Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

No its fine. Like I've said in past threads I screw up sometimes cause I have way to much bouncing around in my head Its probably less than healthy.

I are have same problem.

 LordofHats wrote:
Your forgetting the 4th, the 12th, the 14th, the 36th, the 1st SS Panzer. At the least.

1st Panzer: There has been almost as much ink as blood spilled re: the Malmedy massacre. Allied witnesses testified both for and against the Germans and forensic analysis is mixed. The Germans claimed the US soldiers tried to make a break for it and attacked a few of them, the US claimed no such thing happened. Both sides admit that a few soldiers escaped to a nearby Cafe, which the Germans responded by burning down and shooting those that tried to escape (which would hardly be the case of the runners were unarmed). While quite a few corpses showed head-shots, this is consistent with German operations in Russia where they would shoot the 'dead' to make sure. Witnesses on both sides admit that no order seemed to be given to initiate the whole thing. (It actually would have conflicted with standings orders re: captured allied officers)


4th: Yes, I know about the thing in Greece where a detachment started wiping out the village.

12th: Hitlerjugand's crimes are well known, however, the actual trial transcripts for Kurt Meyer show some rather glaring holes in the story, which led to his acquittal on several charges, and execution being commuted on the rest. (The biggest hole being that it was unclear if the prisoners had been killed by his own men or that of the AA regiment that was under a separate command but accompanied his forces. Meyer himself testified that he never gave an order to kill prisoners (and could prove he had issued orders that were quite the reverse) but did recall hearing gunfire on the afternoon in question.)

14th: "The Galicia Division (14. Waffen grenadier division der SS) should not be indicted as a group. The members of Galicia Division were individually screened for security purposes before admission to Canada. Charges of war crimes of Galicia Division have never been substantiated, either in 1950 when they were first preferred, or in 1984 when they were renewed, or before this Commission. Further, in the absence of evidence of participation or knowledge of specific war crimes, mere membership in the Galicia Division is insufficient to justify prosecution." - Findings of the Deschênes Commission.

36th: Dirlewanger has been discussed a great deal in my posts, and was assigned to the Waffen SS in late 1944, having spent the majority of the war as SS-Sonderbatallion "Dirlewanger" under the SS-Totenkopfverbände. In August of 1944, the 36th suffered 314% (IIRC) casualties compared to their original numbers at the beginning of the month.

I'm not even talking about Malmedy. When Barbarossa initiated the 1st SS went through several Russian towns and villiages and killed civilians. Of course given the Wormhoudt massacre, arguing the 1st SS didn't commit a massacre at Malmedy is kind of foolish. At that point in the war the execution of POW's was just common practice for Germany after the years of fighting on the Eastern Front where both sides did it like it was a contest. Soldiers didn't need orders to do it they just did it. And I'm actually in agreement that Sep Deitreich was railroaded in the Malmedy trial but that's a question of guilt not a question of 'did it happen.' EDIT: And of course, heaven forbid a criminal say 'But I didn't do it!"

The first confirmed war crimes in Europe were committed by the 1st and 2nd SS when they burned down villages in Poland with people still in them.

Which Division was the SS Adolf Hitler, The fuhrer's personal guard?

 nomsheep wrote:
Which Division was the SS Adolf Hitler, The fuhrer's personal guard?

1st SS Division Leibstandarte SS Adolf Hitler EDIT: Oh fun fact. Leibstandarte means 'Life Guard' but they were not guarding any pools

The Leibstandarte were his original body guards but starting with the invasion of Poland I think he got a different unit to do his guarding for him. I can't remember.

 LordofHats wrote:

 nomsheep wrote:
Which Division was the SS Adolf Hitler, The fuhrer's personal guard?

1st SS Division Leibstandarte SS Adolf Hitler

The Leibstandarte were his original body guards but starting with the invasion of Poland I think he got a different unit to do his guarding for him. I can't remember.

Thanks, They are the only unit I have any real knowledge of. They overextended repeatedly and were constantly trapped behind enemy lines iirc. I'm sure they went back and forth during the war but towards the end I believe the were guarding him again.

 LordofHats wrote:
I'm not even talking about Malmedy. When Barbarossa initiated the 1st SS went through several Russian towns and villiages and killed civilians. Of course given the Wormhoudt massacre, arguing the 1st SS didn't commit a massacre at Malmedy is kind of foolish. At that point in the war the execution of POW's was just common practice for Germany after the years of fighting on the Eastern Front where both sides did it like it was a contest. Soldiers didn't need orders to do it they just did it. And I'm actually in agreement that Sep Deitreich was railroaded in the Malmedy trial but that's a question of guilt not a question of 'did it happen.'

The first confirmed war crimes in Europe were committed by the 1st and 2nd SS when they burned down villages in Poland with people still in them.

I've always found it interesting that Wormhoudt never saw anyone tried for it, the commanding officer in charge, Wilhelm Mohnke, lived until 2001, and denied the charge.

And that's a gross generalization about German's taking POWs, at least in the West, where the Geneva Conventions were (largely, with several important exceptions) upheld. No one is arguing that Malmedy didn't happen, it's that it's unclear exactly what happened.

The issue I think is that the post-war trials were in a literalist sense, ex-post facto procedures. No court system or procedure existed for the investigations and trials before hand. They were made up on the spot so the results of various war crime trials and investigations differ widely for seemingly arbitrary reasons at times.

 LordofHats wrote:
The issue I think is that the post-war trials were in a literalist sense, ex-post facto procedures. No court system or procedure existed for the investigations and trials before hand. They were made up on the spot so the results of various war crime trials and investigations differ widely for seemingly arbitrary reasons at times.

Well, remember too that the whole point wasn't justice, it was to get as many Nazis to dance the Tyburn Jig as possible and give the whole thing the veneer of 'law'. With Meyer, the prosecution was only able to produce two witnesses, who's testimony conflicted not only with one another, but proven fact. He was found guilty, as the regulations he was charged under only required the prosecution to prove that he was the CO of the men who most likely did it, regardless of his own orders or any attempt to identify and punish the culprits on his part.

I think they wanted justice. But I do think there are significant ethical questions about the post war trials. People were horrified and thought such a thing had to be punished but there was nothing under which to punish those men so they had to make it up as they went along.

 LordofHats wrote:

 nomsheep wrote:
Which Division was the SS Adolf Hitler, The fuhrer's personal guard?

1st SS Division Leibstandarte SS Adolf Hitler EDIT: Oh fun fact. Leibstandarte means 'Life Guard' but they were not guarding any pools .

I get the feeling these lads don't guard pools either :p

Notice: Not comparing the Life Guard, senior regiment in the British army and half the household cavalry to Nazis, just pointing out that "Life Guard" is not an unknown term for a bodyguard unit. And that these lads dress better.

The Swedes have had one since the early 16th century.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_Guards_(Swedish_Army)
Possunt nec posse videntur!

 Mannahnin wrote:

Hmmm. I think them lads need a little more fiber in their diet

You violated your own rule #7.

Oh no, what have I done!

 LordofHats wrote:
I think they wanted justice. But I do think there are significant ethical questions about the post war trials. People were horrified and thought such a thing had to be punished but there was nothing under which to punish those men so they had to make it up as they went along.

The real issue is, while the bulk of them likely committed the acts they were charged with, then you get things like Meyer where no jury would have convicted, so they tried them before a military court martial, under another country's military justice system. There were quite a few cases where men were tried and occasionally executed, on testimony and evidence that would not have stood up in a criminal court, even one of the time.

 LordofHats wrote:
Of course the Red Army gave the Wehrmacht a good run in the war crimes department.

For sure.

And yet, for all the atrocities committed by the USSR before, during and after the war, it's weird how rarely you find people on the internet inventing strange little arguments about how the people of the USSR might theoretically have been entirely unaware of the situation.

And yet, people will make strange little arguments about how millions of people could be killed, either on site with bullets, or by being delivered to extermination camps, without the greater population being aware of this. Baffling.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 BaronIveagh wrote:
Yes, it's easy to see how I'm agreeing with you if you never bother to read the reports I'm talking about. Those that have know that I'm pointing out you're full of gak. The really amusing ones were the rare few where the SS actually put the culprits in front of a judge and tried them. When you get sentenced to death for 'rape, murder, and cruel, inhuman behavior unbecoming of a German officer' toward Jews by the SS, you may have gone too far (Gotta love sonderkommando Dirlewanger, what a bunch of cards!).

Hahahahaha! The SS tried some guy, therefore atrocities weren't consistent through the SS and greater Wehrmacht.

This is some weak gak, dude.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 BaronIveagh wrote:
And that's a gross generalization about German's taking POWs, at least in the West, where the Geneva Conventions were (largely, with several important exceptions) upheld.

And given that the war didn't exist only the West, that's a nonsense point.

The behaviour of German units, either SS or regular Wehrmacht, was one in which atrocities were a constant. That's just how it is.

Hitler's bodyguard were all drawn from the Liebstandarte division. It was his opinion that his bodyguards should have field experience.

 sebster wrote:
For sure.

And yet, for all the atrocities committed by the USSR before, during and after the war, it's weird how rarely you find people on the internet inventing strange little arguments about how the people of the USSR might theoretically have been entirely unaware of the situation.

And yet, people will make strange little arguments about how millions of people could be killed, either on site with bullets, or by being delivered to extermination camps, without the greater population being aware of this. Baffling.

That's the Cold War for you.

Subverting truth for 60 years and counting

EDIT: And the topper? The USSR was a one party tyranical state while Germany elected the Nazi party into power.

 sebster wrote:

Hahahahaha! The SS tried some guy, therefore atrocities weren't consistent through the SS and greater Wehrmacht.

This is some weak gak, dude.

No, that fact that some SS regiments were found to be 'Not Guilty' at post war trials (in one units case, thee separate trials on three separate occasions), therefor atrocities were not consistent throughout the SS.

But you don't want facts cluttering up your preconceptions.

 sebster wrote:

The behaviour of German units, either SS or regular Wehrmacht, was one in which atrocities were a constant. That's just how it is.

While I can hardly said to be a fan of the Nazis (as anyone who knows me can tell you, I get rather extreme when forced to deal with them), I also don't believe either the Heer nor Waffen SS (with a few possible exceptions) started each morning with a roast jewish baby for breakfast followed by raping an entire convent and burning down an orphanage with the children still locked inside. While I know that each of these acts did, in fact, occur at one point or another, (and a few even more insane), saying that they were a universal constant throughout the entire German military is a misconception at best, and a self serving lie at worst.

It's like claiming that that the Saturday morning burning people at the stake marathon was a constant for Christianity.

That's the argument SS apologists were making until the Yeltsin years when the full extent of German war crimes (and USSR war crimes for that matter) really started to get unconvered. It's surprising how many German documents ended up in the USSR's possession.

 LordofHats wrote:
That's the argument SS apologists were making until the Yeltsin years when the full extent of German war crimes (and USSR war crimes for that matter) really started to get unconvered. It's surprising how many German documents ended up in the USSR's possession.

Not being certain which documents you're referring to, I can only point out that the Russians also captured documents claiming the Germans built an atom bomb and discovered a form of time travel in 1942.

*Most* of the documents I've seen did not show any 'new' war crimes for Germany (though increased the number for several known ones).

Nazi time travel?

And to think I was beginning to tire of this thread. You have my attention, Baron. Where can I learn more about this?

 Monster Rain wrote:
Nazi time travel?

And to think I was beginning to tire of this thread. You have my attention, Baron. Where can I learn more about this?

At Nazi Atlantis...

No no! The secret Nazi moonbase on the dark side of the moon!

 BaronIveagh wrote:
No, that fact that some SS regiments were found to be 'Not Guilty' at post war trials (in one units case, thee separate trials on three separate occasions), therefor atrocities were not consistent throughout the SS.

But you don't want facts cluttering up your preconceptions.

Yeah, my argument that the SS, like the Wehrmacht and the greater German population, was at least guilty of indifference to the suffering inflicted by the regime is totally countered by you mentioning a unit that was found not guilty of a specific war crime.

This is getting really boring really quickly.

While I can hardly said to be a fan of the Nazis (as anyone who knows me can tell you, I get rather extreme when forced to deal with them), I also don't believe either the Heer nor Waffen SS (with a few possible exceptions) started each morning with a roast jewish baby for breakfast followed by raping an entire convent and burning down an orphanage with the children still locked inside. While I know that each of these acts did, in fact, occur at one point or another, (and a few even more insane), saying that they were a universal constant throughout the entire German military is a misconception at best, and a self serving lie at worst.

It's like claiming that that the Saturday morning burning people at the stake marathon was a constant for Christianity.

No, it's like talking about whether pogroms were a feature of European Christianity.

I would say 'yes, they were'. You then want to argue it, and claim 'not every Christian went on pogroms against the Jews'. And I would reply 'what the fething shitballs are you on about, one can describe a broad trend across an group without stating that every single person within that group personally must have commited unspeakable crimes, and accept that a small number of individuals may have opposed or simply not been involved in any way, while a greater number of individuals stood by passively and still have those atrocities be a defining feature of the organisation and an indictment not just on those who committed them but those who remained indifferent'.

And, from what we've seen so far, you will respond to that by pointing individual cases of people who didn't personally commit atrocities.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 LordofHats wrote:
That's the Cold War for you.

Subverting truth for 60 years and counting

EDIT: And the topper? The USSR was a one party tyranical state while Germany elected the Nazi party into power.

Well, there were plenty of people in respected positions who denied Soviet human rights abuses right up until 1989. Which was part of that same Cold War effect, subverting truth, albeit from the other side.

Now it isn't all that easy to find someone willing to justify or deny the Soviet murders. But people willing to defend part or all of Nazi Germany, that's dead easy. I think you might be on to the reason why, if the war against Nazi Germany had ended with a 50 year propaganda war the whole thing would be be different.

Maybe. I don't know.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 BaronIveagh wrote:
Not being certain which documents you're referring to, I can only point out that the Russians also captured documents claiming the Germans built an atom bomb and discovered a form of time travel in 1942.

Seriously? You're not aware of the revision to World War II dead, based on documents released since the collapse of the Soviet Union? Because that's basically been the focus of research in this subject since the early 90s.

In short, they basically showed the scope of civilian deaths on the Eastern Front was even worse than previously thought.

Maybe this is why you seem so unaware of how dreadful the various elements of the German military machine were during the war....

 sebster wrote:

Yeah, my argument that the SS, like the Wehrmacht and the greater German population, was at least guilty of indifference to the suffering inflicted by the regime is totally countered by you mentioning a unit that was found not guilty of a specific war crime.

Because I (surprisingly) am not so arrogant as to assume that even the majority of Germans were 'in the know'. It's easy to claim ex post facto that everyone knew, because after the fact, everyone does, so it colors their memory of events. The surviving documents suggest that it was not common knowledge, as the German government spent a lot of time and money on disinformation and suppression. They were big on compartmentalizing the operation, which limited the spread of information. Yes, word eventually got out, but we're talking very late in the game, and the reaction of the public was utter horror.

 sebster wrote:

And, from what we've seen so far, you will respond to that by pointing individual cases of people who didn't personally commit atrocities.

Or whole nations that banned them under pain of death. But again, what's a little thing like histoical accuracy to get in the way of your argument.

 sebster wrote:

Seriously? You're not aware of the revision to World War II dead, based on documents released since the collapse of the Soviet Union? Because that's basically been the focus of research in this subject since the early 90s.

In short, they basically showed the scope of civilian deaths on the Eastern Front was even worse than previously thought.

Maybe this is why you seem so unaware of how dreadful the various elements of the German military machine were during the war....

You might want to, you know, read the whole damn post before responding. As the very next sentence after what you quoted was an acknowledgement of the increased numbers. What it did not do was bring any new incidents to light, or offer any new proof of additional people responsible. Maybe reading only the parts that fit your personal views are the reason you are unaware that your claims are not based on fact.



@Monster Rain: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Glocke (Personally, I think it's a load of bs, but it makes for interesting reading, at least.)




Though it is clear is this thread is wildly off topic and probably going nowhere.

 BaronIveagh wrote:


@Monster Rain: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Glocke (Personally, I think it's a load of bs, but it makes for interesting reading, at least.)

.

Oooh! I thought that looked kinda familiar! If you want to read a not terrible pulp fiction account involve Die Glocke "Black Order" by James Rollins is fairly decent. Not quite Clive Cussler's Dirk Pitt. But not terrible.

wwaayy off topic now.