easyred44 Posted June 23, 1999 Share Posted June 23, 1999 The beginning of your web page says that you will change the face of wargaming. Well I was just hoping you would start a new fad in World War II gaming. Remember those who gave their lives in the conflict. And remember those who are still here for all they gave and all they did. All these games are based on events that happened in the war, but there were real people fighting and dying because their respective countries told them they should. Hopefully you can mention something of this at the beginning of the game...... and mention all sides because for the most part, the German infantryman was the same as his American and British counterpart, a father, a son, a brother who was drafted into service. Be different and remember and respect the men who fought and died in the second world war. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted June 23, 1999 Share Posted June 23, 1999 We will make some sort of gesture to the lives lost during WWII. We have to do it in such a way so that we do not come off sounding hollow, but I don't think this will be a problem. Besides the appreciation for the losses of my own country in WWII (the US) due to the countless grave markers in each and every town around me, I also have some understanding of the losses suffered by others. Of particular note I stood atop a mass grave in Dachau and in some non-descript little village in the Black Forest I looked upon the gravestone of a family that gave up 2 sons and a father on the Eastern Front. I'm not really sure what words to use here, but I found great sadness in both places. WW2, its causes and effects, is a complex web made up of the realities of human strengths and weaknesses. There is no easy answer, no easy scapegoat, for the suffering that happend. The only thing that can be said is that only a few were directly responsible for the misery and death of the many. The rest, the vast majority from all nations, were caught up in events larger than themselves. There is plenty of balme and guilt to go around, but certainly soldiers from each nation should not be painted with the same brush (good or bad). Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gatsby Posted June 23, 1999 Share Posted June 23, 1999 Actually I have to take issue with the few and the many here but maybe it would be better to take off this board if you are interested... Let me say this.. I spent a few years studying atrocities by "normal" troops in combat in WW2.. on both sides...we used letters photographs diaries etc...at the time the late 70's the generation who foughtthe war was just starting to die off...we found incredible stuff even then to indicate that this was not just a few nutty guys at the top of the food chain especially for the German army...but "warcrimes" were everywhere and common on both sides... As the genration is now really dying off scholarship these days is coming around to the idea that these atrocities were far more widespread among "Wehrmacht" (lets stick to the Germans for now) than anyone ever guessed...Goldhagen's book was just the tip fo the iceberg...there are literally thousands of pictures, postcards etc...with references by yoru run of the mill army guy bragging or talking about warcrimes... I know its fashionable now to hold up alot of this in a kind of misty eyed golden hued...but I for one take issue about making any of this more heroic than it was....there was a sacrifice alright in WW2 but i am not sure it can just be laid at the feet of a few...it absolves the rest of us of our resposibility...sorry for the speech John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herr Oberst Posted June 23, 1999 Share Posted June 23, 1999 Now this IS a sticky wicket... From the German side, there were both NAZI fanatics in uniform, as well as the general Joe (or should it be Karl or Fritz?) who was drafted into arms. The German troops later in the war were largely a generation that had been raised on the NAZI ideology, and many items related to atrocities on the part of the regular army are the product of a lifetime of teachings, part of which included that the non-Aryans were subhuman races, deserving of no better. The Russians were equally cruel under the Stalin regime. I have recently finished two books, the 900 Days (Siege of Leningrad), and Stalingrad. There are amazing parallels between the privations suffered by the people of Leningrad and the 6th Army. Would the Russian people have been better served by surrendering Leningrad? Ask the 5,000 per day who died from starvation in the winter months. Of the US troops, these were truly Citizen Soldiers, largely unequipped to deal with wartime and all its proclivities. I would not seek to judge someone when I have not been in those circumstances. In the end, we all lost. How many artists, scientists, writers, musicians from any side died in WWII? No one will ever know. In the end I always go back to a quote from the pastor of my church. Formerly an Olympic speed skater for Holland, a lawyer, an operative in Holland in WWII, and finally a Presbyterian pastor. Some might recognize his nickname of Captain Harry to the US troops in documents related to Arnhem and "A Bridge Too Far". His simple words were "It must never be allowed to happen again." Not directed at the Germans, the Russians, the Italians, the Japanese, the British, or the US, but at everyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomm Posted June 23, 1999 Share Posted June 23, 1999 Study history or watch the evening news: you will not get around the fact that a certain percentage of the human race are maniacs, independent of nation, race or religion. Well, give them weapons and let them fight in a war and see what you will get. Pessimistic ? Yes, but hard to disprove. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
137th Gebirg Posted June 23, 1999 Share Posted June 23, 1999 I'd like to echo some sentiments here on this thread (and yes, Herr Oberst, it is a VERY sticky wicket). <SOAPBOX> Yes, six to seven million Jews were killed in the Haulocaust and that is a TERRIBLE thing. Don't let ANYONE say otherwise. However, Gypsys, captured soldiers (from both fronts), Freemasons, the mentally and physically disabled, and homosexuals also fell to the National Socialist sword. In addition, around FIFTY MILLION Russians died under the Stalinist dictatorship (to elaborate on Herr Oberst's comment). Please do not misunderstand...this is CERTAINLY not to belittle the strife that the Jews went through, but rather to ponder and pause for serious reflection on the bigger picture of the crimes committed by more than just one regime, and the pain and suffering experienced by more than just one victim. It is unfortunate that nobody has thought to build a museum (or much less a monument or memorial) to the victimization that other groups were forced to endure. To quote the G.I. soldiers in Saving Private Ryan: "Don't shoot them. Let 'em BURN!" How very appropriate, but in a slightly different way than is most immediately evident. "Nicht Shiessen!"...BANG!..."Who the h*ll is Nick Sheezen?" </SOAPBOX> [This message has been edited by 137th Gebirg (edited 06-23-99).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest John Maragoudakis Posted June 23, 1999 Share Posted June 23, 1999 Like the endings in the DC comics with Sgt Rock says, 'War is Hell'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fionn Posted June 23, 1999 Share Posted June 23, 1999 Hmm a VERY controversial topic indeed. Let me give my take (which some may not like). Every unit and country in the war committed atrocities. How many US units boasted of their 0 surrenders accepted record in the Pacific? How many German units in the East didn't take prisoners for large parts of the war? How many British commando operations were given explicit orders NOT to take prisoners? How many Soviet units refused to accept tank crew surrenders? Answer: AN awful lot. Look, it's war. Bad stuff happens. I've read accounts of ordinary German policemen and soldiers rounding Jew villagers and gypsies up and shooting them en masse as they made their way to the front. I've read of US soldiers shooting POWS in Italy because they were "slowing the column up". This column was in the US rear areas so the shooting wasn't militarily justifiable as being necessary for the safety of the whole. British and Canadian soldiers operated a tacit "no sniper surrenders" for most of the war. How many fighter planes were ordered to strafe German cottages to destroy the agricultural and "small cottage industry" productive capacity following dispersion of production from large factories? Answer, many, many were. Chuck Yeager even recounts a conversation with another decorated pilot in which they discussed what charges would be brought against them if by some chance Germany won the war. Their conclusion was that they would be tried as war criminals since it was certain that most houses they strafed were inhabited purely by civilians. It was war, this stuff happens. No-one is free to cast stones and no-one should be excluded from recognition of what they did. I can admire the fighting qualities of all sides but if there was one phrase I would use to describe the conduct of the men in the war it would not be "outstanding devotion to duty blah blah blah" or " war criminals" BUT rather " A dreadful waste of obedient men who, generally speaking, were fighting for what they believed was a just cause or for what they held dear. There were few heroes and few villains in the war (although there were some of course). Rather there were men who coped and tried to survive whilst not losing their humanity, others who became callous and cold due to the exingencies of war and still others who, unfortunately, were able to use this forum to unleash their sociopathic tendencies." FWIW my grandfather always drew a distinction between the Waffen SS, the Wehrmacht and the German civilians AND nazis. He always felt the Wehrmacht and civilians treated him and his comrades well after they were captured ( during a resistance operation in Belgium... They sort of walked into a factory with a bomb and without any papers DOH ! ... The Germans picked that very day to do a check of all papers in the factory. End result = captivity.). He felt the Waffen SS were fanatical fighters but generally not too bad... They may have gone to the extreme in their reactions but they were soldiers first and foremost. The nazi officials and death camp guards were scum in his opinion. CM doesn't model these units and so I think that a recognition of the sacrifice of the "real soldiers" on every side (whilst bearing in mind that pretty much every side had people who committed atrocities) isn't out of place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
137th Gebirg Posted June 23, 1999 Share Posted June 23, 1999 Fionn - agree whole-heartedly. Well said. Too many times have people lumped the Waffen-SS (as you say, fanatical fighters) in with the Algemeine-SS (the true masters of the death camps) as being just "SS" and therefore, hard-core Nazi fascists...or at least, until Malmedy :-[ [This message has been edited by 137th Gebirg (edited 06-23-99).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhet Posted June 23, 1999 Share Posted June 23, 1999 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>The rest, the vast majority from all nations, were caught up in events larger than themselves. There is plenty of blame and guilt to go around, but certainly soldiers from each nation should not be painted with the same brush (good or bad).<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I certainly agree with this...be it Joe, Fritz, Tommy or Tony the vast majority of the soldiers were fighting for their country and/or what they believe in and for this they have my admiration and respect. ------------------ Rhet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gatsby Posted June 23, 1999 Share Posted June 23, 1999 Alll right .. My original post was about not glorisying all of this...but now we are actually getting into the area which I did my thesis about... First off...my generation made a distinction between SS period and regular Wehrmacht...we wanted to believe that this was a group of fanatical crazies who were going about hooting innocent civilians..not just jews...non combatants.. But we are have been finding out for the last 20 years or so that no that distinction just ain't true in terms of doing atrocities...not killing prisoners.. that was so widespread there is really no point on commenting on it.. on both sides...but in terms of civilians... Goldhagen used a police battalion because these would have been drafted men...from all walks of life...and he pretty well shows in his book that the killing was widespread...really widespread through and through the Wehrmacht....but there are other historians especially German ones who are using diaries and pictures(many oictures of a soldiers shooting civilians with a little note of love on the back..)and saying look the waffen SS might have killed a lot of civilians but take a look atthis.. these rgular Wehrmacht units were busy busy...and it seems that it was pervasive... As far as the dinstiction between the death camp SS and the Waffen SS ..okay sure.. one group worked in a kind of factory...but rememeber that Waffen SS units even though under fire unloike their colleagues still win the atrocity sweepstakes hands down...the suprise is how many of the regular units participated... Goldhagen tells an interesting anecdote about a group of artists and musicians who were near Lodz for a performance...when they heard that there was aktion planned for the next day .. they asked.. they asked if they could join... Justice Black and whoever the british judge at nurembough I forget his name bith said in later memoirs that we needed to make distinctions in order to deal with what happened...so there was this heirarchy of guilt... Most Germans didn't know...(Well that's really being torn apart in the Historikreit of the 80's) next... regular german soldier... doing his duty..killed no civilian.. regular german soldier..killed a few but didn't really like it and woudl have preffered not but was forced..(not true even in SS units murder squads were completely voluntary...even firing squads... regular waffen SS guy...bad...but not really that bad because they were good fighters...yes they burnt a village or two in France to the ground but all in all most of their atrocities in russia.. where lets face it...hey Stalkin killled alot of people didn't he.. what about them... camp guard SS...babd babd bad.. these were the real bad guys.. but still rememeber there were only 6 death camps...so even these guys were not as bad as... death camp SS...true evil right here.... and on top of the list so that we are absolved. Hitler and his cronies... Thsi list is now pretty much a joke... John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fionn Posted June 24, 1999 Share Posted June 24, 1999 Gatsby, I think of you read most posts here they generally agree that Wehrmacht soldiers killed lots of civilians in the form of reprisals and race clearings etc. I don't think anyone is arguing against that. I think what everyone is saying is that EVERYONE did it. Your 19 year old fresh-faced Kansas boy was likely to shoot German POWS some of the time too. German civilians were killed , literally, by the tens of thousands in terror bombing raids etc.. I'm NOT making any judgements about who shot most here or whether terror bombing raids were justified I'm just saying that many soldiers on all sides participated in mass murders, ritual refusal to accept surrenders etc. The German atrocities have been well documented because they lost, the Russian atrocities have been pretty well documented because a) we have access to lots of Germans who saw them and the Russians made no attempt to hide them and c) the Russians ended up being enemies after the war so speaking about all their atrocities was a great motivator for Western civilians and soldiers alike. We don't here about Johnny Smith's murder of a squad of surrendered Volkssturm kids of 16 because , quite simply, we won the war and that kind of stuff isn't publicised by the winning side. I don't think anyone was saying the Wehrmacht was pure as the driven snow, I think people were saying that all sides did it so to single one side out for condemnation above all others is a little but unfair. Lastly, the Wehrmacht were mainly conscripts, just like many other nation's soldiers. They were called up and then did the best they could. Some coped well with the moral challenges, others didn't. It was the same in EVERY army, we just don't have historians rooting around in Western Army files with the same alacrity they root around in German files. Like I say, this isn't me taking a snipe at any countries, it's just a recognition that in war everyone is debased and does horrible things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike T Posted June 24, 1999 Share Posted June 24, 1999 One small quote to remember "History is written by the victors" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
easyred44 Posted June 24, 1999 Author Share Posted June 24, 1999 My original intent was not to get started on all this talk about who killed more civilians or murdered more prisoners. I may be alone on this, but with all that I have read 99% of the people in the US army did not kill prisoners! Being a WWII reenactor I have spoken to many veterans and none have told me of any atrocities. I know they happen but I think the simple fact is that most men of the British, Canadian, and American forces were not as bad as their Russian or German counterparts. As historian Stephen Ambrose said, "When civilians saw the Russians or Germans coming they would hide because it meant murder, rape, and pillaging. When they saw the Americans coming they would all come out for it meant candy, gum, and cigarettes." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CRourke Posted June 24, 1999 Share Posted June 24, 1999 Its my understanding that the west front was on the whole alot more civilized then the east. I imagine the brutality of the eastern front was contagious. Once you hear about the enemy machining prisoners, or mutilating corpses, your alot less inclined to let his medics recover wounded. It is interesting though that a germany unit could fight under a differant set of morale rules depending what front they on. My belief is that brutality, murder, torture and all those unpleasant acts are not the exclusive priviledge of any race or nation. Given the right conditions, any of western allied powers might have done the same thing, and in fact its likely that on a much smaller scale, some of them did. Anyway, this topic is longwinded enough already, I'll stop adding to it now. Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fionn Posted June 24, 1999 Share Posted June 24, 1999 Easyred 44// Just a word to the wise: Stephen Ambrose isn't exactly a completely unbiased source .. Read his work carefully, compare it with that of others and a certain "heroisation" does appear. As for the vets... I'm not saying that all or even many of them shot prisoners etc etc.. I'm just saying it happened on all sides. And BTW I've read quite a few good history books which make absolutely no bones about the fact that US and UK units did on occasion kill prisoners. French units, Moroccans and others made much more of a habit of it than most. As for the comment about US soldiers etc .. Hmm most French towns welcomed them in but after a few days there were usually a plethora of complaints about their behaviour ... It is interesting to note that in most Belgian towns reports to the police of rude behaviour , fondling etc went UP after the US arrived compared with when Germans occupied the towns. But that is, of course, due to the quite lax discipline in many army units during that portion of the war. As a final note: Be VERY careful about believing what you read in any one source... Check it with others, read French, German, UK, US sources and then make your own decision. Remember that there ARE US, UK, French and German revisionists.. Revisionism is not just confined to the neo-nazi movement. Anyways, I'm not looking to ruffle people's feathers here its just that certain US authors are rather "blinkered" in their view of the realities of war. I consider that shooting of prisoners etc is an unfortunate part of war and that otherwise decent men can, kill innocents etc in war.. Unfortunately it seems that some historians don't seem to want to reveal such truths and so gloss over those facts which is a pity... Anyways, CM is a game.. I don't think we need to get all philosophical about dedications yet . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest John Maragoudakis Posted June 24, 1999 Share Posted June 24, 1999 I knew this vet arieal photographer analyst from WW2 that told me sometimes allied bombers returning from a mission in Germany would release any undropped bombs over German soil instead of bringing the unspent bombs back. [This message has been edited by John Maragoudakis (edited 06-25-99).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fatherof4 Posted June 24, 1999 Share Posted June 24, 1999 Please correct me if I'm wrong but while the western front in Europe was fairly "civilized" the Pacific was another matter. The actions there (justified or not) were much more silimlar to what happened on the eastern front. From what little I know about it, I probably would have reacted the same way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike D Posted June 24, 1999 Share Posted June 24, 1999 John M, If I were a pilot I would have dropped those suckers ASAP as well. Not because I, or they, were evil, but because it is darned unsafe to land the plane back in merry old England w/ bombs still hanging in the racks. Dropping unused ordnance prior to landing was common practice to best of my knowledge. Still is today in some cases as well I believe, although modern aircraft might have a better way to ensure the ordnance won't come off during landing. In WWII in the Pacific this usually wasn't much of a problem because they usually got dropped over the water. While it might have been "nice" for the flyboys in Europe to wait until they got over the channel to do it, it is a long way from Germany and carrying that extra weight means burning oh so precious fuel. Fuel that might be needed to evade enemy fighters, etc., on the way home as opposed to running out on the way back. So I don't blame those "educated" flyboys one single bit for dropping unused bombs wherever they might fall over Germany. Much better than dropping them over France or somewhere else right? Plus it maximized the fuel and range of the aircraft heading home. Sounds like a pretty smart move if you ask me. Mike D aka Mikester Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CRourke Posted June 24, 1999 Share Posted June 24, 1999 Ya, thats true about the bomber crews getting rid of their bombs right before they crossed out of germany. Can't say I blame them for it. However, my mom had the misfortune to be growing up in Kleve, a small town on the border with the Netherlands, and a frequent victim of these bombs. I believe that Kleve had more tonnage per unit area dropped on than of the major cities of germany by the end of the war. Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Los Posted June 24, 1999 Share Posted June 24, 1999 Actually I have had vets relate atrocities to me that they committed, primarily because the two guys in question were friends of mine and also because I am a vet too, so there's a differnt level of communication that goes on than when talking to civilians. Maybe knowing I wouldn't be looking at them judging them in some accusatory manner. Both fought in the PAC, one in Okinawa on the 7th ID (as a flamethrower man no less) and the other was a grunt in the USMC. Both mentioned that it was common practice to get out your K-bar and extract gold teeth from Japanese, dead, dying, or wounded. Interestingly enough, this little anectdote is also related by I believe it was either E.B Sledge (on with the old breed in Peleilu) or W. Manchester (?) who wrote "Good Bye Darkness" (or both,it's been years). One of these guys wrote: (I paraphrase) "There is no creature on earth more savage than a 19 year old American boy" Now having served very closely with many Vietnam vets (not the finance or artillery types either, SF, Lurps, grunts, multi-tour types) common discourse on their operations as part of our proffesional development (read sitting around and telling war stories), I have been related a large number of matter of factly stories which would seem to any civilian sitting at home in their air conditioning as downright horrific, but which seem to me as a mixture of buisiness as usual on the front lines/young boys finding themselves with the power to kill while trying to keep from being killed. It's impossible to explain unless you've been a part of it. Now myself having spent over two decades in the service and been in combat but more to the point been an advisor in several nasty foreign wars I can only say that the vast majority of nitty gritty, which goes on in wars is will never really be published or understood (thank god too) WHich brings me back to the Waffen-SS. I don't for a second begrudge any organization heat of battle type atrocities since there is no Army in the world that doesn't commit them in spades, though only the ones that lose end up paying for them. Yes when you get to the cold blooded Malmedy type operations that crosses the line, but it seems to me most guys in the Waffen-SS were like most guys that joined say, the US Marines. Hey it's an elite organization. I'm a nineteen year old kid, in great shape, and believe in my coountry or just want to get into a good outfit with snazzy uniforms becuase it will increase my chances of getting laid 100%. Then I'm sitting their with teh rest of my Regiment before embarking for Saipan and eth division commander is saying "Well, regarding Prisoners, let me just say this. If you have to take even the slightest risk catching a jap, then I say, don't do it." Which is tantamount to saying don't take any prisoners. BTW I ahve this very clip on tape I believe it is the Island Hopping episode of World at War if anyone wants to see it for themsleves. Still given the horrors of WW2 somebody has to be made an example of, and they did atrocities a bit more above the standard deviation, even if a lot of them were einsatzkommando ops, so they all got a black eye for it. I'm sure a lot of guys in the FRY are going to be branded murders for stuff performed by the MUP and Militia too. (Just an example not looking to get into a Kosovo debate). Anyway, I'm rambling.... Cheers... Los Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fionn Posted June 24, 1999 Share Posted June 24, 1999 Good post Los. Nice to see you here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest John Maragoudakis Posted June 25, 1999 Share Posted June 25, 1999 Hmm this is a sticky wicket indeed. Sorry if I offended *any* servicemen. Yes there are varying degrees of tragedy. A great big can of worms that I'm going to stay clear of. I want this game to play out tactics, not philosophy. John [This message has been edited by John Maragoudakis (edited 06-25-99).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted June 25, 1999 Share Posted June 25, 1999 On that note I think I shall close up this thread. I want to tank everybody for being civil in this difficult subect matter. All I have to say is that the more I read the more I understand how widespread "war crimes" are in all wars. WWII was a huge and vicious war, involving millions of soldiers and even more millions of civilians. So its scale has something to do with the numbers of "atrocities". Even Malmady type situations (which historians have largely concluded was a prisoner escape and then massive propaganda distortion by US to get grunts to "hate" Germans...) are not uncommon. Heck, I have two sources that document US Army regulars lining up about 50 captured SS and shooting them in the backs simply because they fought hard in the last days of the war instead of surrendering. Oh, and that was caught on film too. One of the sources was the camera man and I know at least one person that saw the footage... OK, enough rambling I would suggest to anybody that is interested in this, and other low level grunt stuff, read a new book called: "The Deadly Brotherhood - the American combat soldier in WWII" by John McManus ISBN 0-89141-655-2 You can find out all sorts of stuff, like what rations were like, opinions on equipment, what climate did to guys on the ground, why they thought they were fighting, how good were their leaders, as well as how common offing POWs was. The stories are from a wide range of vets from both ETO and PTO. The organization of the book is pretty good, and the author tries not to do much beyond linking the insights and stories together (i.e. he doesn't correct a vet when he said Panthers were shooting at him with 88s or 77s ). Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts