. Allied forces inquiry concluded that an air attack on the German city of Dresden was militarily justified on the grounds the city was defended. This city was filled with refugees fleeing the oncoming Red Army. It has been widely believed that the bombing was to showcase to the Red Army the "bombing capability" of the British and of the Americans. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_Dresden_in_World_War_II - Wikipedia Changing opinions According to an article in Der Spiegel by Klaus Wiegrefe, many personal memoirs of Allied soldiers have been willfully ignored by historians until now because they were at odds with the "Greatest Generation" mythology surrounding World War II. However, this has recently started to change, with books such as "The Day of Battle", by Rick Atkinson, where he describes Allied war crimes in Italy, and "D-Day: The Battle for Normandy," by Antony Beevor. Beevor's latest work is currently discussed by scholars, and should some of them be proven right, it suggests that Allied war crimes in Normandy were much more extensive "than was previously realized". American rapes A study by Robert J. Lilly estimates that a total of 14,000 civilian women in England, France and Germany were raped by American GIs during World War II.[39][40] It is estimated that there were around 3,500 rapes by American servicemen in France between June 1944 and the end of the war and one historian has claimed that sexual violence against women in liberated France was common. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_war_crimes#World_War_II - Wikipedia ------------- |
Posted By: Menumorut
Date Posted: 06-Feb-2013 at 02:17
|
Conventional air raids on Japan
Allied forces conducted many (conventional) air raids on Japan during World War II, causing extensive destruction to the country's cities and killing anywhere from 241,000 to 900,000 people. In addition to the loss of life, the raids caused extensive damage to Japan's cities and contributed to a large decline in industrial production. The USSBS (United States Strategic Bombing Survey) concluded that the effects of strategic bombing and blockade would have forced Japan to surrender by the end of 1945 even if atomic bombs had not been used and the Soviet Union had remained neutral. Historian E. Bartlett Kerr supports this assessment, and argues that the firebombing of Japan's major cities was the key factor motivating Hirohito's decision to end the war. Firebombing is a bombing technique designed to damage a target, generally an urban area, through the use of fire, caused by incendiary devices, rather than from the blast effect of large bombs. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_raids_on_Japan - Wikipedia Atomic bombings on Japan Following a firebombing campaign that destroyed many Japanese cities, the Allies prepared for a costly invasion of Japan. Within the first two to four months of the bombings, the acute effects killed 90,000–166,000 people in Hiroshima and 60,000–80,000 in Nagasaki, with roughly half of the deaths in each city occurring on the first day. 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_bombings_of_Hiroshima_and_Nagasaki#Debate_over_bombings - Wikipedia ------------- |
Posted By: TheAlaniDragonRising
Date Posted: 06-Feb-2013 at 13:20
|
Was there aspects of what the allies carried out that could be considered to be terrorist, without a doubt. The bombing of Dresden for example may well be considered as being retribution for bringing large scale destruction to towns and cities in Britain in a terrorising manner, but retribution doesn't take away an act from being terrorist in its make-up. What makes Dresden particularly sinister though is the insistence that it was an act aimed at destroying military important targets, when it has been plainly noted how a large number of such targets ended up not being targeted at all. Did the allies commit genocide though? I'm not too sure that the definition would agree that they did. ------------- What a handsome figure of a dragon. No wonder I fall madly in love with the Alani Dragon now, the avatar, it's a gorgeous dragon picture. |
Posted By: Menumorut
Date Posted: 06-Feb-2013 at 14:49
|
The http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katyn_Massacre - Katyn Massacre is considered by Poles genocide, but this classification is rejected by Russians (Russians intented to exterminate all Polish military officers, 22,000 being killed).
Also NKVD massacrated tens of thousands to over 100,000 war prisoners, peasants and other people in Ukraine, arrested roughly 500,000 Poles (many will be tortured and killed) in the part of Poland under Soviet rule between 1939-1945 (the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molotov%E2%80%93Ribbentrop_Pact - Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact from 1939 between nazi Germany and Sovietics shared Poland and other countries among their spheres of domination) Similar massacraes happened in other countries annexed by Soviets durintg the war. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NKVD_prisoner_massacres - NKVD prisoner massacres In Romania, Russians killed or deported http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bukovina#Second_World_War - over 50,000 Romanians from Bukovina and perhaps smaller numbers in Bessarabia (former Romanian provinces). Also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expulsion_of_Germans_from_Romania_after_World_War_II - 75,000 Germans living in Romania were deported in Soviet Union, for the only guilt of being Germans (including children and old people). Thousands died there before being repatriated. These can't be classified as genocides anyway, except the extermination of Polish militaries perhaps. ------------- |
Posted By: Mountain Man
Date Posted: 06-Feb-2013 at 15:21
|
Bombings carried out during war time were not done so with the objective of eliminating the enemy as a race - therefore, they are not "genocide". While you mention Allied rapes, you fail to mention two key elements: 1. The Allied soldiers were tried and punished. 2. Rape was not a weapon in the Allied inventory as it was in both the German and Japanese militaries. ------------- Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? |
Posted By: Nick1986
Date Posted: 06-Feb-2013 at 15:34
|
I don't consider Hiroshima or the bombing raids over Germany a war crime. Remember, it was the Nazis and Japanese who started the war and inflicted countless cruelties on the Slavs and Chinese ------------- Me Grimlock not nice Dino! Me bash brains! |
Posted By: Mountain Man
Date Posted: 06-Feb-2013 at 17:14
And the Koreans... ------------- Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? |
Posted By: TheAlaniDragonRising
Date Posted: 06-Feb-2013 at 17:50
------------- What a handsome figure of a dragon. No wonder I fall madly in love with the Alani Dragon now, the avatar, it's a gorgeous dragon picture. |
Posted By: Menumorut
Date Posted: 06-Feb-2013 at 23:59
If you refer to US, British and French rapists, I don't think all have been punished, maybe even not the majority, and the punishments I doubt were as heavy as the crimes they committed. And this is not only history, even today US soldiers committing crimes are not punished as they deserve, I can give you examples, including from Romania where are stationed US troops. Anyway, if you refer to Russian soldiers, who carried out the greatest rape in history during WW2, even less were punihsed, and even Stalin endorsed it. Up to two million German (also Polish, Romanian, even Russian) women have been raped, many of them several times and by large number of soldiers. In many cases women were the victims of repeated rapes, some as many as 60 to 70 times. At least 100,000 women are believed to have been raped in Berlin, based on surging abortion rates in the following months and contemporary hospital reports, with an estimated 10,000 women dying in the aftermath. Female deaths in connection with the rapes in Germany, overall, are estimated at 240,000. Antony Beevor describes it as the "greatest phenomenon of mass rape in history", and has concluded that at least 1.4 million women were raped in East Prussia, Pomerania and Silesia alone. Stalin is alleged to have said that people should ' understand it if a soldier who has crossed thousands of kilometres through blood and fire and death has fun with a woman or takes some trifle'. On another occasion, when told that Red Army soldiers sexually maltreated German refugees, he said: 'We lecture our soldiers too much; let them have their initiative. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_during_the_occupation_of_Germany - Rape during the occupation of Germany - Wikipedia Read also these articles on http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2002/may/01/news.features11 - Guardian.co.uk http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=106687768 - NPR.org 
http://pictureshistory.blogspot.ro/2009/10/rape-of-german-women-after-germany-lost.html - pictureshistory.blogspot.com 
http://historyimages.blogspot.ro/2011/10/mass-rape-of-german-women-when-germany.html - historyimages.blogspot.com [tube]dQWv9KpDWEg[/tube] About Poland rape victims: According to Ostrowska & Zaremba; whether the number of purely Polish victims could have reached or even exceeded 100,000 is only a matter of guessing. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_during_the_liberation_of_Poland - Rape during the liberation of Poland - Wikipedia
Morally and legally, others' cruelty doesn't justify your cruelty. The Tokyo District Court, while denying a case for damages, stated: ... (b) that the dropping of atomic bombs as an act of hostilities was illegal under the rules of positive international law (taking both treaty law and customary law into consideration) then in force... (c) that the dropping of atomic bombs also constituted a wrongful act on the plane of municipal law, ascribable to the United States and its President, Mr. Harry S. Truman; ...The aerial bombardment with atomic bombs of the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was an illegal act of hostilities according to the rules of international law. It must be regarded as indiscriminate aerial bombardment of undefended cities, even if it were directed at military objectives only, inasmuch as it resulted in damage comparable to that caused by indiscriminate bombardment. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_bombings_of_Hiroshima_and_Nagasaki#Debate_over_bombings - Wkikipedia ------------- |
Posted By: Nick1986
Date Posted: 07-Feb-2013 at 07:58
The Germans were also the first to bomb civilians: first Guernica, then the London Blitz and destruction of Coventry ------------- Me Grimlock not nice Dino! Me bash brains! |
Posted By: Azita
Date Posted: 07-Feb-2013 at 10:37
I know you don't like to be disagreed with, but i have say that very very few American/ commonwealth troops were tried, even less were punished. Patton ordered his troops not to take prisoners. And tried to cover up massacres. some research points:- Colonel McCaffrey. Biscari massacre. Bob Lillys book "Taken by force" Not just the German/Italians that US troops "abused":- Us troops committed 26 murders, 31 manslaughters, 22 attempted murders and more than 400 sexual offences, including 126 rapes in England, during 1942-45. The french troops committed appalling crimes in Italy, I have not found one instances of a French soldier being convicted of a crime. Azita ------------- I did never know so full a voice issue from so empty a heart: but the saying is true 'The empty vessel makes the greatest sound'. |
Posted By: lirelou
Date Posted: 07-Feb-2013 at 19:59
|
Hmm, a Tokyo District Court, one presumes the lowest level of court, since there is an appellate court above this, and one presumes, an even higher court over the appellate equivalent to the U.S. Supreme Court. Anyway, a Tokyo District Court found on 7 December 1963, 21 years to the day that Japan launched the war, that dropping Atomic bombs was illegal. I am shocked, I tell you. Shocked. That is known as obiter dicta, i.e. a mere aside of the Court. If it had become the law of the land, then surely there would be a higher court opinion on the matter. As for the rest of what is on this thread, I guess the victors owe the losers, and that includes Romania, an Ally of Nazi Germany's, an apology? Listen, if international law meant anything, your nations would not have launched that war to begin with. But you did, and you lost. Yes, not all Allied soldiers were heroes, and some misbehaved. You might want to remember that next time. Cherry pick your arguments all you want to. The great majority of Americans will continue to view Hiroshima and Nagasaki as having shortened the war, thereby saving more lives in the long run. That same majority of Americans will remember Japan for the rape of Nanking, and Germany for having started the bombing of civilian centers, and for the Death Camps. Oh, on French crimes in Italy. I believe if you check, the majority of French troops in Italy were North African Muslims. Surely they have statistics. They were a part of Mark Clark's Vth Army. ------------- Phong trần mài một lưỡi gươm, Những loài giá áo túi cơm sá gì |
Posted By: Menumorut
Date Posted: 07-Feb-2013 at 22:20
|
Is just lesser known info, don't be upset.
Romania was drawn in war on both sides, first on axis, then on Allied side because of the situation, being caught between nazi Germany and soviet union and because help asked from UK and France was ignored (before the occupation of France). You find http://www.city-data.com/forum/13545898-post6.html - here an explanation of the political situation that lead to allying with Germany, it was not the will of the people or the leadership, they chose what they thought is the less bad. Romania and Romanians were never pro-German during WW1 or WW2, in fact they were and are pro-British and French all the time during the war and afterward. Ofcourse, Romania and Romanians could and should have opposed Germany, it was an opportunistic movement to ally them, but neither the population or the leadership had any sympathy for Germany, which established the annexation of Northern Transylvania by Hungary and approved soviet annexation of Bessarabia and Bukovina (within the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact). Also after the royal coup on 23rd August 1944, Romania proclamed loyalty to Allies, declared war to Germany and fought on western front, its contribution shortening the WW2 with some months and saving of hundreds of thousands of lives (although 167,000 Romanian soldiers were killed, wounded or went missing on this front alone). The result? Romania was not acknowledged as a co-belligerent nation by Allies. ------------- |
Posted By: Nick1986
Date Posted: 08-Feb-2013 at 08:41
The bombing of the Nazis and Japanese wasn't cruelty: it was vital to bring about a swift end to the war. How many more of our soldiers and civilians would have died in a prolonged war if we hadn't damaged Germany's infrastructure? You can blow up a German factory and it will be up and running again in a few weeks, but if you kill their workers it will take 20 years to replace them. The atom bomb changed the Japanese for the better: from militarist aggressors to peace-loving people. If you want to feel sorry for someone, think of all the Jewish and Slavic women and children murdered in the Holocaust ------------- Me Grimlock not nice Dino! Me bash brains! |
Posted By: Mountain Man
Date Posted: 08-Feb-2013 at 14:25
Let me rephrase, then, saying that for the Allies, rape by a soldier was a crime that was punishable, unlike the militaries of the Soviets, the Germans and the Japanese. Your numbers prove that the sheer magnitude of the problem for other militaries was not even remotely approached by the Allies. Were they all punished? Of course not. In war, a great deal goes unnoticed and unreported, but those cases that were reported were investigated, and often punished. The purpose of this thread has so far been to cast the Allies in the same horrific light as the Soviets and the Axis powers, and that simply isn't possible. "The French committed appalling crimes in Italy"? Anything even remotely like the treatment of the Ethiopians by the Italians? Once again, the track record of the Axis military powers cannot be matched by anyone else except the Soviets. ------------- Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? |
Posted By: Azita
Date Posted: 08-Feb-2013 at 14:55
|
Phew!! as long as the US troops weren't as bad as the Germans or soviets, its all ok. cognitive dissonance at its worst. I suppose the Rhine meadow camps were not as bad as the Nazi concentration camps, so they were ok as well. FWIW i have not said that the US/commonwealth troops were as evil as the axis, so there really was no need for you to justify the crimes they did commit. ------------- I did never know so full a voice issue from so empty a heart: but the saying is true 'The empty vessel makes the greatest sound'. |
Posted By: Menumorut
Date Posted: 08-Feb-2013 at 15:06
Like Germans, Romanians etc, but not on the same scale, the Allies commited war crimes, this is the idea of this thread. The sooner people from former Allied nations renounce the idea of an immaculate Allied behaviour in WW2, the better.
This sounds sinister, to not say else.
By both axis and Allied, remember. And if you want to be human, you should think in the same way for German, Romanian etc victims, that are no more quilty than British or other. ------------- |
Posted By: Nick1986
Date Posted: 09-Feb-2013 at 08:52
Harsh, but true. Bomber Harris knew this: to cripple a stronger enemy, you must ruin morale on the home front. It wasn't a war crime, but vital for hastening an end to the conflict as Germany was the aggressor and had already bombed innocent civilians in London, Liverpool, Birmingham, Hull, and Coventry. Ideally, the US should have handed over its atom bombs to the UN when the Nazis and Japs were defeated to prevent the Cold War (or another world war) from ever happening again ------------- Me Grimlock not nice Dino! Me bash brains! |
Posted By: Mountain Man
Date Posted: 09-Feb-2013 at 11:57
Like Germans, Romanians etc, but not on the same scale, the Allies commited war crimes, this is the idea of this thread. The sooner people from former Allied nations renounce the idea of an immaculate Allied behaviour in WW2, the better. [/QUOTE] The better for whom? Sounds like a threat. No one denies that there were crimes; however, they were on a small scale and not officially condoned as they were by other nations, nor were they national military policy. It's sounds like you have a need to tar everyone with the same brush in order to feel better about your own history. ------------- Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? |
Posted By: Menumorut
Date Posted: 09-Feb-2013 at 12:21
|
Better for them, is not a threat. Illusions always come against you.
I feel sorry for few parts of Romanian history, especially the Jewish-Roma genocide and the alliance with Hitler. I don't yet feel sorry for the Romanian armies attacking Russia beyond the Romanian borders, as Russians up to this day didn't apologize for their injustices and crimes against Romanians: the theft of Bessarabia and Bukovina, the murder and deportations of millions of Bessarabian and Bukovinian Romanians. I wished to see at least a simple Russian expressing regret for these decisions of their leaders, but it seems their people support their historical actions and present attitude. Also, a digress: Russia still keeps the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romanian_Treasure - Romanian Treasure , which was sent to Moscow in 1916 and never seen since then. ------------- |
Posted By: Azita
Date Posted: 09-Feb-2013 at 12:40
Is that really fair? A personal attack? I know that it is distasteful for you to read about "unpleasant" incidents in your nations history. Americans really do dislike this, they have such a high level of cognitive dissonance. The need to justify actions by the usual" you were worse than us" or "you did it first" does not address the issues in question. Do you deny that these incidents took place? Azita ------------- I did never know so full a voice issue from so empty a heart: but the saying is true 'The empty vessel makes the greatest sound'. |
Posted By: Nick1986
Date Posted: 09-Feb-2013 at 13:21
|
Azita, I don't think Mountainman meant it as a personal attack. If you wish to make a complaint, please respect the rules and send a private message to the admins: http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=6512&PID=681123#681123 - http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=6512&PID=681123#681123 ------------- Me Grimlock not nice Dino! Me bash brains! |
Posted By: lirelou
Date Posted: 09-Feb-2013 at 13:27
|
I certainly don't see Mountain Man's comment as a personal attack. But his point is well taken. Is this a thread about Allied War Crimes, or is it really a thread that means to say: See, you were no better than the Nazis or the Soviets. All the arguments so far smack of: "No matter what you say, your were as bad or worse then they were." We beg to differ. ------------- Phong trần mài một lưỡi gươm, Những loài giá áo túi cơm sá gì |
Posted By: Menumorut
Date Posted: 09-Feb-2013 at 14:39
|
What's this nonsense? Who said Allies were as worse as axis countries? Ofcourse are not, the difference is immense.
But these small crimes of Western powers and the huge crimes of the Soviet army are little if not at all aknowledged outside the circle of history scholars. Popular culture is a good indicator for this. In movies taking place during WW2 for example, Allies rarely are bad or unjust. They always are presented positively, heroically. this is sort of a myth. ------------- |
Posted By: lirelou
Date Posted: 09-Feb-2013 at 15:53
|
Menumorut: In re your: " But these small crimes of Western powers and the huge crimes of the Soviet army are little if not at all aknowledged outside the circle of history scholars." Yes, and who else but those interested n history nearly 70 years after the war ended would be interested? How can we expect this to be the subject of dailyconversation? Also, in re this: "Popular culture is a good indicator for this. In movies taking place during WW2 for example, Allies rarely are bad or unjust. They always are presented positively, heroically. this is sort of a myth." Did you see "Saving Private Ryan?" If you had, you'd have seen what amounted to atrocities. The killing of surrendered German prisoners. So, not "always". Now yes, they are (almost) always presented positively and heroically. Of course! And given the sacrifices they made to win that war, why does that not surprise? Yet Kurt Vonnegut's "Catch 22" was outside the paradigm, and it was still a best seller and a popular movie. But that too is ancient history now, and just a blip on the popular cultural radar. ------------- Phong trần mài một lưỡi gươm, Những loài giá áo túi cơm sá gì |
Posted By: Azita
Date Posted: 09-Feb-2013 at 16:23
So the volume of these crimes the deciding factor with you. BTW the soviets WERE UK/USA allies. So were the "allies" as bad as the Nazis, yes they were. (However much of Stalin's evil was committed before he became a US/UK Allie) were the US/UK forces as bad as the Nazis, No they were not. BUT only down to the volume of the offences So i will change my statement:- The Western allies did not Rape/murder/loot in the same volume as their Soviet allies or the Nazis. ------------- I did never know so full a voice issue from so empty a heart: but the saying is true 'The empty vessel makes the greatest sound'. |
Posted By: Mountain Man
Date Posted: 09-Feb-2013 at 18:45
You "know" what, exactly? You have no idea how I think or feel about things, particularly since I grew up in post-war Germany and Austria. I saw my first death camp at age five. How about you? And what is this constant accusation that Americans are guilty of "cognitive dissonance"? It's a catchy little buzz-phrase, but meaningless in this context unless you are actually prepared to prove that 300 million Americans suffer from a specific form of cognitive dysfunction. THIS is the actual meaning of "cognitive dissonance: The term cognitive dissonance is used to describe the feeling of discomfort that results from holding two conflicting beliefs. When there is a discrepancy between beliefs and behaviors, something must change in order to eliminate or reduce the dissonance. As you can see from the actual definition, I'm not suffering from "cognitive dissonance" at all, since my beliefs are matched by historical reality, and there is no "behavior" issue involved whatsoever. What is clear here that some people have a deep need to make everyone guilty of the same level of barbarity as the Germans and the Soviets, and unfortunately for that need, history says it didn't happen that way. As an American, I am aware that we have treated our Indians, our Japanese-American citizens, our blacks and our Chinese laborers far worse than we ever treated anyone else, but we did not build death camps, nor did we starve and brutalize POW's to death, nor did we practice rape as a weapon against civilian populations. We did, however, punish our own soldiers when we found them doing those things, and that will forever remain the critical difference between us and other nations. Did incidents take place involving American troops? Yes. Were the levels of incidents or atrocities even remotely on a par with those committed by the Germans, the Japanese and the Soviets? No. That's historical reality, and this forum is all about actual history. ------------- Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? |
Posted By: Azita
Date Posted: 09-Feb-2013 at 21:18
|
and in such nice bold type, you even used italics as well.............. ------------- I did never know so full a voice issue from so empty a heart: but the saying is true 'The empty vessel makes the greatest sound'. |
Posted By: lirelou
Date Posted: 09-Feb-2013 at 21:25
|
Azita, to your last, you need to add the bolded text: "The Western allies did not Rape/murder/loot in the same volume as their Soviet allies or the Nazis", standards of conduct were promulgated for all their troops, those standards were included in training of U.S. personnel, and good faith efforts were made to punish violations in a timely manner within the means of the commands to do so. Remember, the allies included Nationalist China, Belgium, Norway, Denmark, the Netherlands, France, the United Kingdom and Commonwealth Nations, Mexico (provided one Fighter Squadron), the Commonwealth of the Philippines,and of course, the United States. ------------- Phong trần mài một lưỡi gươm, Những loài giá áo túi cơm sá gì |
Posted By: Azita
Date Posted: 09-Feb-2013 at 23:07
Why do i need to? ------------- I did never know so full a voice issue from so empty a heart: but the saying is true 'The empty vessel makes the greatest sound'. |
Posted By: Mountain Man
Date Posted: 10-Feb-2013 at 00:35
I do that to make it easier for readers to differentiate the quote from the response. Glad you like it. ------------- Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? |
Posted By: Centrix Vigilis
Date Posted: 10-Feb-2013 at 01:03
 /also sprach Chamberlain. It remains intensely amusing to me, yet to this date; that the liberal leftist American or socialist European appeasement approach remains not only in vogue but still key to their very thinking processes. As it regards national security and or ongoing mil ops past and present. Nick...tsk tsk....had that grievous error been prepared; ALL of Western Europe would still be Sov satellites. And you would be speaking Russian....by 47....praising Stalin-Lenin-et al. Because if you actually believe the Soviets would have stopped their research and subsequent production of nuc weapons...your down the rabbit hole with Alice. And we aint talking my girlfriend your pup. Not only would they not have done it. They would have been in position to blackmail every nation on the planet to cooperate with their agenda. and The atrocities being discussed and subsequent would have been worse then they were. As for whether the level of atrocity 'A' rises to the level of atrocity 'B' commited by whomever; remains subject. Not only is it impractical but, imo, to a degree, unrealistic to do other then at best, objectively compare and contrast. Given the differences in developing culture and sociological context. And the adoption of laws that did not even exist in human culture until 5000 years after the first were probably committed by 'x' nation state-clan-group vs. 'y'. All of them were done. Whether you view it as a negative necessity or collateral damage and consequence of war is an individual prerogative. All of them were evil. But that's hindsight and hidesight and a comparative analysis, based on qualifiers the other side might not give a shit about, to decide which is worse. Still remains subjective as much as objective. And for all those that didn't understand that? Return to class... and learn the historical method before you let nationalistic defensive passions, because your side lost, f**k up your objectivity. Because at that point your not a historian. Merely a fanatic attempting justification of an agenda. And for that....see this. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zU9lv_WqK6k&feature=related - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zU9lv_WqK6k&feature=related ------------- "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" S. T. Friedman Pilger's law: 'If it's been officially denied, then it's probably true' |
Posted By: Azita
Date Posted: 10-Feb-2013 at 10:02
|
So lets expand this discussion to the Rhine meadow (Rheinberg) camps and German DEF:- Just some points, with no moral discussion yet. First i want to make this clear we have James Bacque book, which is discredited.. But Stephen Ambrose says on the subject “terrible things happened at the end of the war.” Niall Ferguson - “the mortality rate for German POW's in U.S. hands was more than 4 times higher than the rate for those who surrendered to the British", 'We had so much food we didn’t know what to do with it.' – Colonel Henry Settle, 106th division “The silence about this atrocity has pained me for forty-five years”- Martin Brech, formet US soldier. US Senator http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenneth_S._Wherry - complained about “the thousands upon thousands of tons of rations spoiling amid a starving population”. In 1969, General http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonard_D._Heaton - The prisoners lived through the winter in tents and slept on the bare ground under one blanket each. They say they are underfed and beaten and kicked by guards. Many have no underclothes or boots." ; Chicago Tribune Press Service 19 /5/46 Another Red Cross report stated:- “The 472,526 remaining slaves had already been described by correspondents as; "a beggar army of pale, thin men clad in vermin infested tatters." All were pronounced unfit for work, three quarters of them due to deliberate starvation. ( I must confess to some shock at the word “slave”) US General http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucius_D._Clay - Eisenhower said in 1944 "God, I hate Germans! Why? Because the German is a beast!" This was interesting. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=atMufGPkO-8
------------- I did never know so full a voice issue from so empty a heart: but the saying is true 'The empty vessel makes the greatest sound'. |
Posted By: Menumorut
Date Posted: 10-Feb-2013 at 15:06
To be honest,I don't know what historical method is, I'm a specialist in history, just an amateur. I tried to present some facts as objectively as possible. In the moral aspect of the problem, I think all human beings should be treated with equal respect and helped even if they hurted us. Is a principle derived from the Christian morals of nonviolence and love (I don't consider myself Christian and don't believe in the historicity of most of Bible, but I consider the core Christian principles as divine laws). ------------- |
Posted By: lirelou
Date Posted: 10-Feb-2013 at 16:15
|
" “The 472,526 remaining
slaves had already been described by correspondents as; "a beggar army of pale,
thin men clad in vermin infested tatters." All were pronounced unfit for
work, three quarters of them due to deliberate starvation." The Triumph of Reason: A thinking man's guide to Adolph Hitler “Here then is a rare opportunity to examine the authentic
first-hand expressions uttered by the German Leader who won the hearts and
minds of hundreds of millions of Europeans. These extracts have so far been
undemocratically denied by the so-called 'champions of free speech.' You may
agree or disagree with the Fuhrer's account of unfolding events, his hopes and
his fears. But the liberating experience will elevate your freedom of thought
and make you less of a manipulated puppet. You will stand taller and be a
better human being as a consequence. -- Michael Walsh” The Battle for Europe "...The most fascinating aspect of this compilation is the
revelation that much of the victor's account of events is bunkum. The Battle
for Europe unravels the victors' propaganda casts a new perspective on the
great European tragedy of 1939 -1945. Contained in this work are insights and
revelations you will not find anywhere else, dealing with the true origins of
the conflict, Allied atrocities and cover-ups." Don't bother to reply. That says all I need to know about where you're coming from. ------------- Phong trần mài một lưỡi gươm, Những loài giá áo túi cơm sá gì |
Posted By: Mountain Man
Date Posted: 10-Feb-2013 at 16:51
------------- Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? |
Posted By: Centrix Vigilis
Date Posted: 10-Feb-2013 at 17:50
Yes I know that. Ntl.....it will serve you well even an as an amateur. To not only learn what it is but to practice it's principals. Why? It will lend credibility to your theorems and presentation-debate in their defense. Perhaps I spoke quickly and it would appear that it was directed to you personally. It was not. My apologies if you thought it was. And I do believe you are attempting objectivity....and you have demonstrated it. However yours is a topic that is easily twisted and manipulated by others; for entirely different reasons and agendas hidden under the guise of participation. Consequently my advice; is to thoroughly ensure your intent, reference the discussion, is obvious. As for the moral conundrum? That's an entirely different conversation not to mention the legal one involved. Reference atrocities of war as defined in law that isn't even yet remotely historically as old as the issue being examined. Iow. remember your contextual era. Examine the question as it relates to the existing law and social and cultural experience in the time era in which the event/s occurred. And then, by comparing and contrasting it; to like events in the same era....you just might be able to objectively determine if the events were not only morally repugnant at the time. But, whether appropriate determinations and actions were made-taken to prohibit it's continued occurrences. or at the very least to curtail their occurence. But beware the pit trap of attempting to moralize an action of a military operation versus that of one in direct violation of well recognized international and national, civil and military law, without a thorough examination of the same. If you do this (and this is where the historical method proves it's value) you will find it's not only easier to identify an atrocity but easier to prove it as well. So far an interesting thread. My business obligations keep me busy at this time of year. Hence my limited particpation tied to personal reasons as well. But I'm here. And I will continue to moderate as necessary when I observe violations. And like Lire Lou I know where this is going.  So for those out there with ulterior motives that would attempt to ride this horse onto a different track? Which would would contstitute CoC violations that might include trolling and anti-nationalistic rhetoric, covert anti-semitism, etc. Do it and I'll put you on that famous bench. Bet. ------------- "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" S. T. Friedman Pilger's law: 'If it's been officially denied, then it's probably true' |
Posted By: Mountain Man
Date Posted: 10-Feb-2013 at 19:31
|
Fortunately, CV has figured out "where this is going", because I haven't. So far I haven't identified a specific argument beyond the originally post. Statement: The Allies also committed war crimes during WWII. Response: Yes, but not to the degree their enemies or Soviet Russia did, in defiance of established principles of military justice and the Hague Convention, and not as national policy. Rebuttal: Some incidents referred to, but nothing that matches the degree historically attributed to aforementioned culprits. Arguments/rebuttals beyond that: None that specifically rebutts anything so far, nor anything that advances the position of the original poster. Warning by moderator: So for those out there with ulterior motives that would attempt to ride this horse onto a different track? Which would would contstitute CoC violations that might include trolling and anti-nationalistic rhetoric, covert anti-semitism, etc.
Procedural query: Is insisting that the Allies were as bad as the enemy despite overwhelming historical evidence to the contrary "anti-nationalistic rhetoric" or "trolling"? As for "anti-Semitism", its existence in varying forms and to various degrees is a matter of historical record on the part of both Allies and Axis forces and governments, but not the specific focus of the OP; therefore, it is not germane to the discussion. It is interesting to note that social mores, prejudices and attitudes were entirely different during the Second World War among the populations of all of the major belligerents. For example, carpet bombing of civilian populations was considered a valid part of the all-out war against the enemy and their industrial capabilities. Would that be considered an accurate summation of the discussion to date, CV? Perhaps it might be helpful if the OP would clarify his intent so that the rest of us can stay on track? ------------- Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? |
Posted By: Menumorut
Date Posted: 10-Feb-2013 at 20:15
Later I've read something about historical method and found is nothing new to me, is about how to avoid misiterpretations, something I was aware of as result of quite a lot of historical scientific studies, polemics etc.
I heard this sort of argument so often from Muslims trying to defend Muhammad's action, especially sexual relations with a 9 yo child, that I formed a big reserve for this idea. I think is false, what we perceive as wrong was similarly perceived by precedent generations, being something harmful for some human beings. Btw, I don't see morals as something abstract, but as a practical way of protecting human beings' integrity and well-being.
You missuderstood me. I just tried to tell that German, Romanian victims of the war must be seen with the same compasion like Jews and others. None were worse than others. The adhesion of large masses to a criminal ideology didn't succeed because, say, Germans were genetically more evil than other nations. It was just a cultural context that lead to that mistake. Neither are today Germans worse than other nations. ------------- |
Posted By: Centrix Vigilis
Date Posted: 10-Feb-2013 at 22:15
------------- "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" S. T. Friedman Pilger's law: 'If it's been officially denied, then it's probably true' |
Posted By: Centrix Vigilis
Date Posted: 10-Feb-2013 at 22:38
------------- "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" S. T. Friedman Pilger's law: 'If it's been officially denied, then it's probably true' |
Posted By: Azita
Date Posted: 11-Feb-2013 at 08:06
|
lirelou & Mountain Man your passions are inflamed, I can understand that, it isn't easy to read such unpleasantness about ones countrymen, perhaps i should have used a softer approach. If i have been to harsh and you feel an apology is needed, you have it unreservedly. I cant say that i have ever heard of Michael Walsh, from what you show, he is not someone i would read. Do you think he might be using the Red cross report in an attempt to bring some truth to his writings? ....................................................................................................... What are your thoughts regarding these claims regarding the camps? Do you perhaps have counter evidence? Certainly the POW held in England were treated well, many many choose to stay. Why were the captured Germans reclassified as DEF and not POW, was that to circumvent the Geneva conventions? From memory ( i will take what ever correction is needed) the French used POW to clear mine fields, as in march over this field please............. German POW in England were used a "slave" labour and even built Wembley stadium. The French send thousands of POW of to the Soviet Union in the full knowledge it was a death sentence. Menumorut, might have an agenda as you like to say, but i cant see it. Seems acceptable to discuss German/ soviet/Japanese war crimes, but not American or British. If this topic is to sensitive for you I will desist, again Sorry, i should have been more considerate of your fragility regarding such issues. Azita PS: if you need to make a counter claim of War crimes with Menumorut, may i suggest you research the Odessa massacre. ------------- I did never know so full a voice issue from so empty a heart: but the saying is true 'The empty vessel makes the greatest sound'. |
Posted By: lirelou
Date Posted: 11-Feb-2013 at 12:40
|
Azita, in re your: "I cant say that i have ever heard of Michael Walsh, from what you show, he is not someone i would read." Well, Azita, here you go. Apparently you and he read the same sources: http://www.whale.to/b/walsh11.html ------------- Phong trần mài một lưỡi gươm, Những loài giá áo túi cơm sá gì |
Posted By: Azita
Date Posted: 11-Feb-2013 at 13:04
|
Wont bother, but thank you anyway. What are your thoughts about the Camps? Why do you think Ike classified them as DEF? Have you managed to look up any of the pictorial evidence and personal accounts of the camps? ------------- I did never know so full a voice issue from so empty a heart: but the saying is true 'The empty vessel makes the greatest sound'. |
Posted By: Nick1986
Date Posted: 11-Feb-2013 at 17:32
It's disgraceful comparing the Nazis' slave labour with POWs being put to work by the British. The captured Nazis were the ones who did the damage to Britain's cities in the first place. ------------- Me Grimlock not nice Dino! Me bash brains! |
Posted By: Mountain Man
Date Posted: 11-Feb-2013 at 21:24
|
The topic isn't "sensitive", but your approach is offensive to me - coming from a military family that has served with honor and distinction since the Civil War - so I will accept your offer to cease and desist. Thank you for your understanding. ------------- Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? |
Posted By: Azita
Date Posted: 12-Feb-2013 at 11:15
|
Nick, not sure i actually "compared" the two , merely stated the fact, even using the term slave in quotation marks. Am i in error regarding German forced labour building Wembley? I suspect they were rather better fed and housed than those in German camps.............. Also would all those Germans have been Nazis, Guilty of Bombing Britain? Anyway moving on. How do members feel the about the killing of Germans at Dachau, there is as im sure you will know, pictorial evidence of this. Again can i state:-
I think some might have missed that comment before, so I restate it. Question, If it were YOU, after years of desensitising war, that game across this scene, what would you have done to those that ran this camp, inflicting such suffering? What would YOU do? Azita ------------- I did never know so full a voice issue from so empty a heart: but the saying is true 'The empty vessel makes the greatest sound'. |
Posted By: Nick1986
Date Posted: 12-Feb-2013 at 16:55
Of course these Nazis were responsible for the bombing of Britain. Many POWs in the early years of the War were Luftwaffe bomber crews. It wasn't slavery, but closer to the forced labor of convicts, intended to keep them too exhausted to cause trouble, and to punish them for their crimes. Killing Nazis at Dachau wasn't a war crime: they deserved to die for the brutality they inflicted on the Jewish prisoners. I always thought the Nuremberg trials were a pretentious waste of time: it would have been better to simply line the Nazis up against a wall and shoot them (as the Italian partisans did to Mussolini), or let their victims take revenge upon them ------------- Me Grimlock not nice Dino! Me bash brains! |
Posted By: lirelou
Date Posted: 12-Feb-2013 at 20:12
|
Mountain Man, the "facts" we're seeing here, polled from various web sites, have their origin in a book by a Canadian named James Becque. you can find a wiki article that outlines the challenges against it here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Other_Losses The bottom line is that no mainstream historian accepts the charges made by Becque. You can find a review by Stephen Ambrose himself here: http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/b/bacque-james/ambrose-001.html ------------- Phong trần mài một lưỡi gươm, Những loài giá áo túi cơm sá gì |
Posted By: Azita
Date Posted: 12-Feb-2013 at 20:33
Main stream historians? oh you mean like Stephen Ambrose or Niall Ferguson? (as quoted) perhaps American general Clay is also incorrect? as are the red cross. As i said i know its hard to think of your nation doing these things, but denial does not mean they didn't happen, Would it help if i post the pictures of the camps? Nick how many German bomber crew were held in England compared to infantry? were ALL Germans Nazis then?
err and what does the Geneva convention say about that?
quite right, just as the Nazis did to there victims........oh wait wasn't it a war crime when they did that.......?
------------- I did never know so full a voice issue from so empty a heart: but the saying is true 'The empty vessel makes the greatest sound'. |
Posted By: lirelou
Date Posted: 13-Feb-2013 at 10:45
|
In re: "Main stream historians? oh you mean like Stephen Ambrose or Niall Ferguson? (as quoted) perhaps American general Clay is also incorrect? as are the red cross. As i said i know its hard to think of your nation doing these things, but denial does not mean they didn't happen, Would it help if i post the pictures of the camps? Nick how many German bomber crew were held in England compared to infantry? were ALL Germans Nazis then?" Sorry, Azita, but your righteous indignation loses me. Whatever Ambrose's faults, no one has faulted the facts of his history. Rather they've faulted who published them first. And it wasn't just Ambrose, but a panel of known historians who've shredded Becque's "facts". Photographs provide no context. You can pick and choose photos like you can facts. Becque is grinding an ax, just as you are. I've actually known a few survivors of the German camps, just as I used to work with an American, born in Milwaulkee, who was captured at the end of the war while serving in the German Army (his parents had returned to Germany in '36). Henry spent some time as a POW, and ended up making a career n the American Army as a intelligence interrogator. I also served with a former German fallschirmjaeger who had jumped at Crete in '41, and another who had been a 17 year old kid soldier in the Waffen SS in 1945. They never spoke of their time in the camps, but both made careers in that same American Army. I also served at Fort Douglas, Utah for a few years, a former German POW camp from both WWI and WWII. They had a nice memorial to those POWs in their cemetery. Really, one of the nicest posts in the Army. You aren't really cherry-picking, you're just rehashing others' arguments that have serious flaws and attract the likes of David Duke. ------------- Phong trần mài một lưỡi gươm, Những loài giá áo túi cơm sá gì |
Posted By: Azita
Date Posted: 13-Feb-2013 at 11:14
|
How many times do i have to say that i agree that James Bacque is not accurate? Your final word is that the camps did NOT exist. Fine. Can you show where i have shown "righteous indignation" please? ------------- I did never know so full a voice issue from so empty a heart: but the saying is true 'The empty vessel makes the greatest sound'. |
Posted By: Nick1986
Date Posted: 13-Feb-2013 at 11:40
Did the Nazis follow the Geneva convention when they gassed Jews, raped Russian women, and massacred children in revenge for insurgent attacks? The British wouldn't have captured many German infantrymen until the North African campaign. Nazi prisoners were treated a lot better than they treated captured Poles and Russians ------------- Me Grimlock not nice Dino! Me bash brains! |
Posted By: Azita
Date Posted: 13-Feb-2013 at 12:13
|
So as the Nazis didn't follow the conventions, that justifys when the allies didn't? Again i ask were ALL Germans Nazis? Were all Germans guilty of war crimes and as such worthy of bad treatment? As the British didnt capture many German infantry until 1942, does that mean that German soldiers were NOT later put to work ( after the war) as forced labour to build Wembley?
Does that include those subjected to summary execution? ------------- I did never know so full a voice issue from so empty a heart: but the saying is true 'The empty vessel makes the greatest sound'. |
Posted By: Nick1986
Date Posted: 14-Feb-2013 at 08:58
Most Germans were indeed Nazis, or at least supported the regime. They were war criminals because they marched into Poland, bombed London and committed many other acts of aggression. It was perfectly acceptable to force captured German soldiers to build Wembley as they did much worse things to their own prisoners. Many Nazis who were summarily executed were SS men and as such deserved to die for the many atrocities they committed. ------------- Me Grimlock not nice Dino! Me bash brains! |
Posted By: Azita
Date Posted: 14-Feb-2013 at 09:59
Using the same standards. does that mean that UK/US troops that invaded Iraq in 2003 are also war criminals? ------------- I did never know so full a voice issue from so empty a heart: but the saying is true 'The empty vessel makes the greatest sound'. |
Posted By: Mountain Man
Date Posted: 14-Feb-2013 at 14:59
|
Originally posted by Azita: If this topic is to sensitive for
you I will desist. And yet here you are, still at it despite being asked to keep your word and stop. I repeat- I find your comments offensive and request that you honor your agreement to cease such posts. ------------- Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? |
Posted By: Azita
Date Posted: 14-Feb-2013 at 15:35
|
just answering others, if that is ok. I had agreed I would stop answering your posts, err , which im now doing....... I had tried to move on to other subjects, but the thread was dragged back to the Rhine meadow camps. BTW what exactly do you find offensive? The fact that US troops committed these acts or that i have mentioned them? If you have some, "shadows" in your past, then perhaps you would like to share, so we can better understand why you are getting so upset. Again, Why is it Ok to post about German/Japanese/soviet war crimes but NOT American? If you don't like a thread why read it? I would never normally use wikipedia as a reference, but it seems to be popular here, so:- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rheinwiesenlager Its much "milder" than other allegations, so shall we settle at that? Also:- http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8564401.stm Should settle the POW Wembley question. Nick, most Germans were not Nazis, at its height the NSDAP had 8.5 million members, during most of the war membership was 5-10% of the population (??) ------------- I did never know so full a voice issue from so empty a heart: but the saying is true 'The empty vessel makes the greatest sound'. |
Posted By: TheAlaniDragonRising
Date Posted: 14-Feb-2013 at 19:50
------------- What a handsome figure of a dragon. No wonder I fall madly in love with the Alani Dragon now, the avatar, it's a gorgeous dragon picture. |
Posted By: Azita
Date Posted: 14-Feb-2013 at 20:10
|
Oh? i did indicate i wasn't sure when i originally posted. from the BBC web page sited ( perhaps you didn't mange to read it) "The stadium authorities applied for German labour and are now employing 44 Germans out of a total of 123."" "their labour would be deployed on building construction and the road leading to Wembley's hallowed turf." "They are however, employing German Prisoners of War on the preparatory work." Are you nick picking to side step from the war crimes mentioned? but, sigh ok, no German POW were used in building Wembley stadium, the BBC have it all wrong. Thank you very much for this input, now, what are your thoughts on the Rhine meadow camps and the Dachau killings?
------------- I did never know so full a voice issue from so empty a heart: but the saying is true 'The empty vessel makes the greatest sound'. |
Posted By: TheAlaniDragonRising
Date Posted: 14-Feb-2013 at 22:58
Anyway, Azita, where were we, oh yes, the BBC. No, the BBC have it perfectly right. Wembley way is a part of the building construction, but not the stadium itself. The BBC has an audio of a documentry on BBC radio 4, and at the bottom of that BBC article you said you read has a link on BBC iplayer, and here is the link to it. http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio/player/b00rb1xr - http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio/player/b00rb1xr However I understand how people maybe not able to listen to it, so I have recorded a short section from it which explains all you need to know. [TUBE]-0unWP-DTqs&related[/TUBE]
------------- What a handsome figure of a dragon. No wonder I fall madly in love with the Alani Dragon now, the avatar, it's a gorgeous dragon picture. |
Posted By: Azita
Date Posted: 15-Feb-2013 at 05:30
|
so your point is simply that the German POW forced labour, did NOT build any part of the stadium itself, rather the road to it? is that right? Thats a very important difference indeed, vital to the fact that Britain used German POW as forced (slave) labour. Myself being an "adopted" Briton, this crucial difference has set my mind at rest. So to ask again, what are your thoughts on the Rhine meadow camps and the summary execution of German camp guards? ------------- I did never know so full a voice issue from so empty a heart: but the saying is true 'The empty vessel makes the greatest sound'. |
Posted By: Nick1986
Date Posted: 15-Feb-2013 at 08:05
|
Why does the execution of the SS men who guarded death camps bother you so much? They deserved to die for the years of abuse they inflicted on the Jews
------------- Me Grimlock not nice Dino! Me bash brains! |
Posted By: Azita
Date Posted: 15-Feb-2013 at 08:18
Now you see. i think that is why so many members get upset with me, they think they can read my actually opinions into what i post. As i have often said. i don't often state my "own" opinions. I haven't said i thought it was "wrong", merely that they are war crimes, if judged by the same standards as the German "crimes". FWIW, i fully sympathise with the US troops executing the guards, i suspect it would even have been a cathartic experience for them. As this is a history forum, i try to get a discussion about events going , rather than just post dry facts. i don't care on a personal level that 1000s of Germans were shot without trial, or staved to death in concentration camps. I do find the hypocrisy rather irritating, along with the blinkered denial that so often occurs. BUT that is where the debate gets fun, a challenge, mental exercise. Its an anonymous internet forum, why do so many get so upset, its almost as if they actually care what other totally anonymous people think. Azita ------------- I did never know so full a voice issue from so empty a heart: but the saying is true 'The empty vessel makes the greatest sound'. |
Posted By: TheAlaniDragonRising
Date Posted: 15-Feb-2013 at 08:50
As for POWs taking part in work, what is your understanding as to the rights and wrongs of those who are not offices taking part in such activities? While you're at it, Azita, can you quantify the use of the word "slave" in the way you've used it in terms of the way the POWs were generally treated?
------------- What a handsome figure of a dragon. No wonder I fall madly in love with the Alani Dragon now, the avatar, it's a gorgeous dragon picture. |
Posted By: TheAlaniDragonRising
Date Posted: 15-Feb-2013 at 08:55
|
Azita, to state that you think something is a war crime is an opinion. ------------- What a handsome figure of a dragon. No wonder I fall madly in love with the Alani Dragon now, the avatar, it's a gorgeous dragon picture. |
Posted By: Azita
Date Posted: 15-Feb-2013 at 09:26
|
Oh dear! yes as i confessed ( hail mary) i was wrong about Wembley, was the road not the building. But still was German forced labour used. Which was MY point. As for the term slave, well i mostly used it in quotation marks, so i hopped that would indicate a degree of uncertainty over its use. NOW im not going to be aggressive and post the Geneva conventions, you can look them up as easily as i can. Questions:- were the German POW paid for their work? Were they free to leave? Could they refuse to work without consequence? I had mostly asked questions regarding war crimes, hence the question marks at the end...... But stating that something IS a war crime might well be an opinion, just that i have never said it was one i held. Here FWIW is my opinion............. ready?.............. I dont care..................... but as Germans had caused so much destruction, perhaps it was only right they mended some of it or built something. The Germans working in England and the USA were damn lucky compared to those in French or Soviet "care". the Germans in the Rhine camps, were treated with deliberate cruelty, many perhaps would have deserved this, MOST would not have. It was against the conventions and was not the act of a magnanimous enemy. BUT as with all the war, there was no manual, how would "we" have done things? Much worse i suspect. Azita Now, what is your opinion? ------------- I did never know so full a voice issue from so empty a heart: but the saying is true 'The empty vessel makes the greatest sound'. |
Posted By: TheAlaniDragonRising
Date Posted: 15-Feb-2013 at 09:43
|
Azita, the specific part of the Geneva convention you need as it stood prior to the 1949 ratification, plus a link will be fine, if it helps you to put over what you're trying to convey.
------------- What a handsome figure of a dragon. No wonder I fall madly in love with the Alani Dragon now, the avatar, it's a gorgeous dragon picture. |
Posted By: Azita
Date Posted: 15-Feb-2013 at 09:59
|
My Brain hurts. The 3rd conventions were in 1929(?) But as a side, i wonder if that was why the English sent the last German POW back before the 4th conventions in 1949? As for what im trying to convey, err well, I think i need to lay down for a bit, that kitchen table still free..? Hah! 1st Wembley built (in part) by Germans, 2nd Wembley built by Poles   Azita. ------------- I did never know so full a voice issue from so empty a heart: but the saying is true 'The empty vessel makes the greatest sound'. |
Posted By: TheAlaniDragonRising
Date Posted: 15-Feb-2013 at 10:25
On the other hand, Azita, the summer olympics were in 1948, so I'm guessing it was thought not to be reasonable to have them keep working on the Wembley way as it was finished. ------------- What a handsome figure of a dragon. No wonder I fall madly in love with the Alani Dragon now, the avatar, it's a gorgeous dragon picture. |
Posted By: yomud
Date Posted: 12-Apr-2013 at 15:21
guys turkmen ss who surrendered in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Padua - Padua and La Spezia get 20 years slave labor fromYalta Conference part of them returned to soviet from iran part of them sended to ukrain those who work as slave labor in ukraine and later abandend there never get back to home |
Posted By: beorna
Date Posted: 12-Apr-2013 at 15:31
But I am sure you know, that often these guys were not the former KZ guards, cos those had escaped, but were soldiers and boys from the neighbourhood, the Wehrmacht or whatever, who were commanded in the last days of the war to keep the order in the KZs untill the allies arrive. |
Posted By: yomud
Date Posted: 12-Apr-2013 at 15:36
turkmen enter the war as soviet effective military division they fight in so many battle in kursk in kiev i dont know how many turkmen sended to war but we know turkmen division sufferd 70000 dead Casualties while the turkmen Population at start of war was 1.300.000 they just pulled out b4 the berlin cuz of large Casualties in the war some of the turkmen caught by nazi guys they put to use in franc and italy as turkmen ss for fight against allied force u know nazi guys kill half of soviet pow what choice do they have but accpt to join turkmen ss ?? after war they get 20 labor slave that wasn't justice   ------------- yomud are free people |
Posted By: beorna
Date Posted: 12-Apr-2013 at 16:57
|
There are different Turkmenian troops, first those who were integrated into the Wehrmacht and then the "Osttürkischer Waffen-verband der SS". The units of the Wehrmacht were indeed often recruited from the POWs since 1942 as Legions, the less good soldiers integrated into Labour-batallions. But it would be wrong to claim all were POWs, there were as well volunteers who wanted to fight the bolshevists. Since 43, but especially in 44 and 45 the SS started to create turkmenic units, too and tried to recruit volunteers, even with help of muslim leadrs. Those units were mainly used for security and anti-partisan missions, e.g. were they involved in the Warsaw uprise as part of the troops of von dem bach and the Dirlewanger unit. |
Posted By: yomud
Date Posted: 13-Apr-2013 at 01:32
|
i dont get it :d are u telling me they travel from turkmenistan to germany to fight against red army ?? or they just join nazi when they get caught by nazi ?? can u tellme more about them plz ?? have they involved them self in war crime ?? ------------- yomud are free people |
Posted By: beorna
Date Posted: 13-Apr-2013 at 06:00
well, there are two main groups. The one as you mentioned, were POWs, Turkic people who hated the Bolsheviki and were eager to fight them or simply Soviet POWS of Turkic origin who wanted to escape the German POW camps. The second group are volunteers from the occupied territories, who hoped to become independent from the Soviet Union after the war. They were Azeri, Balkarians, Karatshals, Komyks, Turkmenians etc. Turkic people from territories outside the German zone usually were former POWs, so Kirgisians Turkmenians, Uighurs, tadjiks etc. Cos these troops were usually used for anti-partisan missions we have to expect, that they were heavily involved in german war crimes. During these missions were usually the most victims civilians. I wrote it in another thread, about the Polish Home Army. But these troops were as well target of war crimes as well, perhaps as well as reaction to own war crimes and that they changed the side. In France there is a Rbert Galley , who is suspected in war crimes against hundreds of germans and Ostlegionen, too. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Galley_%28politician%29. He shall have executed or burned POWs and WIA. |
Posted By: yomud
Date Posted: 13-Apr-2013 at 14:37
|
well war crime was new for me where did u read about them ?? i just know they used for watch camp building and they mostly on duty with out bullets cuz german fear they may shot german soldiers ofc in the time when allied get close they were given ammunition in Yalta Conference their known crime was betraying mother land (which given to those who run away from army ) and fight along side of germans for this they get 20 year slave working i didnt know they used in poland this was new 2 and i think germens send them to italy so they could take them away from red army they abandoned in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Padua - Padua and La Spezia ------------- yomud are free people |
Posted By: beorna
Date Posted: 13-Apr-2013 at 17:14
|
Since autumn 1942 these Infantry btallions of soviet nations existed. One year later around 53 batallions exsted 14 turkmenian and 8 azeri ones. They were used as well at front units. But the military success of these units was low, there was a great number of desertation. So in 1943 it was decided to send them to the west. The most well-known unit is the 162. Turkmenian Infantry division. They were send to Italy, where they cred about partisan attacks. One of my grandfathers was in that days at the 71 ID, which fought together in Northern italy against partisans. |
Posted By: Delenda est Roma
Date Posted: 20-Apr-2013 at 01:18
|
Basically the Dresden firebombings and Japanese atomic bomb droppings were war crimes. ------------- |
Posted By: Centrix Vigilis
Date Posted: 20-Apr-2013 at 02:48
|
Nah...but what they were.... was strategic application of tactical weaponry and techniques to bring about multiple aspects of modern warfare. Ie. psychological destruction of the morale as much as the destruction of infrastructure and oppositions war making capabilities.
Nothing new. ------------- "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" S. T. Friedman Pilger's law: 'If it's been officially denied, then it's probably true' |
Posted By: TITAN_
Date Posted: 20-Apr-2013 at 05:27
|
Killing civilians is a war crime. There is no excuse. There is nothing wrong with admitting that "my own" nation did something wrong. ------------- αἰὲν ἀριστεύειν Een aristevin “Ever to Excel“ From Homer's Iliad (8th century BC). Motto of the University of St Andrews (founded 1410), the Edinburgh Academy (founded 1824) and others. |
Posted By: Nick1986
Date Posted: 21-Apr-2013 at 21:37
The Germans killed our civilians first in the London Blitz. The RAF's own bombings weren't a war crime, but an act of retaliation. By depriving the Nazis of future workers and soldiers, Bomber Harris was able to cripple their war effort on the home front. ------------- Me Grimlock not nice Dino! Me bash brains! |
Posted By: Mountain Man
Date Posted: 21-Apr-2013 at 23:34
|
Some members here seem in a rush to label everything a war crime, yet they have a very narrow focus and an apparent lack of understanding of what the rules of warfare actually were during WWII. ------------- Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? |
Posted By: beorna
Date Posted: 22-Apr-2013 at 04:10
We have the old problem, who did what first. I don't claim allied bombing per se a crime, but the bombing directive. I claim as well the Baedecker Blitz and the V-attacks a war crime. Let me mentioned Möchengladbach e.g. Of course Mönchengladbach was no terror raid. But 5 bombs exploded in the city between Luisen- and Weststraße, and killed 4 civilians (Stadtarchiv Mö-Gldb. 1c/3608). It was a collateral damage. Just some days later on may 15th/16th 1940 the RAF bombed the Ruhr area as well, Hagen, Oberhausen, Castrop-Rauxel, Wanne-Eickel, Dortmund, Gelsenkirchen and Bottrop, there were as well lots of raids against North german towns. Again it were targets of the military and industral complex, with civilian casualties as collateral damage. This is all before a german aircraft bombed a british town. The german attacks followed the same idea. Your The british bombing directive was something completely new. This order was given as "area bombing directive" General Directive No.5 (S.46368/D.C.A.S) „You are accordingly authorised to use your forces without restriction …“ "It has been decided that the primary objective of your operations should be focused on the morale of the enemy civil population and in particular the industrial workers" Sir Charles Portal:“… I suppose it is clear that the aiming points will be the built up areas, and not, for instance, the dockyards or aircraft factories where these are mentioned in Appendix A. This must be made quite clear if it is not already understood.” In october 1943 Harris said:"the aim of the Combined Bomber Offensive...should be unambiguously stated (as) the destruction of German cities, the killing of German workers, and the disruption of civilized life throughout Germany.... It should be emphasized that the destruction of houses, public utilities, transport and lives, the creation of a refugee problem on an unprecedented scale, and the breakdown of morale both at home and at the battle fronts by fear of extended and intensified bombing, are accepted and intended aims of our bombing policy. They are not by-products of attempts to hit factories." British people like to claim, that the germans started the bombing war with their attacks on England. When were the first bombings? Rotterdam was burning on may 14th 1940. Yes, there were as well bombings in Poland, too, in 1939, in the combat zone and e.g. during the battle of Warsaw. But there was an air raid on Wilhelmshaven already in september 1939, so the Britons started with occasional bombing in september 1939, Mönchengladbach and Duisburg were attacked in may 12th and 15th 1940. Hannover followed in may 19th. German air raids on britain started in June 1940 (e.g. Hull). The London Blitz started in september 1940. In the end of 1940 the RAF went increasingly against civilian targets and in early 1942 they published the bomber directive. Since april 1942 germany responded with the Baedecker Blitz. So the bombing directive IS an allied war crime. The deliberately killing of civilians, women, children, babies, elderly "without restriction" hague Convention, Art. 22. The right of belligerents to adopt means of injuring the enemy is not unlimited. And for the german bombing policy before the baedecker Blitz see, "Hitlers directive 17 from august 1st,1940: In order to establish the necessary conditions for the final conquest of England I intend to intensify air and sea warfare against the English homeland. I therefore order as follows: 1. The German Air Force has to overpower the English Air Force with all the forces at its command, in the shortest time possible. The attacks are to be directed primarily against flying units, their ground installations, and their supply organizations, but also against the aircraft industry, including that manufacturing anti-aircraft equipment...... 5. I reserve to myself the right to decide on terror attacks as measures of reprisal." And as a later statement by Churchill see Churchill's withdrawn cable http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/education/heroesvillains/g1/images/g1cs3s3a.jpg">  Let us remind the Hague Convention! Hague convention Art. 22. The right of belligerents to adopt means of injuring the enemy is not unlimited. "Until a more complete code of the laws of war has been issued, the High Contracting Parties deem it expedient to declare that, in cases not included in the Regulations adopted by them, the inhabitants and the belligerents remain under the protection and the rule of the principles of the law of nations, as they result from the usages established among civilized peoples, from the laws of humanity, and the dictates of the public conscience." "In MGFA, Das Deutsche Reich und der Zweite Weltkrieg Bd 7, p. 328, one can clearly get the information, that British officials, who investigated german documents after the war recognized, that the german bombing missions from 1940/1941 were no terror bombings. Even Arthur Harris wrote in his memoirs (bomber offensive, p.83), that the germans did not use the chance to rub ut the British towns. And the chief of US Air corps stated in april 1941, that the Luftwaffe hit mostly industrial and military targets." |
Posted By: TITAN_
Date Posted: 23-Apr-2013 at 07:55
That makes no sense. The only effective way to "deprive the Nazis of future workers and soldiers" would be to wipe out the entire population of Germany....  You didn't do it though. If you could, that would be a war crime. ------------- αἰὲν ἀριστεύειν Een aristevin “Ever to Excel“ From Homer's Iliad (8th century BC). Motto of the University of St Andrews (founded 1410), the Edinburgh Academy (founded 1824) and others. |
Posted By: beorna
Date Posted: 23-Apr-2013 at 08:54
Indeed , the "killing of future workers and soldiers" means nothing else than killing deliberately children. If this is no war crime, well... |
Posted By: Mountain Man
Date Posted: 23-Apr-2013 at 11:09
|
The truth is, beorna, that you want it to be a war crime so it is...at least in your mind. I suspect that you have never fought in a war and have no idea how things really work; however, your opinion on the matter does not make it so. ------------- Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? |
Posted By: beorna
Date Posted: 23-Apr-2013 at 13:39
I am not a fish, but nevertheless I can tell you something about swimming. If killing deliberately civilians is not an war crime, see the HC articles above, why should we consider rapes as war crimes? Isn't it better one makes children with hostile women, than the enemy? Do you know, that EGr (Einsatzgruppen) and anti-partisan units, like the kaminski-brigade, the units of vdBach-Zelewski or the Schuma killed as well a hundreds of thousands of civilians, just for the one reason, that they could not support the partisans? So here as well, these nazi units did nothing else than to prevent, that these people become soldiers, partisans or workers. I would, no, I do call this a war crime. And you? Where is the difference between deliberately killings? The altitude? |
Posted By: Don Quixote
Date Posted: 25-Apr-2013 at 02:38
|
Well, if deliberate killings of civilians are not war crime, then we have to openly embrace all kinds of genocides, which are basically the same thing. It's very dangerous to justify the killings of civilians, because then where does our humanity go? If we accept that as normal, then everyone can kill everyone else, and justification always will be found. ------------- |
Posted By: Don Quixote
Date Posted: 25-Apr-2013 at 03:23
Believe it or not, MM, not only ex-military can have opinions about war, nor is military experience prerequisite for the right to talk about such stuff. It's more like military people have vested interest in justification of everything that their own country did, because otherwise it will be possible they to feel responsible; something that no military guy wants to feel, the price is too steep; so they cannot even dream of being objective to some point. The profession requires to agree with the command, past, current, or future one, so to speak; so free thinking would be only on the way. So why would anyone want to consider a deliberately subjective opinion more of a value than of a one who doesn't have vested interest in the matter? Anyway the notion that "you have no combat experience so you understand nothing and your opinion doesn't count" is by definition cheap manipulation, not an argument. I wouldn't use it if I were you. ------------- |
Posted By: beorna
Date Posted: 25-Apr-2013 at 03:58
The discussion about the bombing directive is indeed a hot theme. I had a several discussions about it and I have to be honest, there is no clear law, which says what is allowed and what not or what is a war crime and what not. The reason is simply, that the HC is older than aerial warfare and that the nations weren't able to include the aerial warfare into the HC or at least did't ratify such improvement. But as i have tried to show, are there articles in the HC who clearly state that such unrestricted warfare is against humanity and therefor a war crime. I have said it already, not the aerial warfare is the war crime, but the deliberately killing of civilians as main target. That's why I consider the bombing of Warsaw, Coventry or Rotterdam, to mention just some German air raids, not as war crime. They were part of an military operation. But nevertheless I would call these bombings morally criminal, because collateral damage was accepted. In the beginning of the thread, there are several allied war crimes mentioned. One of these crimes was the execution of POWs by the allied troops. Especially Waffen-SS troops seem to have been target of such crimes. One can here as well explain, why it happened, e.g. as response to Waffen-SS crimes during the French campaign or later. The death of comrades can cause such retalliation. But of course would this be not different for equal war crimes of Wehrmacht and Waffen-SS. But of course is explanation no justification. Ilse Koch was accused in the trials after war to have had a lampshade made of jewish skin or some shrunken heads made of russian POWs. These deeds are symbol for the ruthlessness of the nazis and there is no doubt, that they were. But besides the fact, that there is no clear evidence, that the lampshades exist and the shrunken heads are really russian POWs, what does it mean, if US soldiers were trophy hunting in a large scale on the pacific theatre (and even today some did it in Iraq)? If we agree in human rights, in humanity, then we should not cover any crimes, just because they were committed by our ancestors or recent compatriots. If we don't speak about it, we cannot investigate why they happened and we cannot avoid it in further wars. |
Posted By: medenaywe
Date Posted: 25-Apr-2013 at 04:17
|
War is not boxing game with gloves on hands.Killing people is crime anyway.War is time when it is legal and victorious can say after what did criminal make other side! |
Posted By: Don Quixote
Date Posted: 25-Apr-2013 at 04:20
I agree with that. I also consider the Dresden firebombing and the atomic bomb war crimes, from moral point of view; in the case of the second I don't think there was a clear idea about the real repercussions of this weapon, but this cannot be justification either, just something to consider. The very idea that targeting civilians is OK is what must be criticized; the funny thing is that people who consider the above 2 happenings OK still consider terrorist attacks /that by definition target civilians/ something to object to, while in fact it's one and the same thing. So, this is the danger - if one justifies the former, if one wants to have at least a semblance of objectivity then he/se has to justify the latter; then both must be objected to and shown in their inhuman face; otherwise there will be no end of the human tragedy of extermination. ------------- |
Posted By: Don Quixote
Date Posted: 25-Apr-2013 at 04:24
Well, IMHO, ideally, wars should be outlawed, any one and all of them, no matter what; as well as aggression, and economic blackmail... But I don't think humanity has grown up to that point yet, as it can be seen on multiple occasions in personal and collective plan. ------------- |
Posted By: medenaywe
Date Posted: 25-Apr-2013 at 04:34
I was knocked out in box fighting once laying on gym floor for few minutes.Even enhanced arm with glove is killing weapon.But i suggest new rules for Next World wars:Box fighting on play station with pain adapter. |
Posted By: Don Quixote
Date Posted: 25-Apr-2013 at 04:47
Sounds good, I'm all for it ------------- |
Posted By: Nick1986
Date Posted: 25-Apr-2013 at 19:12
I still say it had to be done. The Nazis killed many more Jews and Slavs on the Eastern Front. Our very survival was threatened by the better-equipped aggressors who had already conquered much of Europe ------------- Me Grimlock not nice Dino! Me bash brains! |
Posted By: lirelou
Date Posted: 25-Apr-2013 at 21:42
|
Neither Dresden nor the atomic bombs were war crimes. They were nothing to take great pride in, but they both hastened the end the war. It's nice that we have sharp legal minds that they can delve into this subject and dissect its parts. But none of the ideas they cite has ever prevented another war. I liked the idea that war should be outlawed. Yes, there's the solution. Pardon if it incites the snappy rejoinder: When wars are outlawed, only outlaws will fight wars. OK, who's going to bring the guilty parties to justice? Maybe the United Nations?
Here's a question: On the day Dresden was bombed, how many died in the death camps? How many Allied soldiers died in or as a result of combat that day? ------------- Phong trần mài một lưỡi gươm, Những loài giá áo túi cơm sá gì |