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.

What you posted has nothing to do with what you quoted.

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

http://www.americainwwii.com/articles/americans-for-hitler/

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

http://www.feldgrau.com/rvol.html

http://www.2worldwar2.com/german-secret-weapons.htm

http://techzwn.com/2011/08/the-soviet-zombie-experiments/

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

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waffen-SS_foreign_volunteers_and_conscripts

http://content.wisconsinhistory.org/cdm/ref/collection/wmh/id/36765

http://www.traces.org/americanbund.html

WHY?

Why not?

I dig up things like this for fun. Of course my interests are on a whole nother level then most, but on some subjects- Sometimes the best questions are better left unasked, unless you want to just up and throw anything you thought you knew about something. WW2 is not a pretty pink package tied in a bow. Its history, based on other factors that I won't go into in a minis column, I honestly recommend Osprey in the discussion, and to not just sit around and think that you can say this guy= good, this guy= bad. There are more then enough factors and twists and turns without even trying too hard.

At the time? Hitler was a great guy. He even made Time Magazines man of the year once. That he was a unifier, he rolled with an outright psychotic tempo for a country while at the same time did what he did for that time was not something everyone even on the board wants to get into, honestly WHY should they?

My point here Is that there is more to the world then storybooks and penny dreadfulls.

Its not always about demonizing someone or something.

Sometimes it just is what it is.

Popularity comes with perception.

rose tinted glasses help as well.

OP I think a big part of the appeal is playing as the underdog. National Socialists basically shoved the biggest kid on the block and said 'Do something'. The fact that Barbarossa came so close to success against such preposterous odds shows that it it hadn't been for the whole massive genocide on both sides thing it would be a pretty interesting overconfident underdog matchup. I'm always amazed studying it that the Germans came as near as they did to pulling it off.

I think in school they like to teach that an Allied victory was a foregone conclusion due to our insurmountable industrial advantages (even the wimp of the group industrially, the UK was outproducing the Germans in the key areas of aircraft and ships as early as 1941) but it's pretty chilling and at the same time interesting to see how just a few different things could have turned the tide and completely changed the course of history.

Plus for me... IDK when I play an American force I feel like I'm really loosing my own dudes, you know? And if they are just panzergrenadiers I'm like whatever, some plastic nazis got ventilated.

German Army was the most advanced at the beginning to until the middle of the war and they are the most tactically independent army.

I play as Russians in Dust tactics and bolt action, i just like the bulky tech design of the Russians.

MVBrandt wrote:
It's very hard to separate the Nazis from the Germans, and generally it's also probably insensitive and inappropriate to do so.

This separation was a big part of the reason why I went for DAK as my FoW army when I first got into the game.

 Grot 6 wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_for_Castle_Itter

http://www.americainwwii.com/articles/americans-for-hitler/

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

http://www.feldgrau.com/rvol.html

http://www.2worldwar2.com/german-secret-weapons.htm

http://techzwn.com/2011/08/the-soviet-zombie-experiments/

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

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waffen-SS_foreign_volunteers_and_conscripts

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devil%27s_Guard

WHY?

Why not?

I dig up things like this for fun. Of course my interests are on a whole nother level then most, but on some subjects- Sometimes the best questions are better left unasked, unless you want to just up and throw anything you thought you knew about something. WW2 is not a pretty pink package tied in a bow. Its history, based on other factors that I won't go into in a minis column, I honestly recommend Osprey in the discussion, and to not just sit around and think that you can say this guy= good, this guy= bad. There are more then enough factors and twists and turns without even trying too hard.

At the time? Hitler was a great guy. He even made Time Magazines man of the year once. That he was a unifier, he rolled with an outright psychotic tempo for a country while at the same time did what he did for that time was not something everyone even on the board wants to get into, honestly WHY should they?

My point here Is that there is more to the world then storybooks and penny dreadfulls.

Its not always about demonizing someone or something.

Sometimes it just is what it is.

Popularity comes with perception.

rose tinted glasses help as well

This was a terrible post, if it was meant to contradict anything Manchu said earlier. And generally speaking, any post that says 'Hitler was great guy', is to be regarded as suspect at the best of times.

I recommend reading outside of Osprey and internet websites that dress up historical events with Daily-Mail-esque titles.

 Manchu wrote:
Phrases like "carried out in full by all concerned" seem meant to set an impossibly high burden of proof of 100% compliance while the historical fact remains that the German armed forces eagerly committed atrocities. I think this kind of apologetic view of the Wehrmacht (especially characterizing German soldiers as simple patriots) is part of the allure of playing German armies. The romantic idea of the "good German" has appealed to the imaginations in the US, UK, and Commonwealth since the war was still going on (e.g., Rommel).

Something to remember, is that if you were between the ages of EVERY MALE ON THIS FORUM and happened to be born German (or Austrian, etc) and weren't already in a camp for political dissidents, or actually came of age in those war years, then congratulations! You're in the Wehrmacht, now, mein freund. I don't think that's particularly "romanticised". I think that's simple fact.

So what?

I feel that you're essentially just being argumentative here with an I AM RIGHT IF YOU DISAGREE WITH ME YOU ARE WRONG attitude, so I'm going to skip your posts here as they haven't added anything to the discussion for a couple of pages beyond what I just posted.

That's a fine tantrum -- but it's not an argument.

A lot of people were in the Wehrmacht. Sure. There were also a lot of Germans. And yet somehow the Nazis came to power and stayed in power and German armies waged a war of ethnic extermination.

Safe to assume at this point that you're not going to be collecting a Heer/Grenadier force at any time soon then Manchu?

Actually -- quite the reverse. I'm slated to buy a BA Heer starter army next weekend along with the Soviet starter.

The last several pages have seen nothing much from yourself but a childish reiteration of your opinions couched in what is pretty much a "I AM RIGHT YOU ARE ALL WRONG LA LA LA" tone.

You are far too simplistic in your understandings. I'd recommend you spend some time studying history. I mean, actually studying it. Furthermore, your assessments of the motivations of players may be accurate for your own perspective, but at no point in your existence do you get to speak for the reasons that a majority of others make their choices or judge the validity of their reasons for their choices.

Given the vehemence that you're reiterating your couple of opinions, It appears that you're on some kind of personal crusade on this point. Now, I can to a degree empathise with you - as I have an utter hatred of the WW2-era Japanese, and won't collect (I collect 1:6 scale military figures and, obviously, toy soldiers) or play them in any form that doesn't include them in a non-optional, essential component of the game (ie BF1942, War at Sea, Axis & Allies, etc). Even with this as context, I don't pretend to consider myself an arbiter of the reasons why people may or may not choose to play as or collect IJN, etc forces - as everything you have said in regard to the Germans in WW2 can also be applied to the Japanese.

Anyway, from this point on I'm going to skip your posts. Don't consider it a tantrum, because it's quite the opposite. Consider it me not wanting to continue talking to/arguing with you on this topic.

Reading your post, it is evident that you are only arguing with a figment of your imagination. How is you not being willing to play a Japanese army at all similar to anything that I've said, especially since I just said I will be buying a German army in a week?

You could save everyone a lot of trouble by actually reading the thread before posting, although that would put a cap on your self-righteous ranting.

 Manchu wrote:
What you posted has nothing to do with what you quoted.

How so ?

You basically said that we are not talking about just wargaming and design aesthetic, but german actions during WW2. I disagree, as just about everyone has qualified their comments otherwise when falling on wargaming "team Germany".


My further comments were in response to the tangential discussion about war crimes in the pacific rim.


Both seem pretty relevant.

 Haight wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
What you posted has nothing to do with what you quoted.

How so ?

Because you posted this:

 Haight wrote:
I don't think i've seen anyone say "I play me some third reich cuz i love me some Nazi's. Shame what happened to that Hitler bloke, he was really onto something."

 Haight wrote:
You basically said that we are not talking about just wargaming and design aesthetic, but german actions during WW2.

Close. What I have been saying is that historical war gaming is about history and that the historical dimensions of the German military inevitably shapes people's decisions one way or the other when considering buying and collecting an army.

I agree that your comments about war crimes are completely relevant. This whole turn of the discussion began because I said discussion of war crimes is relevant but a lot of posters just assumed I meant "if you play Germans you must love Nazism."

 Ketara wrote:

 Grot 6 wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_for_Castle_Itter

http://www.americainwwii.com/articles/americans-for-hitler/

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

http://www.feldgrau.com/rvol.html

http://www.2worldwar2.com/german-secret-weapons.htm

http://techzwn.com/2011/08/the-soviet-zombie-experiments/

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

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waffen-SS_foreign_volunteers_and_conscripts

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devil%27s_Guard

WHY?

Why not?

I dig up things like this for fun. Of course my interests are on a whole nother level then most, but on some subjects- Sometimes the best questions are better left unasked, unless you want to just up and throw anything you thought you knew about something. WW2 is not a pretty pink package tied in a bow. Its history, based on other factors that I won't go into in a minis column, I honestly recommend Osprey in the discussion, and to not just sit around and think that you can say this guy= good, this guy= bad. There are more then enough factors and twists and turns without even trying too hard.

At the time? Hitler was a great guy. He even made Time Magazines man of the year once. That he was a unifier, he rolled with an outright psychotic tempo for a country while at the same time did what he did for that time was not something everyone even on the board wants to get into, honestly WHY should they?

My point here Is that there is more to the world then storybooks and penny dreadfulls.

Its not always about demonizing someone or something.

Sometimes it just is what it is.

Popularity comes with perception.

rose tinted glasses help as well

This was a terrible post, if it was meant to contradict anything Manchu said earlier. And generally speaking, any post that says 'Hitler was great guy', is to be regarded as suspect at the best of times.

I recommend reading outside of Osprey and internet websites that dress up historical events with Daily-Mail-esque titles.

I'm not really interested in Hitler being a great guy, I said at the TIME he was a great guy.

The subjects are out there to be found, and YES= Some of them are gakky, but this is the stuff that Historians know about that the general public doesn't want to be put out as fun and games.

Aside from that, my post was for general examples of why WW2 is not all black and white. I'm not involved with what Manchu has going on, because honestly I disagree with him, but am not engaging his comments in the way that you seem to think you have to do with me.

MINE? I'm saying that People play the german sets just because. Has nothing to do with anything, other then they want to play them.

Oh, by the way, add something to the conversation then just an insult.

I've got more to add, but you being obtuse is making me not want to continue in this discussion.


Its history, chief. I have no dog in the fight.

Here is a parting gift for you to. "Suspect" as you think it is.

http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,760539,00.html

 Grot 6 wrote:

Aside from that, my post was for general examples of why WW2 is not all black and white. I'm not involved with what Manchu has going on, because honestly I disagree with him, but am not engaging his comments in the way that you seem to think you have to do with me.

The second world war was somewhat unique in that it WAS black and white. Victory for the Germans would have meant the elimination of *all* Eastern Slavic peoples, my Polish buddies at work certainly wouldn't be here today if he'd succeeded. The fact that the Allies (especially the Soviets) were not whiter than white doesn't mean that the Nazi German regime wasn't the most despicable and evil regime in history.

MINE? I'm saying that People play the german sets just because. Has nothing to do with anything, other then they want to play them.

People do everything for a reason. I like Cadians because they're generic enough for any colour scheme...nobody collects soldiers of the Third Reich just because.

Its history, chief. I have no dog in the fight.

This is a very telling sentence, given how one can *usually* assume that the man in the street found the nazi regime horrific and deserved to have been stopped.

The war was as grey as every war and to throw anything made by humans in black and white is at best naive.

What amazes me is the inability of people to accept that persons can choose to play historical games disregarding history, that people can choose Germans because of the aesthetics, or because their military exploits are quite amazing and not because they are closet Nazis and that they can definitely ignore what the Nazi army did back then, because they do not care as far as their wargaming is concerned.

What amazes me is that people can claim historical war games have nothing to do with history.

It is because you fail to understand that people can see a "historical" war game as a game alone, without all the baggage that comes with it save the very light one and then even if that.

As I have tried to explain, that's not the issue. Of course people can disregard the historical facts (see ITT). But that, too, is a way of considering the historical facts.

 Manchu wrote:
As I have tried to explain, that's not the issue. Of course people can disregard the historical facts (see ITT). But that, too, is a way of considering the historical facts.

Originally I was going to call your last post out as BS because I play Bolt Action and Flames of War and look at them as games rather than historical simulators. For me the draw is fighting during the WWII time period with the WWII technology, and not so much as fighting WWII, but I don't think I can call your last post out as BS because I still play those games because of when they took place.

xruslanx wrote:

 Grot 6 wrote:

Aside from that, my post was for general examples of why WW2 is not all black and white. I'm not involved with what Manchu has going on, because honestly I disagree with him, but am not engaging his comments in the way that you seem to think you have to do with me.

The second world war was somewhat unique in that it WAS black and white. Victory for the Germans would have meant the elimination of *all* Eastern Slavic peoples, my Polish buddies at work certainly wouldn't be here today if he'd succeeded. The fact that the Allies (especially the Soviets) were not whiter than white doesn't mean that the Nazi German regime wasn't the most despicable and evil regime in history.

MINE? I'm saying that People play the german sets just because. Has nothing to do with anything, other then they want to play them.

People do everything for a reason. I like Cadians because they're generic enough for any colour scheme...nobody collects soldiers of the Third Reich just because.

Its history, chief. I have no dog in the fight.

This is a very telling sentence, given how one can *usually* assume that the man in the street found the nazi regime horrific and deserved to have been stopped.

I appreciate you opinion, but You haven't looked at my links there or done your homework on this subject.

The information is there to be read, contrary to how people want to spin it their way or whatever.

No, your not looking at the links or even giving yourself a serious chance to find out what was really going on in the world at that time. I know exactly what I said and was insulted for it.

I even went ahead and dug back a few more and for what it is worth, America didn't think anything about Germany. People had issues on both side and the current political opinions at that time were to sit it out. It was called Isolationism.

I'm holding on to the heavy stuff. I'm not even going to go down that rabbit hole. If you want to, go on for yourself. Links that I posted are just a taste. The next one is going to cost you if I have to put on my work pants and do it the way I know I should, but will blow the pants off of the discussion...

One thing has to do with another, friend. It is never in Black and White.

Go on over and look at those links, and ask the question- Is this true, or is the Grotster full of gak and made them all up? Where did he get this info, and can I find three more sources that say something about this?

I'll go right out and say it, The one on the bottom about the SS Foreign Legion regiment is looking like the gak one of the bunch, and I'm removing it.
BUT I'll replace it with something equally tasty.

 Alfndrate wrote:
but I don't think I can call your last post out as BS because I still play those games because of when they took place.

Yep, that's all I mean. Again, this whole thing started because PsychoticShock said we shouldn't even consider atrocities ITT.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Grot 6 wrote:
I appreciate you opinion, but You haven't looked at my links there or done your homework on this subject.

But nothing you've posted comes close to proving that Allied atrocities are morally equivalent to the Axis atrocities. The Allies got their hands dirty, no doubt, but they did so at least in part to stop something that has no redeeming qualities from a morally sane perspective.

 Manchu wrote:

 Alfndrate wrote:
but I don't think I can call your last post out as BS because I still play those games because of when they took place.

Yep, that's all I mean. Again, this whole thing started because PsychoticShock said we shouldn't even consider atrocities ITT.

I mean I certainly don't think about the atrocities of Nazi Germany when my opponent's flammenpanzer is rolling down the road towards me (note pick one of these up for your Heer army, nothing says good morning like two 18 inch auto-hitting 2d6 (per flame thrower) flamers that do d3+1 pin markers and force a morale check to even remain on the board.) I guess if we were to "re-enact" the liberation of Buchenwald, then it might cross my mind, but at the end of the day (to me) it's just a game that takes place in WWII.

If you refer to me I think you can refer to me by the forum nickname and not a faux nickname.

And this is not what I said, I never force, in contrast to what you do, what people should or should not do, I did say thought hat many people disregard whatever historical baggage there is behind the armies they play when choosing to play a faction and focus on the aspects they like.

 Alfndrate wrote:
but at the end of the day (to me) it's just a game that takes place in WWII.

"Takes place in WWII" entails a huge amount, however, including the atrocities. When you decide to whittle that down to whatever suits you, you are in fact dealing with history. You're dismissing, sure, but that's still dealing with it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 PsychoticStorm wrote:
If you refer to me I think you can refer to me by the forum nickname and not a faux nickname.

Just a typo :/

 PsychoticStorm wrote:
And this is not what I said, I never force, in contrast to what you do, what people should or should not do

(1) You're mischaracterizing my statements. (2) You're mischaracterizing your own statements. Here's exactly what you posted:

 PsychoticStorm wrote:
And while the whole discussion of what really happened, from whose point of view one sees it and who was the worse of them all is quite intriguing, I feel it is a discussion for another thread and another topic.

 Manchu wrote:

 Alfndrate wrote:
but at the end of the day (to me) it's just a game that takes place in WWII.

"Takes place in WWII" entails a huge amount, however, including the atrocities. When you decide to whittle that down to whatever suits you, you are in fact dealing with history. You're dismissing, sure, but that's still dealing with it.

Alternatively people simply accept that it is a game, or in other words a crude approximation of historical reality, and as such isn't worth expending energy over worrying about the ramifications of playing Germans and the ideology of their government.

What I described isn't really a matter of expending energy. When you say "people simply accept" that right there is the moment I'm talking about, where people decide what to do about the history.