St Nazaire - Futile Heroism?

Hi Mark,

If I have offended you or anyone who knows Tom McCormack then I apologise whole heartedly. After much consideration however I have decided on my part to leave these photographs in place for several reasons. That said though the final say as far as I am aware lies with the Admin and Mods of this site.

There is no need for you to feel bad or bare any guilt as you didn't lead me to these pictures. I discovered them last night whilst doing extensive searches for pictures on the Bundesarchive. As you will notice I have posted numerous photographs today from the archives to add interest to some threads that have already been running for some time. Operation Chariot being one of them.

Having served in a war myself and seen what horrors there are I am still no friend of censorship. I think it's important to see the true horrors of war whether that be 60 years ago or 6 years ago. If it helps show what war is really like and photographs undoubtedly do then it's far better in my opinion than watching a Hollywood film.

I also feel that if I removed the photographs of a wounded soldier it would then open grounds for arguements regarding other photographs like SSM Parkes of the Irish Guards hanging dead from a Sherman tank for example or maybe the hundreds of photographs of those that suffered from the Holocaust-Should they be removed from public forums too? Personally I don't think that they should be removed.

Whilst I accept some people may find the pictures distressing that I'm affraid is the reality of war and anyone who knows me will know I have no intention of upsetting anyone. I feel that there is far to much copyright on articles and photographs (Prodominately for monetry gain) regarding WW2 as there is without restricting the public's access to it further. After all it is apart of our history and thus we should be entitled to view it as we see fit.

Those photographs I have posted apitimise everything to me about the self sacrifice British Soldiers, Sailors and Airmen made during WW2 when asked to stand up and be counted. One of the many reasons I myself joined the British Army.

Trust me when I say those pictures were not put up by me to satisfy some morbid curiousity or for them to be gawked at like I'm sure the Nazi Regime wished. They are purely to remind people of how proud they should be for what they have today, if it was not for men like Tom McCormack who gave their life for a just fight.

Regards
Andy

 

None taken! I was simply correcting the error

Some of you will know me as an active member of the Great War Forum and have just done work there on the affiliations of the territorial regiments in London including the London Scottish and the London Irish. The Liverpool Scottish came up as part of that work and we pinned down that they switched from the King's Liverpools to the QOCH between the wars. I was not aware of this when I began trying to trace Tom McCormack some ten years ago, and I lost a lot of time trying to research him via the King's Liverpools records!


Kev - I didn't read you as being confrontational and I hope the Forum here doesn't think that of me either

It's just that I am in contact now via the Commando Veterans Association with the sons, daughters, brothers, sisters and wives of commandos. Even some of the commandos themselves. It has made me very aware of the emotional impact on others of things that are posted on the web and that these are not simply just interesting pictures.

Tom McCormack was a wonderful man and remains a powerful memory to my mother from her childhood. After much deliberation I decided to show her the picture of Tom wounded. It upset her greatly, but she is glad I showed it to her.

If Tom had been killed on the night of the Raid, rather than died in hospital a fortnight later, would you show her a picture of him lying fallen? I don't think I would.

Also imagine your father was one of the fallen men in the Nazi pictures, how would you feel if you Googled 'St Nazaire' and an image of his body came up unexpectedly?

The difference in seeing the same picture at the Liverpool Scottish Museum is that you're expecting upsetting images there - you're not taken by surprise while sitting in comfort in your home.

Personally I usually refer to such images as being available rather than posting them, then if a relative wishes to see them, they can PM me to find out where, or Google it themselves - but pre-warned that the images are upsetting. That is what I did for these very same photos here on this Forum in my other post about Tom's grave marker.

This is a delicate area and there's no right answer to these Qs. I leave it up to the original posters as to whether they remove the images of the fallen or not, and I certainly will not judge them if they choose to leave them. It's just not what I would do myself.

In other ways I agree with you too - these men definitely did die for a reason and seeing their fallen bodies reminds of that.

As has been said, a difficult area.



Cheers,
Mark

PS
In the aftermath of the St Nazaire Raid, the Nazi newspapers carried a very humiliating photograph of Tom wounded after the Raid with what he had underneath his kilt exposed. The nastier side of the Nazi propaganda machine

Please if anyone does have that photo, could you please please not post it? I would be mortified since I am responsible for bringing Tom's identity to your attention.

The one that is posted higher up of Tom being loaded onto the flatbed truck, mortally wounded and in terrible pain, but still trying to pull down the hem of his kilt, is bad enough :mellow:


Mark, Not at all, I was just worried had offended you. I see that you know this picture, IF you think it may offend and its best it should be removed then I agree.

You can see where me and Andy are comming from Im sure, but if you rather is wasnt there then ok.

Kev

 

The soldier in the kilt is Pve Tom McCormack of No 2 Commandos and this photgraph was the used by the Germans in their publicity shots to emphaise that they had the ability to repel these raids.

These shots were taken before the delayed charge was detonated on HMS Campbeltown.POWs usually showed defiance on enemy photo shots to indicate their moral courage.In addition to the smile,Some indicated their defiance by a sly V for Victory. (I had a friend, not quite 19 years old, who went straight into the bag at Singapore on the surrender before he had chance to fire a shot in anger.He told me they had to march into captivity over the Union Jack flags laid in the road.They showed their defiance by laughing, much to the surprise of the Japanese who intended the act to be one of humiliation to the white race.)

Regarding the raid, the Germans were on edge for some time after it and "rounding up' continued for some considerable time during the night, shooting anything that moved as they searched the docker's housing areas, resulting in unnecessary deaths to civilians. A few of the raiders escaped into the area behind St Nazaire which is now the Parc Natural De Briere.From there they were helped by French civilians who provided them with agricultural maps, large scale advertising maps of the time showing the depots of agricultural companies but sufficiently informative for the basics in navigation.I believe three or four made it to Spain.

The dead are interred in the now military cemetery,south of the airfield between La Baulle and Pornichet.At the time of the raid, the the cemetery was established in a field in open countryside but post war it is now surrounded by an estate.I called there many years and thinking it was still in open countryside was consulting my map.A French lady knowing what I was looking for directed me to the avenue on which the cemeteryis now situated.I suppose they are used to British visitors.

 

I think I know you well enough Andy to know that mean what you say - there is a big chunk of you in that post and its spoken from the heart.
Unfortunately the images of the poor lad are something which cannot be ignored when St. Nazaire is looked at , the pain and sufferring of the lad is obvious and it does underpin the essential fact that warfare is a decidedly destructive ,ugly and inhuman affair - certainly in what it extracts from people.
Seeing Tom McCormack evokes feelings which I cannot really put into words but if anyone wants to glimpse the inhumanity and pity of war that is the legacy which the German photographer has left behind - perhaps that was not upper most in his mind at the time but this is what he achieved in these few photographs and yet behind the imagery is the man himself.
In many respects I can identify with Mark as I feel much the same about the young lads who are buried in Irvinestown and about certain young lads buried overseas - whilst we never knew them they are certainly not strangers to us and yet a sense of responsibility and awareness exists which bites deeply into us, we are protective of their memory , and rightly so.
Yet in Andy's posting of the photo I do not sense anything which I would reproach him for and I say this with a knowledge of the man himself.

Having read Harry's post - the Germans were certainly shaken up and even fired on each other in the day that followed.
The propaganda apart they did show respect to the men who died and buried them with the respect due to them.

 

Taking photographs of the defeated has always a tradition in the propaganda stakes.So photographs should not really shock anyone and if you trace the source of the photographs,it is obvious that these were the work of the German official war photographers who are credited with the various photographs displayed.Some of these were quite revealing and were counter used to motivate the Allied common soldier in the war to the defeat the Nazi regime.

Propaganda also took the form of recorded interrogation of aircrew POWs, although declared to be "terror flyers" were made to indicate that they were well treated as if this was a concession away from the Geneva Convention.Of course, aircrew usually saw through this deceit but had to comply and play the game to get better treatment.

Its distressing seeing your people being maltreated in life and in death, especially if you are incapable of putting it right.It proved a prime motivator in destroying this montrous regime.

If you can get hold of an English language version of "Signal",you will see recorded,the statements of Allied POWs,all criticising their countries and promoting Nazi virtues in a consistent style.There is also interesting submissions from Soviet Muslam POWs where obviously the Germans were trying to influence the Moslems against the Allied cause.

But the obscene photographs were those which were taken privately and carried in possessions,a trait which was encouraged by the regime's indoctrination and culture.The strange point is these people never ever thought they would be taken to book and photographic evidence became an important witness in the case against the perpetrators.The atrocities handed out to soldiers and civilians alike was well documented both formally and informally.There is a well known photograph of Russian POWs fighting for scraps of food being thrown by their German capturers.The aim of course, was that the Nazi regime wished to show that that the Ivans were sub human.An assessment which changed when the Wehrmacht realised that the Red Army possessed equally, the skills of waging war especially when they began to sustain high manpower losses on the battlefield.

 

After much consideration however I have decided on my part to leave these photographs in place for several reasons. That said though the final say as far as I am aware lies with the Admin and Mods of this site.
Having read your thinking on this, I would ask the Mods to respect your wishes and leave the pictures in place.

Also I have had several very well written PMs about this off the board and it is clear that many people have been profoundly moved by these pictures. Particularly the one of Tom on his own.

Just to clarify: it's only the pictures of the fallen that I was uncomfortable with. I was happy to have the wounded shown.

Having served in a war myself and seen what horrors there are I am still no friend of censorship. I think it's important to see the true horrors of war whether that be 60 years ago or 6 years ago. If it helps show what war is really like and photographs undoubtedly do then it's far better in my opinion than watching a Hollywood film.

I completely agree - the Hollywood glamorisation of war is very dangerous.

I have not served, but I am a volunteer in Mountain Rescue and we are unfortunately regularly involved in recovering bodies of persons who have taken their own lives. Sometimes these bodies are only recovered after long periods of time or where they have chosen extreme methods. It is my experience of the relatives of these persons that makes me very aware of the psychological impact of seeing a loved one in such a condition. We have learnt that it is of paramount importance to protect loved ones from these sights. Far better in my experience for them to encounter the body later in a less shocking condition.

You have been in battle, so you will be very aware how these real-life sights do haunt the mind.

I very much agree with you of the value to us all of seeing the true horror of battle, but perhaps my MR experience has over-sensitised me towards protecting the tiny number of people who may be the loved ones of the fallen man. And clearly a black-and-white photo has not the power of the real-life sight.

Is the pain of the very few worth the lesson learnt by the great many? Twenty years ago I would have said Yes unhesitatingly. Not so sure now.

There's also of course the element of time passed here too. I'm comfortable with these types of images of the fallen from the Great War, uncomfortable with similar images from WW2, and I definitely think such images from Helmand should not be shown.

For me, it's definitely a matter of the probability of the fallen man's immediate loved ones stumbling across the image. With time passing this becomes less & less likely and I have less of an issue with such images being widely available. A lifetime in the future, images from Helmand will likewise become acceptable.
we should be entitled to view it as we see fit.

Those photographs I have posted apitimise everything to me about the self sacrifice (... of our troops)

Again, I agree with you, and that entitlement is very much one of the things these men died to keep, but they are also real individuals as well as symbols, and their self-sacrifice willingly and bravely given, was probably not given to the extent that they would be happy to see their children distressed by seeing images of them in death. Do we not also owe it to them to look after theirs?

Fetch out no shroud
For Johnny-in-the-cloud;
And keep your tears
For him in after years.

Better by far
For Johnny-the-bright-star,
To keep your head,
And see his children fed.

Again, I guess it's really a matter of the chance of the loved ones of these fallen men stumbling across these images that worries me.

Trust me when I say those pictures were not put up by me to satisfy some morbid curiousity or for them to be gawked at like I'm sure the Nazi Regime wished. They are purely to remind people of how proud they should be for what they have today, if it was not for men like Tom McCormack who gave their life for a just fight.

Regards
Andy
Andy - I never for a moment misread your motives in that way. Likewise yours Kev. And I completely agree with you about the importance of those of us who are left valuing the things they gave their lives that we might have.

And the same continues for those this very day putting themselves in harm's way in our name whatever the rights and wrongs of why they've been sent there.

I'm a newbie on this Forum and I hope I haven't upset you all by stating how I feel, but these matters in fact go to the heart of things don't they? And ultimately had the Nazis not been stopped, would we today be allowed the luxury to even have such discussions? Even the very freedom of the Internet itself would be anathema to such a regime. We've gone way off topic, but I hope the Forum is the better for all this being aired.

These are difficult subjects, well expressed and with heartfelt passion by people who have clearly thought much about them. I think I'm going to enjoy being a part of this Forum!

Cheers,
Mark

 

Mark,
Certinally are difficult questions. Im glad you feel so welcome here, looking forward to your posts on the work you've done on the L&S.

Kev

 

Adam,

That wonderfully articulate response is what reinforces the trust of the members in the quality of the people who moderate this great site. IMHO

 

Five rather different VC's were awarded amongst other decorations which is a testimony to the bravery of all the men who took part in this raid. To put it into context al most one in four men received a medal or MiD.

 

On the night of 27th/28th March, 1942, Lieutenant-Colonel Newman was in command of the military force detailed to land on enemy occupied territory and destroy the dock installations of the German controlled naval base at St. Nazaire. This important base was known to be heavily defended and bomber support had to be abandoned owing to bad weather. The operation was therefore bound to be exceedingly hazardous, but Lieutenant-Colonel Newman, although empowered to call off the assault at any stage, was determined to carry to a successful conclusion the important task which had been assigned to him. Coolly and calmly he stood on the bridge of the leading craft as the small force steamed up the estuary of the River Loire, although the ships had been caught in the enemy searchlights and a murderous cross-fire opened from both banks, causing heavy casualties. Although Lieutenant-Colonel Newman need not have landed himself, he was one of the first ashore and, during the next five hours of bitter fighting, he personally entered several houses and shot up the occupants and supervised the operations in the town utterly regardless of his own safety, and he never wavered in his resolution to carry through the operation upon which so much depended. An enemy gun position on the roof of a U-boat pen had been causing heavy casualties to the landing craft and Lieutenant-Commander Newman directed the fire of a mortar against this position to such effect that the gun was silenced. Still fully exposed, he then brought machine gun fire to bear on an armed trawler in the harbour, compelling it to withdraw and thus preventing many casualties in the main demolition area. Under the brilliant leadership of this officer the troops fought magnificently and held vastly superior enemy forces at bay, until the demolition parties had successfully completed their work of destruction. Bt this time, however, most of the landing craft had been sunk or set on fire and evacuation by sea was no longer possible. Although the main objective had been achieved, Lieutenant-Colonel Newman nevertheless was now determined to try and fight his way out into open country and so give all the survivors a chance to escape. The only way out of the harbour area lay across a narrow iron bridge covered by enemy machine guns and although severely shaken by a German hand grenade, which had burst at his feet, Lieutenant-Colonel Newman personally led the charge which stormed the position and under his inspiring leadership the small force fought its way to a point near the open country when, all ammunition expended, he and his men were finally overpowered by the enemy. The outstanding gallantry and devotion to duty of this fearless officer, his brilliant leadership and initiative, were largely responsible for the success of this perilous operation which resulted in heavy damage to the important naval base at St. Nazaire.

 

For great gallantry, skill and devotion to duty when in charge of a Lewis gun in HM Motor Launch 306 in the St. Nazaire raid on the 28th March, 1942. Motor Launch 306 came under heavy fire while proceeding up the River Loire towards the port. Sergeant Durrant, in his position abaft the bridge, where he had no cover or protection, engaged enemy gun positions and searchlights on shore. During this engagement he was severely wounded in the arm but refused to leave his gun. The Motor launch subsequently went down the river and was attacked by a German destroyer at 50-60 yards range, and often closer. In this action Sergeant Durrant continued to fire at the destroyer's bridge with the greatest of coolness and with complete disregard of the enemy's fire. The Motor Launch was illuminated by the enemy searchlight and Sergeant Durrant drew on himself the individual attention of the enemy guns, and was again wounded in many places. Despite these further wounds he stayed in his exposed position, still firing his gun, although after a time only able to support himself by holding onto the gun mounting. After a running fight, the Commander of the German destroyer called on the Motor Launch to surrender. Sergeant Durrant's answer was a further burst of fire at the destroyer's bridge. Although now very weak he went on firing, using drums of ammunition as fast as they could be replaced. A renewed attack by the enemy vessel eventually silenced the fire of the Motor Launch but Sergeant Durrant refused to give up until the destroyer came alongside, grappled the Motor Launch and took prisoner those whe remained alive. Sergeant Durrant's gallant fight was commended by the German officers on boarding the Motor Launch. This very gallant Non-Commissioned Officer later died of the many wounds received in action. (The ML displaced 65 tons as against the destroyer Jaguar's 950 plus tons.)

 

For great gallantry in the attack on St. Nazaire. He commanded a force of small unprotected ships in an attack on a heavily defended port and led HMS Campbeltown in under intense fire from short range weapons at point blank range. Though the main object of the expedition had been accomplished in the beaching of Campbeltown, he remained on the spot conducting operations, evacuating men from Campbeltown and dealing with strong points and close range weapons while exposed to heavy fire for one hour and sixteen minutes, and did not withdraw till it was certain that his ship could be of no use in rescuing any of the Commando Troops who were still ashore. That his Motor Gun Boat, now full of dead and wounded, should have survived and should have been able to withdraw through an intense barrage of close range fire was almost a miracle.

 

For great gallantry and determination in the attack on St. Nazaire in command of HMS Campbeltown. Under intense fire directed at the bridge from point blank range of about 100 yards, and in the face of the blinding glare of many searchlights, he steamed her into the dock gates and beached and scuttled her in the correct position. This Victoria Cross is awarded to Lieutenant-Commander Beattie in recognition not only of his own valour but also that of the unnamed officers and men of a very gallant ship's company, many of whom have not returned.

 

For great gallantry, skill and devotion to duty as gunlayer of the pom-pom in a motor gun boat in the St. Nazaire raid. Completely exposed and under heavy fire, he engaged positions ashore with cool and steady accuracy. On the way out of the harbour he kept up the same vigorous and accurate fire against the attacking ships, until he was killed at his gun. This Victoria Cross is awarded in recognition not only of the gallantry and devotion to duty of Able Seaman Savage, but also of the valour shown by many others, unnamed, in Motor Launches, Motor Gun Boats and Motor Torpedo Boats, who gallantly carried out their duty in entirely exposed positions against Enemy fire at very close range.

 

I found this site earlier tonight and it is really worth spending some time having a look around. There are some great pictures and diagrams explaining what happened and when with a healthy dose of 'Now' pictures.

If you have a interest in Op Chariot you'll enjoy this site:

Op Chariot<-----Clickety Click

Regards
Andy

 

Fantastic thread lads and really informative. Well done all.

 

For great gallantry in the attack on St. Nazaire. He commanded a force of small unprotected ships in an attack on a heavily defended port and led HMS Campbeltown in under intense fire from short range weapons at point blank range. Though the main object of the expedition had been accomplished in the beaching of Campbeltown, he remained on the spot conducting operations, evacuating men from Campbeltown and dealing with strong points and close range weapons while exposed to heavy fire for one hour and sixteen minutes, and did not withdraw till it was certain that his ship could be of no use in rescuing any of the Commando Troops who were still ashore. That his Motor Gun Boat, now full of dead and wounded, should have survived and should have been able to withdraw through an intense barrage of close range fire was almost a miracle.

Interesting little ditty. I just found out his brother was murdered at Le Paradis, Major Lisle Ryder, 2nd Battalion Royal Norfolks.

 

Having read Bart150's posts at the start of this thread it also begs the question why go after Tirpitz to sink her when in November 44 she was already disabled beyond repair - she was never going to sea again and given the focus of the Allied war effort Tirpitz was really a back number.
Would sinking her really have been worth say the loss of 5-10 Lancasters and the aircrew on them - I would say not.....all it would have taken was that the Luftwaffe had shown up as it should have.

Given the reading of signal traffic we must have known how damaged she was and that her sea going days were over , I have pondered this on and off and Bart150's mention of the dock and the raid itself brings this to mind .

Sorry to take this one off topic but the 617 raid which sank Tirpitz might have had some parallels with "Chariot" but for the German fighters failing to show.

I wish BBc would release some of their excellent documentary programmes to the "History Channel" or show them themselves , Ludovic Kennedy did three excellent studies of Bismarck , Scharnhorst and Tirpitz - there also exists a really good account of the Chariot raid - when so much lesser material gets shown why is this real quality overlooked ?

 

James - I take it you're not a chess player St Nazaire was about removing options. And it became far more "necessary" after the Bismarck's attempt to reach the Atlantic coast of France the year before.

The point about WWII naval battles involving single or a very few commerce raiders was that while it becomes relatively easy to close the stable door - and for instance stop the Bismarck from simply turning round and dashing back for the shelter of Norway - once a single major surface unit or pair of them is loose in an ocean you have to worry about SEVERAL things - where she is at any one time, where she's going to be at various intervals in the next 12-24-36 hours.....and where she's going to be ULTIMATELY if you've "closed the door" behind her

Once an Atlantic haven was removed from the KM's options - the British knew that wherever or whatever the Tirpitz did - ultimately she'd have to end up EITHER back where she started - or make a dash into the Baltic where she wouldn't be any harm anyway.

The converse of that is the Kriegsmarine knows that once she sets sail - she has to make a fast dash to intercept something THEN turn round and dash back to Norway - through Home Fleet steaming down on her

On the aspect of the Allies not knowing how badly she was damaged - AFAIK the Germans kept up a marvellous pretence that fooled even the close watch MilOrg was keping on her "on the ground" so to speak. And that pretence involved keeping up a flow of fake signals' traffic. IIRC it was actually some years after the war before the degree of damage done by the RN was actually known...

After all - we'd done exactly the same in the early summer of 1941, keeping up deck watches etc. on at least one battleship sitting settled in the mud in Alexandria!

Yes, it may seem terribly brutal to use up mens' lives in simply "removing an option" - but that's why "war is hell" The more complicated it gets away from guys in red coats marching in line and column, having a relatively marginal effect on the countryside they marched through - the more things we have invented that cost people's lives...

Regarding sinking her in late '44 - over the years I'm reading more and more that the British had a real fear of the German high Command taking off to Norway as a last resort....while at the same time buying a little into the American fear of an Alpine redoubt. On the last night of the war the FNSF's Mosquitos were tasked to bomb Kiel to stop that exact removal happening - Donitz' government was close at hand And the moment the War came to an end the British flew the SAS to Norway, where in the first week of peace they blew up a LOT of the surrendered German equipment; the party, including Paddy Blair Mayne and Roy Farran of "Winged Dagger" and Crete fame, blew up the former garrison's stock of Pz IVs...despite the fact that the Norwegians had wanted to co-opt them into THEIR army! This IIRC caused a little bit of friction between the two countries...
(The reason why for many years after the war the Norwegian Army used PzIIIs...!)

Imagine a "Norwegian Redoubt" with Tirpitz available to threaten an amphibious invasion force...