Political Correctness getting in the way of Historical Accuracy - Page 2

Palaiologos · March 10, 2003, 17:55

And lets not forget that what ultimatelly brought Hitler's downfall, and indirectly lost the war for the Reich, was Hitler's clash with the officer's corps.

A struggle that Hitler finnaly won, but with the cost of a lost war.

Heresson · March 11, 2003, 10:06

Wermacht was fighting for the nazi, simply because there was no other Germany then. But that's not the point. Their attitude towards Slavs wasn't much different from the official one, and they acted pretty bad.
It's not about politics, it's about behaviour. The true is that Germans, no matter their political views, acted different towards the French f.e. than towards Poles, Gypsies and others

Jon Shafer · March 11, 2003, 15:00

That's probably true for any country you could look at, and putting the Wehrmacht in the same category as the Nazis is going a bit far, IMO...

CharlesBHoff · March 11, 2003, 23:30

There is than book I have called "THE GOOD OLD DAYS" the holocaust as seem by its perpetrators and bystanders. The SS have than standing order that it any SS man didnot want
to murder unarm people of certain ethic group their didnot have to than no official action will be taken against then and
they will have to do extras duty. There was alway one man in the SS units who was alway ill when the SS have to do they dirtry work he was the person in charge of reporting abuse of the SS on certain ethic group to the germany government and from the germany government onward to the International Red Cross.
In combat solider might accientable shoot dead than unarmed civialion , with the SS it was more the rule than the
ecption.

Palaiologos · March 12, 2003, 15:13

The SS were not part of the Wehrmacht.

Jon Shafer · March 12, 2003, 15:21

Quote:

Originally posted by Palaiologos
The SS were not part of the Wehrmacht.

Exactly. It was an organization independant of the Wehrmacht, under the direct control of the Nazis. They were looked down upon by the rest of the Wehrmacht.

Palaiologos · March 12, 2003, 15:48

Quote:

Originally posted by Trip
They were looked down upon by the rest of the Wehrmacht.

True, but one can not doubt their outstanding heroism.

Dauphin · March 12, 2003, 18:22

I wouldn't call it heroism. Unless you think calling Nazi zealots heroes is a good idea.

Heresson · March 13, 2003, 06:30

Quote:

And anyway it is my belief that the Germans fought an honourable war untill operation Barbarossa.

What do You mean by that?

Wermacht wasn't an organisation that was evil from its basis, from definition. But its behaviour didn't have much to do with anything good

Jon Shafer · March 13, 2003, 11:56

Quote:

Originally posted by Heresson
What do You mean by that?

Wermacht wasn't an organisation that was evil from its basis, from definition. But its behaviour didn't have much to do with anything good

That having been said, would you hold the Polish, or French or British Armies any higher?

Sava · March 13, 2003, 13:22

Quote:

Originally posted by Palaiologos

True, but one can not doubt their outstanding heroism.

hopefully you realized what a mistake this statement was...

Palaiologos · March 13, 2003, 13:41

Quote:

Originally posted by Big Crunch
I wouldn't call it heroism. Unless you think calling Nazi zealots heroes is a good idea.

Nazi zealots?

Sava and big Crunch, while having absolutely nothing against you personally i hope you do understand the fault of your arguments.

I am really fed up with the post WW2 anti-nazi propaganda.

I have seen documentaries and read books where the Allied stand at Anzio is characterised as "heroic" and "brave", while the German defense of Normady as "fanatical".

Nazi, British or Russian these people were soldiers fighting for their own countries. In many cases they ignored their own lives and did their duty with honor.

And that makes them heroes.

and anyway the Wafen-SS were not involved in any atrocities.

St Leo · March 13, 2003, 16:43

Quote:

Originally posted by Palaiologos
and anyway the Wafen-SS were not involved in any atrocities.

Uh huh... A Google search turned up this.

CharlesBHoff · March 13, 2003, 17:29

The SS unit that ran the death camp where special unit that didnot socialize with other units at all. They stay together in their own liveing quater and when they went on leave their stay at their rest camp where they didnot socialize with other germany. There where case of non-jew who where put on death train to death camp by mistake who have to be kill to keep the secret of death camp secret as most germany would have being against the death camp.

Heresson · March 14, 2003, 08:45

Quote:

Originally posted by Trip

That having been said, would you hold the Polish, or French or British Armies any higher?

Jon Shafer · March 14, 2003, 13:55

Palaiologos · March 14, 2003, 17:04

St. Leo i read the link, and quite frankly i find it amussing.

I personally do not consider retaliation against partizans an atrocity, and to an objective reader most of the things described there are seen at best, as "uncorfimed".

Many can clearly be identified as propaganda, much like the things told for Germans after WWI.

BTW,how many of you knew that in WWI, Australian troops were not in the habit of taking German prisoners?

I however, do not consider that an atrocity.

Palaiologos · March 14, 2003, 17:06

Quote:

Originally posted by CharlesBHoff
The SS unit that ran the death camp where special unit that didnot socialize with other units at all. They stay together in their own liveing quater and when they went on leave their stay at their rest camp where they didnot socialize with other germany. There where case of non-jew who where put on death train to death camp by mistake who have to be kill to keep the secret of death camp secret as most germany would have being against the death camp.

Yes, it was the "Totenkompf" division.

They too were rolled in the Wafen-Ss in 1944, to make up with the crippling looses suffered in the Russian front.

Palaiologos · March 14, 2003, 20:13

I do not doubt Joakim Peiper's atrocities and that prisoners of war were subject to executions.

That is why i said that untill operation Barbarossa the Germans fought honourably.

After they invaded Russia things just got more "edgy".

St Leo · March 14, 2003, 22:05

The question isn't whether the Waffen chaps committed atrocities. They most certainly did. The question is how many of other side's atrocities have been quietly swept under the rug of history.

We aren't likely to answer it here, but do feel free to knock yourself out.

Reinhard-Baer · March 16, 2003, 20:55

http://www.roadtowar.com/modules.php...titleA&show=10
Here you can download the Swastika for the game
I hope I don't get in jail for it

but I share the opinion of Wilhelm:
To ban the flag is simply exaggeration. You do not become a Nazi because of playing the game or look at the flag

Forbidding the flag does not change history nor does it reverse anything so it's senseless. I think history should be presented as it was even if it was a dark one and I'm further sure that the Wehrmacht did not commit any war crime. After all many high ranking officers tried to kill Hitler I'm not sure about the figures but there were around 15 attempts. The Wehrmacht followed their code of honour to fight for their country even if they knew it was wrong.

Dauphin · March 16, 2003, 21:23

Quote:

Originally posted by Palaiologos
Sava and big Crunch, while having absolutely nothing against you personally i hope you do understand the fault of your arguments.

I am really fed up with the post WW2 anti-nazi propaganda.

You mean you're fed up with people mentioning the Nazi's ideological belief that Germans are superior and that Jews, Gypsies, Slavs, the disabled etc should be exterminated? Anyone who believes this actions are correct, whether they actually performed them personally or not are not heroes, and should not be treated as such.

Quote:

I have seen documentaries and read books where the Allied stand at Anzio is characterised as "heroic" and "brave", while the German defense of Normady as "fanatical".

The difference being that one group was liberating, the other was oppressing.

Quote:

Nazi, British or Russian these people were soldiers fighting for their own countries. In many cases they ignored their own lives and did their duty with honor.

And that makes them heroes.

The British, Russians and Americans fought for their countries, the Nazis (as opposed to the Wehrmacht) fought for the ideology of the domination and extermination of others - that is not heroism.

Quote:

and anyway the Wafen-SS were not involved in any atrocities.

They were. And of those that weren't involved most were willing to commit them in the name of Hitler.

CharlesBHoff · March 17, 2003, 04:37

Quote:

Originally posted by Big Crunch

You mean you're fed up with people mentioning the Nazi's ideological belief that Germans are superior and that Jews, Gypsies, Slavs, the disabled etc should be exterminated? Anyone who believes this actions are correct, whether they actually performed them personally or not are not heroes, and should not be treated as such.

The difference being that one group was liberating, the other was oppressing.

The British, Russians and Americans fought for their countries, the Nazis (as opposed to the Wehrmacht) fought for the ideology of the domination and extermination of others - that is not heroism.

They were. And of those that weren't involved most were willing to commit them in the name of Hitler.

I think you are complete wrong like I think President Bush
is complete wrong on his war against Iraq. The Germany General have to called off 3 or 4 planned coup against Hilter in the 1930's. First Hilter has than approval rateing with the Germany public of 98 % plus and Hilter was also
very popular with the common soilder in the military. Those two fact make any coup bloodless or very bloodly very unlikely. Many kid ask to day it Hilter was so bad why
did many minor counties allied thenself to Germany. First
many of the minor nation that Allied thenself to Germany did so as they fear the USSR more and the Germany government was more like their government. I than saying this that America Government is acting more like than facsot state and so Israel act alot like the nazie did.

Dauphin · March 17, 2003, 09:10

I don't see how anything you said fits into what I said.

Are you trying to justify Nazi doctrine?

I understand how Nazi's got to power, and its something that should be avoided in future and not praised. I certainly do not praise Bush or Israel for its actions, but to call them Nazis is blackly ironic and is to not understand what Naziism is.

St Leo · March 17, 2003, 12:50

There will be no discussion of current affairs in this forum. Take it to the OT. Actions will be taken against those who do not heed this.

Palaiologos · March 17, 2003, 15:07

I will heed your advice St.Leo but i just want to say something to avoid mistaken conclussions.It is simply historical data.

The "WAFEN" SS were the field units of the SS directly participating in combat.The term is not a generic term for all the SS members.

Thanks.

Janbalk · March 20, 2003, 11:10

But SS is hardly current affairs. I assumed St Leo was refaring the post earlier with clearly oversteps.

St Leo · March 20, 2003, 12:45

Yes, I was referring to the post dealing with Bush and Iraq.

Heresson · March 20, 2003, 12:53

Quote:

That is why i said that untill operation Barbarossa the Germans fought honourably.

After they invaded Russia things just got more "edgy".

First of all, not Russia, but USSR.
Secondly, they were "more edgy" as You say, or barbaric, as others say, on the entire eastern front, also in Poland. Again, I do not claim that Soviets in eastern Poland were better.

Dauphin · March 20, 2003, 13:13

Quote:

Originally posted by St Leo
There will be no discussion of current affairs in this forum. Take it to the OT. Actions will be taken against those who do not heed this.

I wasn't intending to.

I still don't get what CharlesBHoff was getting at.