Waffen SS: Let's dispel the myth.

[CavScout]

Originally posted by Maximus:

Way to contradict yourself there. You started out saying that "no nation's behavior excuses another" and then you go on to say that "the (Allied) atrocities are irrelevant when discussing the Waffen SS's." Gee, so you are excusing the Allies' attrocities.

In your zeal to defend the W-SS you have missed the point. When talking about the crimes of one goup, the others don't matter. You can not excuse the Waffen SS for their crimes because of Russian ones no more than you can excuse American war crimes because of German ones. You defend the Waffen SS with a chilling patriotism.

[Kingfish]

Originally posted by Mike Oberly:

Too true,my email buddy-now where's your next turn?

Mike

Well, if it isn't the butcher of Carentan, looking for some fresh meat to carve up.

I'll be stampeding the herd your way later on tonight, the #%$*! geek here at work has us on Windows NT, so no CM until I get home.

Bomb...er, see you then!

------------------

Terminate...with extreme prejudice

[tss]

Forever Babra wrote:

Forget it, Tommi. One can't argue with a hot-head.

I know, I was just waiting my program to compile and decided to kill some time.

I have tried to live by the following advice regarding to flame wars and their equivalents:

"Never mud-wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig enjoys it".

- Tommi

[Forever Babra]

Originally posted by tss:

"Never mud-wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig enjoys it".

- Tommi

LOL!!!!

------------------

Out of commission, become a pillbox.

Out of ammo, become a bunker.

Out of time -- become heroes...

[Maximus]

Well OK, my whole point to this thread was that the Waffen SS got a bad rap due to a small percentage of their members whether they were an actually part of the Allgemiene or not. The common oridnary SS soldier was just following orders from their superiors.

[jshandorf]

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

Rabaatzn (sp?) - this was an SS word for "fun while murdering." It was indoctrinated into W-SS men in Russia - it is why they murdered Canadian POWs, for example.

And your point is? I understand and agree that as a whole the Waffen-SS are responsible for a large number of atrocities and crimes but just as you point out on example and I can counter with some "other" group that did something just as horrible.

My point is this: If you were to by chance meet a man who fought in WWII in the Waffen-SS and he told you this would you immediately think he was a cold blooded, heartless, muderer that slaughter innnocent and helpless civilians and POWs?

I wouldn't, but then again if he was I wouldn't be surprised.

That is my point.

Jeff

------------------

When nuclear weapons are frozen then only freezers will have nuclear weapons.

[Forever Babra]

Originally posted by Maximus:

Well OK, my whole point to this thread was that the Waffen SS got a bad rap due to a small percentage of their members whether they were an actually part of the Allgemiene or not. The common oridnary SS soldier was just following orders from their superiors.

And Jean-Paul Hass, aged 2 months, shot and burned in the church at Oradour-dur-Glane, along with all the other women and children of the village, by members of the 2nd SS Panzer Division, thanks you for your consideration. Good night, Gracie.

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by Maximus:

Well OK, my whole point to this thread was that the Waffen SS got a bad rap due to a small percentage of their members whether they were an actually part of the Allgemiene or not. The common oridnary SS soldier was just following orders from their superiors.

With regards to murders and atrocities, this is true, though they committed more of these acts than other units on a man-for-man basis, and were indoctrinated to not take prisoners, and even enjoy the killing of prisoners on occasion.

As for combat prowess, they are usually OVER-rated.

[Wilhammer]

Morality is not defined relative to other's actions.

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by jshandorf:

And your point is? I understand and agree that as a whole the Waffen-SS are responsible for a large number of atrocities and crimes but just as you point out on example and I can counter with some "other" group that did something just as horrible.

Jeff

The point is IT WAS EXPECTED in W-SS units - and it was not in Wehrmacht, Canadianm, Brit or US. That is the point. It was also far more common - and extended to civilians. Name a single instance of Canadian or American or British troops murdering civilians in numbers greater than one.

[Terence]

Originally posted by Maximus:

The common oridnary SS soldier was just following orders from their superiors.

Three things:

1) Do you realize how ironic your use of the phrase "just following orders" is?

2) Did the German WW2 equivalent of the UCMJ (Uniform Code of Military Justice) have a section on "illegal orders." That is to say, orders that a soldier did not have to obey as they were not legitmate. And if they did, would an order to execute non combatants and prisoners be considered illegal?

Follow up questions: Did any German soldiers ever cite these regulations (if they existed) when ordered to commit illegal acts? What happened to them if they did?

Three: I believe that your assertion that many/most of the Waffen SS troops were "just regular guys" is wrong, and that ample evidence has been presented here to demonstrate otherwise. Certainly the officers were Nazi loyalists. Why did you post this thread? Because you were convinced otherwise by the documentary you saw?

[CavScout]

Originally posted by Maximus:

Well OK, my whole point to this thread was that the Waffen SS got a bad rap due to a small percentage of their members whether they were an actually part of the Allgemiene or not. The common oridnary SS soldier was just following orders from their superiors.

Quite a few Germans claimed to only be following orders. Rightfully, they were hung.

[Michael Dorosh]

Maximus, you've done nothing wrong by raising these questions, and it is unfortunate that this has to devolve into snide remarks and irrelevancies. Most people know that the A-SS and w-SS are two different things, so this isn't a big revelation - what this means is that you were inspired to think by this TV show. That's not a bad thing. I would recommend, however, you consult some books on the subject - perhaps some of the "experts" here can provide some more useful titles. Look them over, then come back and tell us what you find out. I think you will find that the question is not so cut and dry - perhaps you'll even be more confused.

But it would be a better start than listening to misinformation (including mine) and snide remarks here.

[Jeff Heidman]

Originally posted by Forever Babra:

Forget it, Tommi. One can't argue with a hot-head. His argument has gone from "Waffen SS weren't killers" to "So what? Everybody else was doin' it."

Leave him to his fantasy.

I do not think that is what he is saying.

What he is saying is that ALL large groups of men in combat have examples of atrocities, so individual examples are not necessarily evidence of a systemic issue with the overall group.

IN other words, if the fact that the Waffen-SS committed atrocities makes the Waffen-SS organization criminal, then the same standard must be applied to the other groups who also committed atrocities.

Or to turn it around, if the US Airborne are not criminal despite the atrocities they committed, then the Waffen-SS are not criminal despite the atrocities they committed.

His logic is sound, although his premise is probably flawed. The Waffen-SS did in fact commit atrocities at a different level, both in quantity and severity, than most of their peers. This does not a-priori make all members of the Waffen-SS criminal, but it does suggest that the organization was not typical of WW2 military units.

I would be more than willing to hold any other group to the same standard. If you can find me an example of any other unit being involved in something like the massacre in the French church, I will be more than happy to label that organization criminal as well.

Jeff Heidman

[Forever Babra]

Originally posted by Jeff Heidman:

If you can find me an example of any other unit being involved in something like the massacre in the French church, I will be more than happy to label that organization criminal as well.

That's the point. One can't find another. The Waffen SS has that honour. It's a big leap from shooting prisoners out of stress or anger and rounding up nearly 700 civilians and torching them. I won't even touch the Russian front.

[PeterNZer]

Maximus, please take this post as one from someone who wants to encourage your erudition.

Firstly,

While all countries commited atrocities, (for starters, they killed people! The Big Guy (if you believe in him) kinda forbid that stuff), some groups committed A LOT of attrocities.

The SS was different because it was seen by Hitler as the Elite. It tried to recruit the most doctrinaly pure Germans (and later on anyone who agreed with the Nazi philosophy).

While it didn't ALWAYS do this it did happen A LOT. Consequently you got a whole lot of mean rat-bastards who saw themselves as superior and others as inferior.

The rest of the German army widely disliked them (at least they would claim so after the war.. history is tricky eh?) because they got all the latest toys and cushy roles (like occupying Denmark) and when they did fight they often didn't do any better.

While it is true, clearly, that there were different branches of the SS with different roles in the war and different responsibilities for crimes, in general it wasn't a nice organization.

Meanwhile, the exception prooves the rule. There were SS who were drafted in, didn't kill civilians and didn't murder POWs. But many did, either through inaction or outright nastyness.

I think what you're failing to understand is while most people appropriately don't like what the SS stood for and often did, it doesn't mean we condone or ignore war crimes by any other side.

I would say I think more people dislike Bomber Harris than they do your joe-SS soldier who just joined and coasted along. However, most folks would dislike some of those SS leaders more than Bomber Harris, and other would dislike some of those SS units on the eastern front more than the leaders (due to perhaps, direct culpability in murders/rapes/tortures).

It's all about scale and ones sense of morality. By all accounts on the 'damn nasty scale' -on average- the SS were pretty bad.

I've heard of some bad stuff from other armies too, say, the Canadians where a unit accidently shot a bunch of Volkssturm kids surrendering (they ran towards the troops in terror as another group opened up on the Canucks, understandably, there was some shooting before the Sgt and Capt. could get them to stop and fire at the real target). What makes this kinda incident different is that it was the exception to the rule, not the rule as it was often with the SS (esp. on the eastern front).

Please, you're making yourself look very very silly. Do some more reading and remember the best historian gathers from wide sources and forms views based on that. Also think, if you were a criminal SS vet, and some US documentary producer asked you to talk (and paid you a few K I bet too), would you say 'yes i was there when my men raped this woman and i did nothing' or would you say 'o it was other people').

(added in later on)

O, I would recommend everyone who is interested to read 'An intimate history of killing'. A very very interesting book on the nature and psychology of warfare and the roles soldiers and civilians cast themselves in.

Ta

PeterNZ

------------------

"What do I care, I got laid last week" - Chupacabra

"Bjorn again are really quite good!" - Germanboy

- Official owner of the sig files of Dalem and Croda -

[This message has been edited by PeterNZer (edited 03-05-2001).]

[daveym]

There is no reason for fighting here. The originators of this discussion are clinging to argument simply for its sake; they seem to have a logically untenable position.

Examine what I think most people here would agree upon:

1) Waffen-SS were soldiers, not concentration camp guards.

2) However, as the military extension of the Nazi party, many of the Waffen-SS troops committed horrible crimes, probably to a greater extent than regular army troops(?unsure about this; data available?)

3) Troops everywhere committed war crimes.

There may be evidence for racial motivation of war crimes.

4) War crimes are irreprehensible, and as such should be punished.

By these points, if indeed the Waffen-SS are responsible for more than the average incidence rate of war crimes, then they should definitely be remembered as such, as should any such military unit

[jshandorf]

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

The point is IT WAS EXPECTED in W-SS units - and it was not in Wehrmacht, Canadianm, Brit or US. That is the point. It was also far more common - and extended to civilians. Name a single instance of Canadian or American or British troops murdering civilians in numbers greater than one.

The fire bombing of Dresden.

"That night, however, RAF Bomber Command despatched 796 Lancaster bombers and 9 Mosquitoes from the UK. These attacked Dresden in two waves three hours apart, dropping 1,478 tons of high explosive bombs and 1,182 tons of incendiaries which started a firestorm. Such was the weakness of the air defences that only six Lancasters were shot down, although a further three crashed on friendly territory on the way home. The following day, 311 US B17 bombers also struck the city, adding to the extensive damage caused by the RAF. In all, some 50,000 people, including many refugees, are reckoned to have lost their lives and much of the city was devastated."

That is more than one.

BTW Dresden had very little in the way of industry and mostly it was a haven for refugees of the war.

So, how is this any different from rounding up 700 french civilians and torching them in a church.

It isn't.

Jeff

[This message has been edited by jshandorf (edited 03-05-2001).]

[tss]

Jeff Heidman wrote:

This does not a-priori make all members of the Waffen-SS criminal, but it does suggest that the organization was not typical of WW2 military units.

Agreed. There were also decent men in the Waffen-SS.

If you can find me an example of any other unit being involved in something like the massacre in the French church, I will be more than happy to label that organization criminal as well.

That my earlier partisan example fits the bill here. Someone in Soviet high command decided that the partisans of the Arctic front were not doing their "fair share" and ordered them to conduct more attacks. However, after partisans had managed to ambush several field outposts, both German and Finnish troops were on guard and Smirnov didn't think that his troop was strong enough to tackle one. So what did he do? He attacked a small isolated Finnish village (several houses), killed all inhabitants except two boys who managed to escape, and returned home reporting to have destroyed a major German supply dump, killing 30 Germans. Additionally he claimed to have ambushed an supply column, in an area without any roads at all.

The attack was not an accident since the partisans spied the village for at least a full day before the attack.

Smirnov's participation in the Magga-atrocity was firmly established in mid-90s. He is still one of the most respected war heroes of the Kola region.

- Tommi

[RMC]

Hofbauer pointed out that the Waffen SS was labeled a criminal organization in Nürnberg. There has been some speculation that one reason for this was to spare the Wehrmacht from a similar fate. Wasn't there a book called SS: Alibi of a Nation?

[greywolf]

Remember that the Waffen SS branched out and formed units from various european countries under the guise they were protecting Europe from Communism. That is the reason many of these men volunteered. Most were not nazi's.

I've read many many interviews with waffen ss veterens. Yes, the organization was comprised with a higher percentage of fanatics. Yet, many of them joined because they were considered the elite fighting force at the time.

But I didn't see specifically where they were ordered to perform any types of attrocities. I believe the lower level officers were ultimatly responsible for their units behavior.

[Mike Oberly]

We'll see if I can get this one out before this is padlocked.

The Totenkopf was indeed more involved with the death camps than the other Waffen SS divisions,but one thing to keep in mind is that these units,small in number as they were,were quite incestuous.For instance,at least nine men who were with SSTK from the first two years of the war later became commanders of other SS divisions.Three of those eventualy became SS Corps commanders.

The criminal record of *every* Waffen SS division,with the exception of the Wiking,mostly composed of foreign nationals,was abysmal when compared to any other regular army unit of just about any nationality.

And Kingfish-if you'll recall,I declared Carentan an open city,whereupon you proceeded to level it to the ground.I see the propaganda is in full swing.

Mike

[Freak]

Well, its hard to justify what these brain washed people did.

[easy-v]

My two-cents:

It's common to find references to (post Malmede, and espicially post-concentration camp liberation) US troops shooting anybody that surrendered wearing silver-and-black collar tabs or SS runes in 1945.

Maybe this explains the SS vet's stories: "battlefield justice" took out a lot of the guilty perpitrators (as well as, I'm sure, a lot that weren't involved in atrocities).

I came across some POW interrogations conducted by the US 1st ID during the battle for Aachen of an SS squad that had surrendered intact, minus the squad leader.

The interrogator, in light of the fierce resistance of the defenders of Aachen, was baffled that an entire SS squad would surrender. He asked one of the soldats why they surrendered and the soldat replied that their squad leader/NCO placed them in their defensive positions, gave them a short speech about defending the Fatherland, ordered them to fight to the death, and then the NCO promptly unassed the AO, leaving his squad to meet it's fate.

So much for the myth of SS-uber men. I find it hard to accept that a squad composed of men/boys (whatever) like this would "blindly follow orders". Of course, how representative this squad was of the Waffen-SS as a whole is another question.

Maximus:

Oradour-sur-Glane was a French village that a company from the 1st SS razed, shot and burned alive all the civilian inhabitants. It was not a concentration camp.

easy-v

[This message has been edited by easy-v (edited 03-05-2001).]

[This message has been edited by easy-v (edited 03-05-2001).]

[daveym]

Jshandorf:

Posting the bombing of Dresden as a counter-point in this argument is not productive. Any critic of the Waffen-SS, if so inclined (and if given many hours of time), can dig up thousands upon thousands of incidents in which Waffen-SS troops murdered hundreds or thousands of people in village/town x in country y.

You are insulting the victims of war crimes everywhere, be it at the hand of a b-17 or mp-44.