How Rude!

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by Prince of Eckmühl:

I believe that it's also true, that the regular Army had NO respect for the SS as a professional fighting force, viewing them rather as the ultimate expression of Nazi meddling in matters about which they were the worst sort of amateurs.

PoE

Far too general. Some officers may have felt that way and many troops too, but it depends on time and place. Many Army units (such as Großdeutschland, which was not a division to sneeze at by 1943) considered the SS they fought with "good comrades". But again, it depends on which SS units one is considering, what time period, and whom is considering them...

However, your conclusion that they were a bad idea is apt. Ditto the Luftwaffe Field Divisions, the parachute armoured division "Hermann Goering" and other similar private armies that drew valuable resources from the Army. Some units could be justified (HG) more than others (most of the LFD).

[Canuck_TAR]

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Canuck_TAR:

- Have carried ammo.........not fun.

- Even the C9 has a 200rd box.........a 30 rd mag is a draw back in the time to change it. Try the C9 with mags, its a pain in the rear.

- CDN section have 2 C9's per......only at the Pl level will you find the C6. C6 light role rated to 800M, SF roll 1800M. Reaching out and touching someone at distance, even at the sction level is better than dealing with them up close.

- C2.........Your dating yourself!!! LOL!!!

- The CDN force also had a LMG, was the .30 cal american model, replaced the Bren.

Hey, I never said I fired the C2, though in honesty, I have. Once with blanks, once on the range. We replaced them the year after I did my basic.

The Brownings we used (C5?) were rebored to NATO (.308 Winchester) rather than the US 30.06, but yeah, same weapon. It was also a GPMG and used at platoon level AFAICT and did not replace the Bren - the C2 did. </font>

[Andreas]

Originally posted by Canuck_TAR:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

and a general purpose machine gun that ate up ammunition in astonishing quantities.

You mean the MG42..........the best MG of its time and to this day?? </font>

[Andreas]

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Andreas:

I am going to have to accuse you of wisdom now. See how you like it.

All the best

Andreas

I suspect I shall like it much more than when you called me a 'tosser' and told me to shut up, but then I've always been sensitive that way. </font>

[Sammy_Davis_Jnr]

Some info to go with the present debate... a little of topic but may interest some.

http://www.oradour.info/appendix/ssrank01.htm

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

Each problem that I solved became a rule which served afterwards to solve other problems.

- Rene Descartes

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by Andreas:

Flattery will get you anywhere. Hasn't Bugged told you? :confused:

All the best

Andreas

Told? Unfortunately, we learn by doing.

Unfortunately, some women (and some Germans) seem to confuse sincere compliments with flattery on a regular basis...or perhaps it is simply my air of insincerity that makes it all so maddening. Makes for interesting times nonetheless.

[Jussi Köhler]

SS-Head Company Leader: Is that like Über Latrine-Group Commander?

Fantastic link!!! Just a bit off topic, but who cares, its gots SS!!!

[RMC]

Originally posted by Andreas:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Canuck_TAR:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

and a general purpose machine gun that ate up ammunition in astonishing quantities.

You mean the MG42..........the best MG of its time and to this day?? </font>

[Andreas]

I fully agree with that, but I think it is clear from the reduction in ROF that it was not the final word in GPMG design.

I also think however that Michael is raising a valid point in terms of the impact on tactics, something that is described quite well in Jary.

All the best

Andreas

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by Sigrun:

But then the US army has never been able to fight toe-to-toe and win. Take away the incredible long-range fire-power and air-cover and you have a paper tiger.

It seems silly to criticize an army with an effective artillery-based doctrine by saying they can't win without artillery. Mainly, reliance on artillery is not a sin and there is no such thing as "fighting fair" in warfare. And secondly, taking away artillery and airpower has not demonstrably reduced US combat effectiveness in places like Bastogne or other parts of the Bulge, to name the most obvious example.

If the Germans were so clever, why didn't they develop a better artillery system of their own? Come to that, they had very effective mortars integral to their battalions and regiments. And reasonably good artillery pieces whose drawback was in higher level organization (and only by comparison to what a British FOO could do).

How do you think a German defence would have looked if one took away the mortars and artillery?

[Sergei]

Originally posted by Sigrun:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Sergei:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Sigrun:

Having the opinion (and calling it fact) that the general German soldier was a civilised, cultured and honourable man, whilst most soviet soldiers were illiterate child rapists, does not make me a nazi.

Would you like to explain just how "the general German soldier" was civilized, cultured and honourable? They read Goethe? They refused to carry out illegal and immoral orders? They felt in any way that them being civilized, cultured and honourable might contradict with them obeying rabid Nazis? And how were "most Soviet soldiers" illiterate child rapists? Do you have some new statistics showing that literacy percentage in Soviet Union during 1940's was < 50%? And of the 29 million men and women drafted into Red Army during WW2, how many did rape children?

Obviously you're a racist liar, as merely calling you ignorant fool would be the understatement of year. </font>

[Sigrun]

Originally posted by Sergei:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Sigrun:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Sergei:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Sigrun:

Having the opinion (and calling it fact) that the general German soldier was a civilised, cultured and honourable man, whilst most soviet soldiers were illiterate child rapists, does not make me a nazi.

Would you like to explain just how "the general German soldier" was civilized, cultured and honourable? They read Goethe? They refused to carry out illegal and immoral orders? They felt in any way that them being civilized, cultured and honourable might contradict with them obeying rabid Nazis? And how were "most Soviet soldiers" illiterate child rapists? Do you have some new statistics showing that literacy percentage in Soviet Union during 1940's was < 50%? And of the 29 million men and women drafted into Red Army during WW2, how many did rape children?

Obviously you're a racist liar, as merely calling you ignorant fool would be the understatement of year. </font>

[Sergei]

Originally posted by Sigrun:

2,000,000 women and children say you're wrong. And it's got nothing to do with race, so spare us that lame fall-back bleat whydoncha.

I told you to prove your claims objectively and rationally, not to repeat them.

Since the majority of Soviet soldiers in WW2 had died before a single German child had been raped by their comrades, and since literacy levels in Soviet Union were above 80 % by the start of the war, you're a racist liar.

[Prince of Eckmühl]

A synopsis of a book by Anthony Beevor, "Berlin -- The Downfall 1945," Viking, 2002:

Millions of women victims raped by Russian soldiers during the last months of World War II. Anthony Beevor's book "Berlin -- The Downfall 1945" documents rape by Russian soldiers. "Beevor's conclusions are that in response to the vast scale of casualties inflicted on them by the Germans the Soviets responded in kind, and that included rape on a vast scale. It started as soon as the Red Army entered East Prussia and Silesia in 1944, and in many towns and villages every female aged from 10 to 80 was raped." The author "was 'shaken to the core' to discover that even their own Russian and Polish women and girls liberated from German concentration camps were also violated." He estimates that "a 'high proportion' of at least 15 million women who lived in the Soviet zone or were expelled from Germany's eastern provinces were raped." Until recent years, East German women from the World War II era referred to the Red Army war memorial in Berlin as "the Tomb of the Unknown Rapist."

More details about Beevor's book can be found here:

http://www.cdi.org/russia/johnson/6043-11.cfm

PoE

[Balder]

War is war is war. If you say the way how the russians fight was very bloody - and also against the civil population, then this is very connected with the german crimes against the russian people during the war. It is very wrong to say that "this is how the russians are" for example. This shortens the whole historical situation which was an imperialistic war and not tea-time. There is no honour to serve your state or to be degraded to a killing machine...

[ October 11, 2006, 11:07 AM: Message edited by: balder ]

[Battlefront.com]

Sergei,

I told you to prove your claims objectively and rationally, not to repeat them.

Don't bother, he can't. No more than he can pull up a source that explains how it is that a handful of Concentration Camp guards managed to round up and slaughter probably 20,000,000 civilians all on their own without any help from the nice and honerable average German in uniform. Not to mention the untold misery and property damage that was caried out all over Europe. Or for that matter who it was that executed thousands of Italian soldiers in Yugoslavia. I suppose, since they are Italians, they simply ate themselves to death or died from sexually transmitted diseases while the good officers of the Heer tried to save them from themselves.

The problem with Sigrun is he sees things only from one VERY slanted perspective and rejects anything that questions his core beliefs. Therefore, arguing with him is no different than arguing with a neo-Nazi (not coincidentally either). He's got his mind made up and that is that. Self dellusion is such a weakness of the Human mind's construction.

As for me, someone who has studied WW2 seriously for nearly 20 years (and has a piece of paper to prove at least 4 of those years) I see both sides.

When I was young and niave I thought a lot of the same things Sigrun does. I thought the Waffen SS were cool and were superior soldiers. Ironically, this was mostly because of books written by the "victors" and not those written by Germans. The Waffen SS is overly glorified in English writings. It wasn't until I grew up and got a more detailed education that I started to see the great flaws in this thinking. The main reason why is I took my boyhood interest in the Waffen SS and researched the heck out of it. That's where I learned to balance out their great acheivements (and there are many) with their great defeats and their institutional flaws.

I do believe that the average German fought no different than an Allied soldier (and that includes the Soviets). But the attrocities were not comitted by only a handful of selected people. It took millions of men and women to pull them off. Millions that did it knowing what role they were playing. The masacres of Soviet and Italian POWs, for example, were carried out at the front and often in places where no SS were at the time. To claim these things didn't happen is a lie.

Steve

[Michael Dorosh]

Steve, how dare you cheapen the debate by dragging your BA into this. Especially before I had a chance to bring in mine.

I note that Sigrun has not answered any of my posts; again, because one doubts he can.

In addition to your excellent comments, Steve, I think many people had the experience of being initially impressed by the combat record of the Waffen SS if not by the snazzy uniforms. Like you, I feel fortunate to have grown out of that phase, and pity those that haven't.

[Canuck_TAR]

Well SS or Reg HEER...........I'll give them one thing.........fight for 6 years straight an your bound to have the experience on your side.

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by Canuck_TAR:

Well SS or Reg HEER...........I'll give them one thing.........fight for 6 years straight an your bound to have the experience on your side.

No, you're bound to have a sprinkling of exhausted vets interspersed with absurdities like 16 year old draftees and 25 year old regimental colonels. This was the norm for all the major participants in the Second World War by 1944-45. Your experienced ones would be in many cases six feet under, mentally unstable, missing limbs or eyesight, on convalescent/instructional duty, or in a bomb-proof job back of the lines.

[Battlefront.com]

Yes, let us not go to far to the opposite extreme when disporving Sigrun's distortion of history. There are few nations in the world, especially at that time, that could have waged such a massive war (against armies as well as civilians) over such a huge expanse of terrain with such limited natural resources and operating under one of the most inefficient government structures ever to survive outside of peacetime. On top of all that they still managed to find ways to advance science and make the best of the hardships that were mounting by the middle and end of the war.

To me it is not amazing that they were defeated, it is amazing that they were able to hold out for so long. Quite amazing. And I think that is where things like the Waffen SS, Tiger tanks, and this or that small scale engagement get blown out of proportion to their actual impact on the war. These things are symbolic of the Third Reich's successes in the face of its massive failings (politically, social, industrially, and of course militarily).

But they are really nothing more than that... symbols. When you look at the snappy uniforms the Waffen SS used, in person, for most of the war you can see the poor quality of the wool. And if you do your homework you'd find out that the uniform was most likely made by Concentration Camp inmates or general slave labor. To only look at the B&W pictures of "cool looking" Waffen SS troopers without thinking about these other issues is not seeing the whole picture. I think about the inmates of Dachau, a place I have visited, every time I handle my genuine Waffen SS issued camouflage Zeltbahn. Chances are that is where it was made, or a place like that, by people that never lived to see their own liberation.

Oh, and here is another interesting fact. History is written by the victors INITIALLY. But when the vanquished set up a free and open society they tend to try and tell the other side of the story. The materials available to people today are well rounded. Ironically, the false perception of German soldiers as übermensch was largely continued by the Western Allied victors after WWII because of the Cold War. It was in the West's interest to continue the myth that the Soviets were morally corrupt and inept criminals. It has only been in the last 20 years or so that the other side of the story has been able to be told. So on this point I agree with Sigrun... much of the post WWII history was written by the victors and was indeed distorted... but distorted in the same way his thinking is distorted, not in opposition to it. Interesting irony there.

Steve

[Sigrun]

The only irony Steve is your distorted thinking calling my thinking distorted. I've studied the subject matter ten years longer than you, and unlike you I'm not afraid to think freely and look outside the box by which you and your ilk are constrained.

"Millions took part" indeed; what complete and utter rubbish. But hugely funny. Clearly your four years at university taught you nothing of value. About the best you can come up with is rhetoric and crude insults, such as implying I must be a neo-nazi because I regard the Waffen-SS for what they were. A truly shabby display, but not so suprising when you are clearly playing to the cheap flattery of the peanut gallery.

And to bring up "snazzy uniforms" but made of "cheap material"...oh my god, how peurile?!

Trying to talk sense to so throughly indoctrinated mental stumps as you lot is no more productive than trying to herd cats. You don't debate, you simply hurl insults and abuse. "Nazi" this and "neo-nazi" that. A truly classic forum mob of buddy-back-slapping, communal-cock-pumping know-nothings.

[Michael Dorosh]

Steve - they treated their own soldiers like garbage too, almost as bad as the Soviets. There was no psychiatry (the science was seen as "too Jewish" whatever that meant) so legitimate neuropsychiatric patients were never assessed and likely left to suffer and die, unless a particularly benevolent commanding officer intervened. Tens of thousands of Germans were shot for "cowardice" (by contrast, just one American and one Canadian were executed for cowardice among the western Allies). They even shot officers simply for losing a battle - look at the officers who lost the Remagen Bridge in March 1945, some tried in absentia and sentenced to death, others shot after a flying court martial. Unheard of in the western armies to shoot someone just for losing. German aircrew had no mission limits the way Allied aircrew did - you flew until you were dead or crippled. Ditto submariners who had the highest incidence of fatal casualties of any military service short of the Kamikazes and perhaps the Japanese Army in the Pacific - with 75 percent of enlistees being killed in action.

That is how they 'held on as long as they did.' They had no choice. The western democracies didn't stoop to those lows despite very grim episodes in 1940 and 1941. An Army that treats its own men like cattle defies my own description of "best soldiers". Never mind the insane "stand or die" orders after all was lost and the moral cowardice of luminaries like Paulus or even Jodl, Keitel, Krebs, Burgdorf et al whom Sigrun describes as competent and cultured.

[ October 11, 2006, 12:04 PM: Message edited by: Michael Dorosh ]

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by Sigrun:

The only irony Steve is your distorted thinking calling my thinking distorted. I've studied the subject matter ten years longer than you, and unlike you I'm not afraid to think freely and look outside the box by which you and your ilk are constrained.

"Millions took part" indeed; what complete and utter rubbish. But hugely funny. Clearly your four years at university taught you nothing of value. About the best you can come up with is rhetoric and crude insults, such as implying I must be a neo-nazi because I regard the Waffen-SS for what they were. A truly shabby display, but not so suprising when you are clearly playing to the cheap flattery of the peanut gallery.

And to bring up "snazzy uniforms" but made of "cheap material"...oh my god, how peurile?!

Trying to talk sense to so throughly indoctrinated mental stumps as you lot is no more productive than trying to herd cats. You don't debate, you simply hurl insults and abuse. "Nazi" this and "neo-nazi" that. A truly classic forum mob of buddy-back-slapping, communal-cock-pumping know-nothings.

Are we convinced yet that he's a troll, Steve? Can we ban him yet?

[Balder]

@ Sigrun

You do not take the 'Waffen-SS' as what they were. They were subjects of a deadly ideology and they were used up for the interests of an imperialist state AND they were mostly fkn proud of it. You see them as knightly warriors and totally independent to the whole situation.

[Sigrun]

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

Are we convinced yet that he's a troll, Steve? Can we ban him yet?

Oh listen to it. Unable to present little more than it's own insults and abuse it now goes toadying to it's master for a ban. How utterly bankrupt you truly are.