Kate, I don't doubt that for a minute. Every unit has a 'esprit de corps' in some shape or form and new members would soon be aware of that. How hard they would be prepared to fight for it is another thing. Another thing with the SS in my opinion is what was their mindset. Like the Allies may have thought they were all murdering nazi's what did the SS think of the Allies? Did they think it worth surrending or better to fight to the end or to run and fight another day. Maybe they felt they would be shot for past crimes commited by some SS units and because they wore the badge would be treated as murderers. To be honest if you look under the surface there's a hundred questions you could ask and unless you speak to former SS veterans its all speculative and thats assuming they would be open, honest and frank. I know from personal experience not everyone tells the truth about previous combat situations. ps Interesting Thread, Cheers
The structure upon which 12th SS grew was an experienced NCO and officer input from LSSAH. How they were assimilated bound to have had an effect. I would take your point on "brainwashing" Kate what I would consider would be these youngsters were the product of the society which the Nazis had shaped - the Hitler Youth , when they were thrown into Normandy I wonder how many of the survivors viewed the idea that they would not be defeated. Given the reality of the position they found themselves the possibility that they might not win or could be beaten must have raised its head - especially as the days rolled into weeks and the German position became more insecure.
Certainly when one is talking about the SS being elite troops, it may well be true up to 1942 or 43 but from then on the recruits were of a different calibre and make up. The regulations regarding entry into the Waffen SS were relaxed as the war went on and casualties made it inevitable that the stereotype of the Blond Blue-eyed Teutonic Giant was false. The widening of the Waffen SS organisation also ensured that the fighting quality was of a varying scale. There were 38 SS formations but only a small number could have been classed as "elite", indeed only a few of the formations would be classed as "Fanatical". The likes of 1st SS LAH, 2nd SS Das Reich, 3rd SS Totenkopf, 5th SS Wiking, up to the 12th SS Hitlerjugend would certainly fall into this category. Receiving the best of equipment these divisions frequently were found at the point of any localised german attack or counterattack. I have read before that because of their fanaticism the SS units were likely to suffer heavier casualties which could often mean a reduction in experience. My point though is that just because they wore the infamous "SS" runes, it didnt mean they were better soldiers than the allied counterparts.
I don't doubt it Andy problem for GB was that in 44 she was not so very far behind Germany in that she was running out of experienced manpower for the number of demands to be met. The 12th SS as they started in Normandy must have been one of the last SS units to have been drawn almost exclusively from the one source - the ranks of the HJ and German youth organisations. I think they would have found that war was not the great advanture that the movie news reels presented it to be. It would very much have fallen to the NCO and officer structure deliberately put into the division to mould , shape , assist and lead them.
Let me say this...If I had to choose a comrade to go into a tough battle? I would choose the Canadians above everyone else.That includes Germans Americans or anyone from any part of the world. Sapper Sapper, That is indeed high praise for the Canadian vets. I once heard a British officer describe Canadian soldiers as fighting wars in the same manner in which they played hockey. The rougher it got and especially in close quarters, the better they liked it!
Another point I'd like to make is that the Waffen-SS did in fact no suffer heavier casualty rates in general than the Wehrmacht. It's what the German propaganda said during the war, and what the Waffen-SS liked to state (whatever the reasons were for this) but it wasn't actually the case. Them being better equipped than Wehrmacht units is another of those stereotypes that existed since the war which is lacking proof. Bare in mind I am a novice at this compared to some on here who's opinions I greatly respect but I have read all the ATB's publications from D-Day upto the 18th of Sept in Op Market Garden this year(Still fresh in my seive of a head) and although I recall hints of the SS getting first dabs on new kit. It did in the main seem very balanced between the SS and the Wehrmact when allocating supplies and equipment to them and taking their turn in the line. By the time I finished Ruckmarsch I got the impression they were pretty much in it all together and any hints of us and them had disappeared.
I long ago stopped taking notice of an authors bias. I read books to get the first hand acoounts rather than an authors analysis. Good point! Having read accounts from both Hubert and Kurt Meyer, I could not escape the impression that their descriptions and summaries were always very self serving. While continually demeaning the quality of Commonwealth troops there was always a suggestion of "If only" that explains their defeat! If only we had those numbers, that power, sufficient fuel, air cover, artillery support, naval guns, etc., the result would have different. Actions such as the badly executed SS attacks on June 7th/8th in Rots, Norrey-en-Bessin and Putot, receive much less scrutiny.
It did in the main seem very balanced between the SS and the Wehrmact when allocating supplies and equipment to them and taking their turn in the line. The SS were supplied through the normal Army channels. They stood in line like everyone else so they did not recieve any priority. Indeed there were more Army Tiger Units than SS ones. The best equiped Division in Normandy were Lehr, an Army Unit. 12th SS did not distinguish itself during the Bulge fighting.
True , the 12th SS were never the same after Normandy - and not everyone who was drafted to them as replacement was delighted to be part of the SS. From training in Belgium in April to death in Normandy in June . July August - a "grateful Fuhrer" hardly paused for thought , what a waste.
Canuck - you are right about Canadians "fighting like they play hockey" - from what I see on TV - at every turn I might add - don't they know that soccer is the main sport these days ? .....the Hockey of to-day is more like boxing on ice - or Ice dancing so that becomes an entertainment (sic) rather than a sport - the more they fight - the more penalties they give away which assists the opposition to win - but then who said they had any brains ???- I do believe they lost them with their front teeth...... Cheers
Tom, That isn't hockey you're watching. It's actually the the military preparing the next draft for a tour in Afghanistan!!!!
I have an interesting story concerning the 12th SS in Normandy. I am 50 and have a friend who is the same age. I have an interest in the Normandy campaign and he saw me with some documents and said 'Oh I think my dad was there in the war'. I said I would be interested to know what unit he was in whereupon it turned out his dad was in the 12th SS Pz Gr Rgt 26! His dad was captured in Normandy and moved to a POW camp in England. After the war he settled in England, got married and became British. He tells a funny story of ( in more recent years) going to his family Doctor - who has known him for more than 40 years- with a hearing problem. The Doctor said did you serve in WW2? Yes. Did you engage in combat? yes I was blown up and concussed. Well then we can get you a war pension as even after all this time your hearing problem will be related to that incident. I don't think so. Why not? Because I was fighting for the Germans! I can tell you that as a young Grenadier he did not think he was invincible and was as frightened and shocked as anyone would have been. But he fought for his life and for his colleagues - just like any soldier had to on all sides.
My friend's dad was a former 12th SS Grenadier, he came to England as a POW and sayed after the war. Having spoken with him I can say that at the time ( as very young man) he was fighting for his life and for the lives of his friends. In that battle at that time the whole raison d'etre of a soldier was to kill the enemy. I don't want to get into the whole shooting of prisoners thing, but he thinks it's ridiculous that he and his colleagues have been portrayed in many quarters as 'murderers'. I have to agree with him.
Certainly when one is talking about the SS being elite troops, it may well be true up to 1942 or 43 but from then on the recruits were of a different calibre and make up. The regulations regarding entry into the Waffen SS were relaxed as the war went on and casualties made it inevitable that the stereotype of the Blond Blue-eyed Teutonic Giant was false. The widening of the Waffen SS organisation also ensured that the fighting quality was of a varying scale. There were 38 SS formations but only a small number could have been classed as "elite", indeed only a few of the formations would be classed as "Fanatical". The likes of 1st SS LAH, 2nd SS Das Reich, 3rd SS Totenkopf, 5th SS Wiking, up to the 12th SS Hitlerjugend would certainly fall into this category. Receiving the best of equipment these divisions frequently were found at the point of any localised german attack or counterattack. I have read before that because of their fanaticism the SS units were likely to suffer heavier casualties which could often mean a reduction in experience. My point though is that just because they wore the infamous "SS" runes, it didnt mean they were better soldiers than the allied counterparts. The arguments about which side had the 'better' soldiers will always go on but it is an arguement that can never be resolved because there are so many variables. You cannot compare like with like. Given the overwhelming superiority of air-power, resources and intelligence that the Allies had at their disposal it is clear that western writers and commentators have asked themselves: How would we have fared if the roles were reversed? Perhaps this is where the idea of the Germans being 'better' has come from? Soldiers on both sides did what they had to do, as best as they could. No-one is better than the other.
Steve P I don't want to get into the whole shooting of prisoners thing, but he thinks it's ridiculous that he and his colleagues have been portrayed in many quarters as 'murderers'. I have to agree with him. For those who did do this Steve unfortunately it did happen , either as a decision made on the spot or as a result of an order - it rests with those concerned or in some instances in the culture of the units concerned. To say all are murders would be wrong.
I don't want to get into the whole shooting of prisoners thing, but he thinks it's ridiculous that he and his colleagues have been portrayed in many quarters as 'murderers'. I have to agree with him. Steve, You may want to conduct some research of your own before agreeing too readily with his assertions. To be sure, there were atrocities committed by both sides. A reality of war which will always be present. The events in Normandy were not those isolated incidents perpetrated by a few individuals. What distinguishs the conduct of the 12th SS is the systemic pattern of killing prisoners which pervaded their actions in Normandy. While those who ordered these acts escaped prosecution, by and large, there is a huge body of evidence which damns the division, it's leaders and the idealogy which drove it. As many as 156 Canadian soldiers were murdered by the 12th SS during the Normandy campaign. You may want to start with the Abbaye d'Ardenne before dismissing a reputation which was so richly deserved.
156 Canadians? How many other nationalities? 156 (at least) prima facie looks like a bit more than my definition of sporadic. (of course to me it takes a million to become a statistic -_- )
I don't want to get into the whole shooting of prisoners thing, but he thinks it's ridiculous that he and his colleagues have been portrayed in many quarters as 'murderers'. I have to agree with him. Steve, You may want to conduct some research of your own before agreeing too readily with his assertions. To be sure, there were atrocities committed by both sides. A reality of war which will always be present. The events in Normandy were not those isolated incidents perpetrated by a few individuals. What distinguishs the conduct of the 12th SS is the systemic pattern of killing prisoners which pervaded their actions in Normandy. While those who ordered these acts escaped prosecution, by and large, there is a huge body of evidence which damns the division, it's leaders and the idealogy which drove it. As many as 156 Canadian soldiers were murdered by the 12th SS during the Normandy campaign. You may want to start with the Abbaye d'Ardenne before dismissing a reputation which was so richly deserved. <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><meta name="ProgId" content="Word.Document"><meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 11"><meta name="Originator" content="Microsoft Word 11"><link rel="File-List" href="file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5CSTEVEP%7E1%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5Cmsohtml1%5C01%5Cclip_filelist.xml"><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:PunctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <wontGrowAutofit/> </w:Compatibility> <w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel> </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156"> </w:LatentStyles> </xml><![endif]--><style> <!-- /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-parent:""; margin:0cm; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";} @page Section1 {size:595.3pt 841.9pt; margin:72.0pt 90.0pt 72.0pt 90.0pt; mso-header-margin:36.0pt; mso-footer-margin:36.0pt; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} --> </style><!--[if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language:#0400; mso-fareast-language:#0400; mso-bidi-language:#0400;} </style> <![endif]--> Dear Canuck I appreciate your comments but perhaps you misunderstand my ‘attitude’. I am by no means an SS sympathiser – anything but, and know full well that shooting of prisoners took place. I have researched the Battle of Normandy avidly for over 30 years, have read all the books ( including Conduct Unbecoming), have walked the ground on several occasions both in groups and alone, and have met veterans – Canadians / Germans, on both sides. Rather unusually I have had close contact i.e on a personal basis with an ex PZgr from the Division and am able to appreciate his ‘personal’ view. But I did say I didn’t want to get into the ‘shooting of prisoners’ thing as I fully understand the facts and opinions – and the emotions genertated, from both sides! It’s well documented; not least on this excellent site. Best regards SteveP
