Interesting tidbit-your call

[Mad Russian]

Andreas. What is the "HWC section of the AHF"?

As I stated, the point is and was that not every single guy in the war that wore an SS uniform is a war criminal. The guy that started this thread didn't attack JasonC with his ideology, JasonC attacked him. Nobody was in anybody's face until JasonC went over to the attack.

The section of the website I posted here is not Nazi claptrap. There are warcriminals in all armies as the man stated. As I stated, you are only a warcriminal if you lose the war. Germany as a nation was guilty of multiple crimes against humanity. That does not mean that every single German soldier was guilty of those crimes...not everybody was a concentration camp guard, not everybody was guilty of killing a Jew. According to JasonC's and apparently Andrew H.'s stance if you ever wore the SS runes you ARE guilty by association and should therefore just go away and die someplace. That is EXACTLY the same ideology the Nazi's used. If you don't agree with us then off to the concentration camp you go. I can see no place for that ideological claptrap here on a website that is about WWII combat.

I also agree that it is totally irrelevant that the number of SS men who returned home, were, or were not, war criminals. This thread has never been about that UNTIL JasonC made it about that. The point is that if JasonC didn't like the thread instead of wishing the man to go off and die he could have just as easily informed of the facts that others did.

Unfortunately that isn't JasonC's, or several other posters on this websites, style. They would rather attack with venon people that are simply trying to enjoy the game and bring a bit of history to the conversation.

JasonC has no divine insight into WWII that I have seen. In fact he seems to think that since he has read some books he knows everything about it and now he moves over into the realm of knowing everything there is to know about being a soldier too. I have asked him long ago and am still awaiting an answer as to which military unit he has served with. I fear that I await that answer in vain. JasonC only lectures people he never answers questions on his sources.

I respect your views on the subject of WWII Germany. You have at least, a "real" base of information, and make an honest attempt to research the truth of the situation.

I would warn you that every single website that doesn't support your position can't be labeled as Nazi claptrap though. That is an easy out that several here on this site use just out of hand. It is often just thrown out there as the Biblical answer. I see nowhere in the Bible where it says, that websites that don't damn the Waffen SS, are Nazi claptrap. So my assumption is that that arguement isn't always true either.

See you are using logic to your arguement. That not all Waffen SS were the same..."Different from a late-war draftee or some surplus Luftwaffe guy sent to the W-SS from his airfield to gain the Endsieg." I have yet to ever see JasonC make that distinction. There are several others that when they the letters SS lose their ability to think clearly.

[Andreas]

Originally posted by Panther Commander:

I would warn you that every single website that doesn't support your position can't be labeled as Nazi claptrap though. That is an easy out that several here on this site use just out of hand. It is often just thrown out there as the Biblical answer. I see nowhere in the Bible where it says, that websites that don't damn the Waffen SS, are Nazi claptrap. So my assumption is that that arguement isn't always true either.

Hi

I have given you three specific reasons why I think the website is apologist Nazi claptrap. To wit:

1. The 560 W-SS men killed at Dachau are an invention, often used by W-SS apologists to say 'See, the US was just as bad'.

2. The number of W-SS men killed during the war is irrelevant, so why bring it up?

3. The accusations against elements of the W-SS in partisan combat have nothing to do with shooting partisans, but all with things like Oradour, Tulle, or any number of un-named places in the east. Of course, the author of the site declines to discuss under which part of international law the inhabitants of Oradour were massacred.

Now, clearly I have read the page you linked, and I know a bit about what the Nazi apologist who created it wrote. If you show me another site that makes an argument as to why the W-SS was not a bunch of genocidal aryan fanatics with the moral inhibitions of a Great White shark, I'll look at it, digest the argument, and then make up my mind as to whether it is apologist Nazi claptrap or whether the author has a point. Depends on the quality of the argument. This particular site failed the grade badly.

Your accusation that to me any site that makes such an argument is apologist Nazi claptrap, or that I say that as an 'easy-out' has absolutely no basis whatsoever. I suggest you reconsider your view. I hope I have made clear enough that you are totally wrong in that belief.

HWC section on the AHF forum:

http://forum.axishistory.com/viewforum.php?f=6

"... N'oubliez pas que cela fut.

Non ne l'oubliez pas:

Gravez ces mots dans votre coeur.

Pensez y chez vous, dans la rue,

en vous couchant, en vous levant;

Répétez le à vos enfants,

ou que votre maison s'écroule

Que la maladie vous accable,

que vos enfants se détournent de vous."

Primo Levi

All the best

Andreas

[Shmavis]

Here is the last thread that I can recall in which JasonC decided to "share his views". The first couple of replies are made by senior forum members without a trace of offense(although, Sergei changed tack quickly). Then, the fun begins...

[Mad Russian]

Andreas, please don't misconstrue my comment about the websites all being Nazi claptrap. In the less than 2 years I've wandered around this website I have never seen a website with an accepted alternate point of view. It has always been just another "Nazi claptrap" website.

I have never heard of the incident described: The 560 W-SS men killed at Dachau are an invention, often used by W-SS apologists to say 'See, the US was just as bad'. But just because I've never heard of it doesn't mean it didn't happen. During my own research into the war I have seen on several occasions where US troops would have been branded war criminals if the Germans had won. As a for instance, think about the bombing campaigns the destroyed German cities with the center of the city as the aiming point.

IIRC, and I may be wrong the SS was not an all volunteer oganization during it's entire life. I think later in the war that they were "sent" men like the other services. That of course does not apply to the Dutch volunteer. Just as an overall backdrop to the "they were all not a bunch of genocidal aryan fanatics".

Today it is a bit harder to understand the SS mentality. 1930's and 40's Europe was a different place.

The SS and the German military as a whole advertised that the war AFTER 1941 was a war against communism. Not a war of Aryan purity. The part about the blonde haired, blue eyed, fair skinned German went out the window early. There simply weren't enough of those to go around. So the SS had to recruit on something else. Destroying communism was a strong draw.

The West used it on more than one occassion itself.

When I read the story of our SS Dutchman I didn't see him as being fanatic. It says he joined to feed his family. That may well have been at his mother's behest. I don't know I wasn't there. Few things in life are black and white and I know that as a teenager I have done things I wished I hadn't later.

Once again, I don't remember the SS Dutchman being sorry that he joined the SS. I don't know if that is true or not either. There are alot of things we don't know about this man. And yet he has been branded a traitor, which I think you can make a strong case for, a murderer, rapist, genocidal aryan fanatic, etc...

Military organizations of all the worlds armies use an elite status as a recruiting tool. The SS I think was no different. "If you are going to fight for Germany why not fight with THE organization that will destroy communism??!!"

That would have been a powerful draw to a teenager. I know that because it still is. The US Navy Seals, US Army Rangers, as just two examples use that very draw for recruits today and they are all volunteer elite forces.

Don't mistake my position on the SS. They should not be glorified. The war as a whole should not be glorified. But to come to a website that is about playing at war and taking a stance that anybody who even whispers the letters SS is some kind of a fanatic is crazy.

I mean how can you play the Germans in the game? Weren't war crimes done by "ordinary" Germans as well? Do you agree with the "ordinary" German unit politics? Weren't the "ordinary" German soldiers in Russia too? Didn't they shoot and kill people in situations that were later construed to be wrong? Of course the answer to that is yes.

So why the SS? I think 2 reasons.

1st the concentration camps. Rightfully so. Normal army units didn't take part in the running and staffing of concentration camps. But they sent train loads of people to fill them up.

2nd the brutal force the SS used in their combat operations. They weren't on average as skilled as their German Army counterparts so they used brute force to get the job done. They had a reputation of fighting hard.

Tell me how many war crimes are the Waffen SS accused of in the time period of 1941-1945.

How many Germans were captured at Stalingrad? How many came home? How many even lived to go to the gulags? If Germany had won the war would that have been considered a war crime.

You see war is not about black and white. You see your best friend shot down right next to and then a moment later the guy that did it throws up his hands and surrenders. Do you shoot him? There is a good chance that you will. Have you committed a war crime? IF you shot him you definately have. Will you be charged for it? If you side win the war it is far more likely that you won't be.

That is my point.

In the case of warcrimes especially might makes right. The fact that the Germans committed them is well documented. What isn't so well documented by the victors is their own situations of doing exactly the same thing but not being charged for the acts.

[John Kettler]

Aco4bn187inf and troops,

ISTR that what really led to the unit's disbandment was "necklacing" prisoners while deployed in Africa. For those who don't know, the bound prisoner has a tire draped around the neck. Accelerants are applied, and the tire is then lit.

Regards,

John Kettler

[Andreas]

Originally posted by Panther Commander:

Andreas, please don't misconstrue my comment about the websites all being Nazi claptrap. In the less than 2 years I've wandered around this website I have never seen a website with an accepted alternate point of view. It has always been just another "Nazi claptrap" website.

Irrelevant - I am not talking about other websites, I am talking about this, specific website you linked. It is apologist Nazi claptrap (ANC) - I have given you my reasons. It is up to you to accept that or not or do your own research, and it is up to me to make up my mind about you or anyone else who accepts it at face value. What's the big deal?

Originally posted by Panther Commander:

I have never heard of the incident described: The 560 W-SS men killed at Dachau are an invention, often used by W-SS apologists to say 'See, the US was just as bad'. But just because I've never heard of it doesn't mean it didn't happen.

So, you never heard of it. When I tell you it did not happen like that (note that I did not say it did not happen), and tell you where to go to research it, you ignore my reasons, don't do the research, and continue to infer that I just dismiss any website being positive about the W-SS as ANC. Nice.

Originally posted by Panther Commander:

During my own research into the war I have seen on several occasions where US troops would have been branded war criminals if the Germans had won. As a for instance, think about the bombing campaigns the destroyed German cities with the center of the city as the aiming point.

I think about those a lot, any time I drive through a German city, and they were not warcrimes.

Originally posted by Panther Commander:

IIRC, and I may be wrong the SS was not an all volunteer oganization during it's entire life. I think later in the war that they were "sent" men like the other services. That of course does not apply to the Dutch volunteer. Just as an overall backdrop to the "they were all not a bunch of genocidal aryan fanatics".

Yes, I know, I think I said pretty much the same two posts ago. Remember, I am not JasonC, if you have an argument with him, address him.

Originally posted by Panther Commander:

When I read the story of our SS Dutchman I didn't see him as being fanatic. It says he joined to feed his family. That may well have been at his mother's behest. I don't know I wasn't there. Few things in life are black and white and I know that as a teenager I have done things I wished I hadn't later.

Did you join Al Quaida, fight Americans, and slay Christians, or did you speed with your new Thunderbird and crash it? There is a qualitative difference between these two. The former is equivalent to what the Dutchman did, the latter is the kind of ordinary sin one normally associates with youth.

Originally posted by Panther Commander:

Once again, I don't remember the SS Dutchman being sorry that he joined the SS. I don't know if that is true or not either. There are alot of things we don't know about this man. And yet he has been branded a traitor, which I think you can make a strong case for, a murderer, rapist, genocidal aryan fanatic, etc...

I see him as a traitor. I have not posted anything else of the things you say. Unless you completely want to misconstrue the line in my previous post - so just in case, when I wrote the line 'genocidal aryan fanatics', I did not mean that the W-SS was that, but that there are people who think so, and there are websites who say they were not. In the latter case, I look at each website when I come across them to take a view of whether the defense is credible. The charge is not credible, I am sorry if that was not clear.

Originally posted by Panther Commander:

Military organizations of all the worlds armies use an elite status as a recruiting tool. The SS I think was no different. "If you are going to fight for Germany why not fight with THE organization that will destroy communism??!!"

That would have been a powerful draw to a teenager. I know that because it still is. The US Navy Seals, US Army Rangers, as just two examples use that very draw for recruits today and they are all volunteer elite forces.

We are not talking about a national recruit, we are talking about a Dutchman joining, voluntarily, the army of a nation that had overrun his country, maybe in a formation that would later engage the forces of his own country coming to liberate it. I hope the difference between that and normal recruitment are clear.

Originally posted by Panther Commander:

Don't mistake my position on the SS. They should not be glorified. The war as a whole should not be glorified. But to come to a website that is about playing at war and taking a stance that anybody who even whispers the letters SS is some kind of a fanatic is crazy.

How about you show me where I did this in this thread? Or are you now on your soapbox and this is no longer addressed to me?

Originally posted by Panther Commander:

I mean how can you play the Germans in the game? Weren't war crimes done by "ordinary" Germans as well? Do you agree with the "ordinary" German unit politics? Weren't the "ordinary" German soldiers in Russia too? Didn't they shoot and kill people in situations that were later construed to be wrong? Of course the answer to that is yes.

On the off-chance that you are not on your soapbox but still talking to me, I have no trouble playing the Germans, or the W-SS. I can tell the game apart from reality.

Originally posted by Panther Commander:

Tell me how many war crimes are the Waffen SS accused of in the time period of 1941-1945.

No idea. How many?

Originally posted by Panther Commander:

How many Germans were captured at Stalingrad? How many came home? How many even lived to go to the gulags? If Germany had won the war would that have been considered a war crime.

How is that relevant, and can you show that those of the Stalingrad survivors who died in captivity were murdered? You do know that the Red Army gave immediate medical care to soldiers who surrendered at Stalingrad, according to one of the 5-6,000 who survived?

Originally posted by Panther Commander:

You see war is not about black and white. You see your best friend shot down right next to and then a moment later the guy that did it throws up his hands and surrenders. Do you shoot him? There is a good chance that you will. Have you committed a war crime? IF you shot him you definately have. Will you be charged for it? If you side win the war it is far more likely that you won't be.

Actually, if your side loses the war you are also quite unlikely to be charged for it. But if you can tell me how many German soldiers were charged for the kind of crime you describe (if any), I may change my mind.

Originally posted by Panther Commander:

In the case of warcrimes especially might makes right. The fact that the Germans committed them is well documented. What isn't so well documented by the victors is their own situations of doing exactly the same thing but not being charged for the acts.

Actually, the Dachau incident is very well documented in the history of 45th Division 'The Rock of Anzio'. Just one example. I wish that German divisional histories were as frank.

All the best

Andreas

[Dead Horse]

Originally posted by John Kettler:

Aco4bn187inf and troops,

ISTR that what really led to the unit's disbandment was "necklacing" prisoners while deployed in Africa. For those who don't know, the bound prisoner has a tire draped around the neck. Accelerants are applied, and the tire is then lit.

Regards,

John Kettler

This seems like confusion on your part; neckalcing was done in theatre, but not by the CAR. The Canadian atrocities revolved around two deaths, one as a result of a night-long beating and torture session. The CAR had orders to shoot "between the skirt and the flip-flops" but widespread torture of prisoners was not commonplace.

The Somalia Inquiry documents are widely available on the internet.

[Andreas]

Originally posted by Panther Commander:

So why the SS? I think 2 reasons.

1st the concentration camps. Rightfully so. Normal army units didn't take part in the running and staffing of concentration camps. But they sent train loads of people to fill them up.

2nd the brutal force the SS used in their combat operations. They weren't on average as skilled as their German Army counterparts so they used brute force to get the job done. They had a reputation of fighting hard.

Forgot about this one.

You forget reason No. 3. Massacres of POWs such as happened at Wormhoudt, Abbaye l'Ardenne, Le Paradis, Malmédy, and of civilians such as at Oradour-sur-Glarne, Tulle, Sant' Anna di Stazzema, Marzabotto, and in the east.

Clearly, ordinary Wehrmacht divisions (e.g. 1. Gebirgsdivision, some of the security divisions in the east, etc.) contributed to the trail of slaughter and genocide that German forces slashed through Europe, but it is quite interesting to see the number of crimes associated with the W-SS, compared to its small size. For example in Italy, one division, 16. Reichsführer SS, killed ca. 20% of all civilians killed in massacres in Italy, according to a source I have seen.

All the best

Andreas

[Aragorn2002]

Originally posted by Panther Commander:

It certainly must have been bad for them to be banned. JasonC cusses people out, tells them to leave the forum like he owns it, tells them to go somewhere and die and he gets to stay./QUOTE]

Exactly. All animals are equal, but some animals at this forum appear to be more equal than others. Even worse is that he seems to encourage ignorant idiots like Santosdiablo to open their big mouth.

[Santosdiablo]

I think if you just look at the linkyou will see that you are wrong Stalind did not kill more than Hitler

Just look under the Topic Death toll

[Aragorn2002]

To defend Stalin is as worse as defending Hitler. They were both murderous thugs, who caused Europe and the rest of the world an ocean of misery. I'm not interested in death tolls or a "top ten of mass murderers". Stalin and Hitler were criminals of the worst kind. And the kind of overreacting like JasonC did has been the end of many a good post. I bet most people here did join this forum because they love this game and all that it includes. I want to see posts like these: http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=30;t=004115#000000

and

http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=30;t=004088#000006

Not some oversensitive egotist calling other people nazis or fascists. So many people around here that have so much factual knowledge about tactics, weapons and other interesting aspects of warfare and what is the discussion? Whether Stalin killed more people than Hitler...It's disgusting and it annoys the hell out of me. Stop playing the forum thug and share your knowledge, or if you don't like the subject give some civil comments or stay out of it.

[ November 08, 2005, 12:23 PM: Message edited by: Aragorn2002 ]

[George MC]

Thought this might be of interest...

Eastern Front veteran account

Cheers fur noo

George Mc

[stoat]

Originally posted by Santosdiablo:

I think if you just look at the linkyou will see that you are wrong Stalind did not kill more than Hitler

Just look under the Topic Death toll

Since you really seem to like this link as a source, I will show you what it says.

MEDIAN: 51 million for the entire Stalin Era

That's 35,000,000 deaths which can probably be blamed on Hitler to one extent or another.

You seem to be good at math. Tell me how this illustrates that Hitler killed more people.

[JasonC]

I had given up on this thread, but I think I'll pour in one last can of gasoline, because the Nazi defenders are getting a little too smug and comfortable with themselves.

There is no moral equivalence between the actions of Nazis and of Germany, and those of the western allies in WW II. The western allies did not start the war. Hitler did, the Nazis did, Germany did. They are to blame for everything that followed. Every scrap of it. Pretending Germany was just another equal belligerent like any other, in some natural disaster from on high, will not fly. If the war had been a noble crusade Germany might get all the credit for it. But it wasn't. It was one of the most squalid episodes in human history, and the men who voluntarily choose it and brought it on, were and are scum and the enemies of the entire human race.

Germany did not fight WW II to save Europe from communism. Germany started the war by allying with communists to destroy the nation that actually did save Europe from communism - back in 1920 - the Poles. Germany fought WW II to enslave mankind, establish a master race, exterminate entire peoples, and as far as in them lay, to return all mankind to a barbarian age of blood and fire and death.

Hitler was not a statesman but a madman and a criminal. The Nazis were not a German elite but mere thugs and gangsters and the worst rulers of Germany in its entire history, back to times when all we have is a few lines from Tacitus to tell us what was going on. WW II was the worst disaster for Germany since the thirty years war and it was entirely self inflicted. Nobody can understand the first thing about WW II who does not understand, right at the outset, that the most educated people on the planet when stark raving mad and marched off enthusiastically under the orders of homicidal lunatics in pursuit of raving incoherent nonsense plus mass murder.

And this is not simply one perspective on the war, it is the historical truth about it. Germany could never have won the war, they never had the beginings of an inkling on an idea how they would defeat the US for instance. But if they had, all of the above would have still been true and in spades. In the ensuing dark age, the Nazis would still have fallen, because there was absolutely nothing there to build with or on. They just would have wrecked even more and killed additional millions. Stopping them was incumbent on all of civilization, on the whole human race, and was for the benefit of everyone else, the German people included.

Nothing can change any of the above. No spin can reduce it even a smidgen. No time, no imaginary fantastic alternate histories, can move any of it an inch.

Everyone involved at the time bears some responsibility for all of it. But in different degrees, partially varying with where they were individually placed, partially with what they individually did. And a lot varying with what they thought of it all and what they have learned, and done, since. Hitler and the ringleaders are world-historical criminals for all time. Not even success could have palliated that, in the slightest, and certainly nothing since has.

Other men of influence at the time bear significant responsibility for Germany's actions, including senior members of her armed forces, both Heer and SS. Those who believed in all of it, enthusiastically supported the war, wished for and welcomed it, are guilty as all get out. And they are not rare. Those who did not, but felt it their duty to support their country even in a cause they might recognize as bad, can be understood and forgiven - but there is something there that needs forgiveness, and there is no honor in it. Not a scrap.

Those who had no real choice in the matter and were swept up in events beyond a human scale or their lowly powers, we can sympathize with. But that sympathy is conditional - on recognition that the cause was not a just one, that the war was a tragedy for mankind and an avoidable one, that better men than themselves were dying needlessly at their hands. Those who boast of none of it, who are sorry for all of it, who wish it had never happened, *and* did not have any real choice in the matter - we can and should, sympathize with in all charity.

But those who supported it and still do so are not in that position. Those who defend it are not in that position. Those who claim is was honorable and worthy and they themselves are paragons, are not in that position. They are self righteous evil scum, enemies of the whole human race, and deserve our contempt.

Some may have supported it at the time, but regret it now. They are guilty but know it. How we view them should depend on the depth and sincerety of their contrition. There is no contrition with self-righteous self-regard. Nor is there any sincere contrition without actual deeds to make up for what one has done, consciously. The lowliest private who thought even once that it was great that Germany was winning and was thrilled at the prospect of conquering other (entirely innocent) peoples, has much to be contrite for, even if he never did more than was legally compelled of him and never broke any of the laws of war, personally. That is individual guilt for an individual failing.

That is why we should have no patience for the neo Nazis defending Germany as a whole in WW II. We also should have no patience for those defending the SS in particular. You have to be pretty gullible or pretty stupid to think the average man in the SS didn't believe in the cause he was fighting for. Enthusiatically. There may be exceptions and one can allow for them. But most of them volunteered, all of them swore to die for Hitler, almost all of them killed better men than themselves for no adequate or just reason, simply to further the mad ambitions of evil men, who they largely agreed with.

And that is doubly true of foreign volunteers for the SS. To all of the above, they add treason. And they subtract the explanation, that they simply asked for the most notable branch of service (itself a naive view incidentally - these men did not think the SS were unconnected with the political regime).

German guilt for the war as a whole cannot be washed away. It can be atoned for, by better conduct and repudiation of past actions and principles. But it is not atoned for when instead that guilt is deliberately denied and attempts are made to minimize it with moral equivalence games and relativist dodges and the pretence that it is all just up to the victors. That is neo Nazi excuse making and propaganda. Even if those peddling it do not recognize it as what it is, that remains what it is.

Fewer than were guilty were punished. That was leniency, not a requirement of justice. Do not confuse them. Leniency is for the guilty, especially when there are masses of them and chastizement would do more harm than good. It removes nothing of the stain of guilt. Only contrition can do that, it is not in the victors' power.

As for the ankle biting ad homimums, most here already know I served in the US army reserves, in the artillery. I doubt many know I served on 8 inch self propelled howitzers (also trained of 155s, to be sure). I can't imagine why anyone on earth would care, but somebody asked.

As for the original poster, I have to tell him that I simply have no reason to trust him and do not take him at his word. I think he deliberately set out to praise old SS men and I think that is a slimy thing to run around deliberately doing. If he makes a habit of it he can expect similar reactions. Nazis aren't cool. Nazism isn't neato. Real outright Nazi apologists are still around and they are very nasty pieces of work. If you aren't one of them, stop acting like one so the rest of us can tell.

To PC, I think you are peddling Nazi apologetics. I do not know if you are aware that is what you are doing but I am inclined to think so. Charity prompts me to consider an alternate explanation - you are morally blind rather than twisted. You cannot see the horror in the actions of men of the past. No one can plead moral blindness as to his own actions, because he is responsible for them. But you are not responsible for the actions of others, that you wrongly excuse. So perhaps you just can't see what they did and why they did it. Some of us can, and know all men are capable of such actions, and only forceful confrontation warns men away from them.

There is no moral and consistent position that can excuse the actions of a Dutch traitor joining the SS in WW II. Perhaps your love of relativism sends you scurrying around looking for one, because the very idea there might be entirely condemned positions and actions in the world, gives you the willies. It is a fool's errand, if so. Relativism is false, and leads to moral blindness. If your neighbors truly acted on it you'd be up in arms in a matter of days.

I notice, for instance, that you felt inclined to defend SS men from my attacks as directed at whole groups, which you say is just like the problem with them. You don't seem to notice the entire absence of coherence in this combination. If their maxims were blameworthy, then blaming them for them is worthy, and you have nothing to complain about. If they weren't, then you have no reason to treat my supposedly acting on them as something to blame.

The reality is, there is only one position that can defend the conduct of the Nazis, and it is Nazism. Which believed might made right, and the victory of their race in war was the only important thing. When you claim they are only condemned because they lost, you are buying their Nazi ideology second hand. No, they lost because they deserved to lose, and they deserved to lose because they were evil. And anybody who supported them furthered evil, and either admits and atones for it or remains evil. And anybody who defends it still today, remains evil, or at the most charitable, morally blind.

None of which has anything to do with CM. Having said my piece, I will now drop it, and let the faithless propagandists worry their bones some more.

[ November 08, 2005, 06:56 PM: Message edited by: JasonC ]

[Corvidae]

deleted by poster

[ November 08, 2005, 07:21 PM: Message edited by: Corvidae ]

[BulletRat]

Ah c'mon - the SS wern't that bad, in fact... I rather like em!

[PzKpfwIII]

Originally posted by JasonC:

[QB] There is no moral equivalence between the actions of Nazis and of Germany, and those of the western allies in WW II. The western allies did not start the war. Hitler did, the Nazis did, Germany did. They are to blame for everything that followed. Every scrap of it. Pretending Germany was just another equal belligerent like any other, in some natural disaster from on high, will not fly. If the war had been a noble crusade Germany might get all the credit for it. But it wasn't. It was one of the most squalid episodes in human history, and the men who voluntarily choose it and brought it on, were and are scum and the enemies of the entire human race.

One finds it hard to argue with this, so long as you are not demonizing "them"; the Nazis were, unfortunately, flesh and blood humans who loved their families, had hopes and dreams like everyone else, and who thought that taking over their neighbours and exterminating the Jews, the gypsies, the mentally infirm, the handicapped, and the elderly would bring about Utopia. I'm not sure if your objections to that are religious, or athiestically moral, (I know what mine are) and that would be besides the point anyway - but the main point here is that they felt that science, history, maybe even common sense supported what they were doing. They even expected to go down in history for it; Goering was convinced there would be statues of him in every German home. I think (or hope) that we all would have a hard time understanding how they thought that way today. But everything is relative. We rightly condemn them through our own lens, but somehow, millions of people convinced themselves and each other that what they were doing was natural and legal - or perhaps even immoral and illegal but necessary. I suppose in the latter case we have self-imposed martyrdom. ("I may go to Hell for murdering undesirables, but Germany will finally be cleansed of all its ills.")

It's perverted to be sure, but not the work of beasts.

Germany did not fight WW II to save Europe from communism. Germany started the war by allying with communists to destroy the nation that actually did save Europe from communism - back in 1920 - the Poles. Germany fought WW II to enslave mankind, establish a master race, exterminate entire peoples, and as far as in them lay, to return all mankind to a barbarian age of blood and fire and death.

Mostly right, but the demonization at the end just sounds foolish. Hitler wanted to retire to Austria after his "work" was finished, build cities, and quietly live in retirement. Or so he said. Others figure he would have got Von Braun hopping so he could send jackbooted astronauts to take over the moon. I have no insights into which he really hoped to achieve.

Hitler was not a statesman but a madman and a criminal. The Nazis were not a German elite but mere thugs and gangsters and the worst rulers of Germany in its entire history, back to times when all we have is a few lines from Tacitus to tell us what was going on.

This is all true as well; they were poorly organized (lucky for us) and criminal. Hitler may have been a "madman" but if you are speaking clinically, as in insane, he most certainly wasn't. I wouldn't defend him as being rational, I guess I wonder what your definition of "madman" is. Whatever it is, I think it's bad enough - worse really - to think that a rational human being could come to the kinds of conclusions on race and social Darwinism as he did.

WW II was the worst disaster for Germany since the thirty years war and it was entirely self inflicted. Nobody can understand the first thing about WW II who does not understand, right at the outset, that the most educated people on the planet when stark raving mad and marched off enthusiastically under the orders of homicidal lunatics in pursuit of raving incoherent nonsense plus mass murder.

Take them on an individual basis though. You can't blame it all on insanity, not millions of people. Was Speer "mad"? He was brilliant. And a liar after the war. And he knowingly achieved miracles with the armaments portfolio knowing full well that he was using slave labor. I've never heard him described as "mad" though. You just dilute your statements with this. They weren't lunatics, they were thinking human beings, which makes it all much more chilling. Some would say Americans are starting to go down the same path. That doesn't frighten you?

Everyone involved at the time bears some responsibility for all of it. But in different degrees, partially varying with where they were individually placed, partially with what they individually did. And a lot varying with what they thought of it all and what they have learned, and done, since. Hitler and the ringleaders are world-historical criminals for all time. Not even success could have palliated that, in the slightest, and certainly nothing since has.

This is true and well stated.

Those who had no real choice in the matter and were swept up in events beyond a human scale or their lowly powers, we can sympathize with. But that sympathy is conditional - on recognition that the cause was not a just one, that the war was a tragedy for mankind and an avoidable one, that better men than themselves were dying needlessly at their hands. Those who boast of none of it, who are sorry for all of it, who wish it had never happened, *and* did not have any real choice in the matter - we can and should, sympathize with in all charity.

But you would deny the "fact" of an 18 year old Dutch boy volunteering for the SS as being "swept up in it." Fair position, just wondering where you draw the line. Plenty of German males enlisted before being called up - were they swept up...or were they criminals?

[Aco4bn187inf]

George Mc,

That is a very interesting combat memoir, and it contains a reminder that not every SS man volunteered for it, and that all sides did indeed commit war crimes. (Not to make an equavalence between the Allied project and the German one as a whole.)

Did you notice, though, that the contact email address on the introduction page of the site uses an acronym for one of Hitler's titles? Grofaz- Grossester Feldherr Alle Zeit (I may be misspelling it.) It would appear that the site is run by someone who admires or identifies with Hitler, and I do not trust any such person who sets himself up as an editor of historical material.

(By the way, I'm playing Schwerpunkt Glowaczow right now, and it is awesome!)

[Shmavis]

Gasoline, indeed! JasonC, it is so very easy to observe and make judgements from your comfortable home after lengthy reading on Second World War history some 60 years later. You deal in absolutes, with which I utterly disagree, and, ironically, would call a fanatic's method.

With a little patience, you could steer the confused and ill-informed in the right direction. Instead, you hurl your insults and alienate from the beginning. This forum has seen a few neo-nazis on their merry way. Maybe, it needs to bid farewell to its self-appointed High Inquisitor.

[George MC]

Originally posted by Aco4bn187inf:

George Mc,

That is a very interesting combat memoir, and it contains a reminder that not every SS man volunteered for it, and that all sides did indeed commit war crimes. (Not to make an equavalence between the Allied project and the German one as a whole.)

Did you notice, though, that the contact email address on the introduction page of the site uses an acronym for one of Hitler's titles? Grofaz- Grossester Feldherr Alle Zeit (I may be misspelling it.) It would appear that the site is run by someone who admires or identifies with Hitler, and I do not trust any such person who sets himself up as an editor of historical material.

(By the way, I'm playing Schwerpunkt Glowaczow right now, and it is awesome!)

No I had'nt noticed that - hhmm.. dangerous waters out there methinks. I'll take another look at it....

Glad you are enjoying Schwerpunkt - I'm currently playing Stuetzpunkt as the Soviets and having a bit of rough time!

I'd appreciate any feedabck where you are done with it?

Cheers fur noo

George

[Santosdiablo]

You didnt give any refrences

And the link i gave this one says 20 million to Stalin but dont forget he also helped people with his medical program and job program you only see the negative no the positive

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stalin

[Sergei]

Originally posted by Santosdiablo:

dont forget he also helped people with his medical program and job program

Again, you're being an idiot.

[Santosdiablo]

No no i wrote this before

it is from the link

Stalin's government placed heavy emphasis on the provision of free medical services. Campaigns were carried out against typhus, cholera, and malaria; the number of doctors was increased as rapidly as facilities and training would permit; and death and infant mortality rates steadily declined. Education in primary schools continued to be free and was expanded, with many more Soviet citizens learning to read and write, and higher education also expanded. Stalin was the only ruler in the history of Russia and Soviet Union who established fees for secondary education in public schools. With the industrialization and heavy human losses due to the World War II and repressions the generation that survived under Stalin saw a major expansion in job opportunities, especially for women.

Stop beeing so angry and just read the link

[Sergei]

I know you wrote it before (and I replied), which is why I said that you're again being an idiot. To add to that, your only source seems to be Wikipedia, which proves that you're no historian. You keep spouting off irrelevant tidbits, issues which only a staunch Stalinist would specifically thank Stalin for. To quote myself:

Would you do the same when talking about Hitler and his crimes? How he rebuilt the German economy like no-one else could have, how he sacrificed lives to defend Germany, how he blah blah blah?

[The Leader]

Finally, a thread I can get into...where do I start?

Would you do the same when talking about Hitler and his historic struggle? How he rebuilt the German economy like no-one else could have, how he sacrificed lives to defend Germany, how he nearly made the world a perfect place?

Ahh...perhaps we can start there.

The idea that Stalin was anything but a butcher and a thug is repugnant. Sergei is wise to repudiate these propagandistic lies.

I could go on but Hermann Goering is coming over for a late afternoon tea and he insists the pastries be "just so."

[ November 09, 2005, 11:36 AM: Message edited by: The Leader ]