You appear confused Ron, Tom and other veterans have not written the history of the second world war, they have published personal experiences. Ron has proven that his contributions are not hearsay but taken from contemporary documents of his own authorship. Are you suggesting he embellished that - for what? Taking your previous reflection you surely don't expect a serious answer, do you? Anyway, you are not gonna get it. I am not getting bothered discussing serious stuff with people who start a discussion by Godwinning the opponent. The prejudice that some of you bear is stunning, but then again, to be expected.
A serious answer? No I did not consider anything serious was within your compass and true to form you did not fail -well done. Enough of this contributing to your stupidity, your desire to insult as you fail to inform says's it all.
OMG. I thought that this kind of childish Jerry bashing was for the childish forums. But it is all over this forum too. Get a grip guys. The Germans were no murderous bunch in May/June 1940. That is what some of you like to make of them. But come on. Do you think your RAF and the USAAF were much enchanted during the 1941-1945 occupation of Europe, when the usually quite pointless raids bombed tens of thousands French, Dutch and Belgian civilians out of their houses and when in 1943-1945 every vehicle, train or boat was shot up killing thousands of innocents? Were the relentless shellings of the 'to be liberated' areas a blessing in disguise? When the Allies came liberate us, tens of thousands of civilians were killed by exactly the same modus operandi as the Germans used in May/June 1940 to get the NW of Europa. That is war. The Germans can be blamed for plenty of terrible acts and actions. But lets get a grip and leave the one-sighted beloney like that bit hereabove aside. Most of us should be well beyond that kind of childish hindsight. How about you show us affadavits and written testimonials about the atrocities, we will all read them and better understand your point of view? Barbara
Dear Barbara, Where would I get affadavits of atrocities, that some of the people here seem to see in May/June 1940 as a fundamental ingredient of German operations, that not occured in such a way? The thing is that this forum (like any forum I guess) doesn't seem able to appreciate that a Frenchman or Brit shooting a civilian under vague suspicion of Fifth Columnist activities qualifies as much as murder as the German doing the same. That is what bothers me. I am not advocating German behaviour let alone atrocities or crimes. What I AM advocating is letting go of the old prejudice and leave out the large untrue accusations of German atrocities during the campaign in May and June 1940. On the scale of things the German army behaved very well. The kind of discipline that ran through the lines and the still living high number of classic school NCO's and officers (as well as the freshness of the men) caused a vast army to operate in a very controlled manner. That was exactly Pruisian school. And it was in fact only seen in the May/June 1940 campaign. Having said that, it brings me back to the root cause of this most interesting exchange. The huge prejudice that particularly Brits feel towards the Germans in that May 1940 campaign. It sort of blurs the ability to see things into the right perspective, because it diverts attention from the massive defeat that was suffered. In most countries on the continent historians have grown into the 'letting go' era, where prejudice and war retorics are gradually making place for a history recording that shows the true facts and causes of the May and June 1940 defeat.
German army behaved very well I agree the German Army did behave pretty well 1940 but unfortunately the SS did not. If we take the La Paradise incident, the British did not believe the two survivors - "the German Army does not do that sort of thing" - which was largely true in 1940 - but the Waffen SS carried out the killings. The Army wanted the SS Liebstandarte Band Master court martialed for murdering civilians in Poland (but Himmler got that stopped) and the questions were being asked of the SS Totenkopf about the La Paradis massacre which might have brought court martial proceedings by the Army. It was only as the War progressed that the Army descended to the same level as the SS.
Who strafed refugees to clear the roads for the advance? The army the SS or those gallant knights of the sky the Luftwaffe the very same that also bombed the Dutch people after the surrender - then claimed it was all a big mistake. The same murderers of Spanish people - just to get some practice in. Perhaps an uncle of mine lied when he said he watched it with tears in his eyes and the word BASTARDS shouted from his mouth. He made it back across the channel - prejudiced? Yes I think he was.
What a pathetic reply. If you don't get it, don't bother. I am not going to keep replying to half-wits that only look for trouble. Actually I'm a woman!! So who is the half wit now! What a ****.
Dear Barbara, Where would I get affadavits of atrocities, that some of the people here seem to see in May/June 1940 as a fundamental ingredient of German operations, that not occured in such a way? The thing is that this forum (like any forum I guess) doesn't seem able to appreciate that a Frenchman or Brit shooting a civilian under vague suspicion of Fifth Columnist activities qualifies as much as murder as the German doing the same. That is what bothers me. I am not advocating German behaviour let alone atrocities or crimes. What I AM advocating is letting go of the old prejudice and leave out the large untrue accusations of German atrocities during the campaign in May and June 1940. On the scale of things the German army behaved very well. The kind of discipline that ran through the lines and the still living high number of classic school NCO's and officers (as well as the freshness of the men) caused a vast army to operate in a very controlled manner. That was exactly Pruisian school. And it was in fact only seen in the May/June 1940 campaign. Having said that, it brings me back to the root cause of this most interesting exchange. The huge prejudice that particularly Brits feel towards the Germans in that May 1940 campaign. It sort of blurs the ability to see things into the right perspective, because it diverts attention from the massive defeat that was suffered. In most countries on the continent historians have grown into the 'letting go' era, where prejudice and war retorics are gradually making place for a history recording that shows the true facts and causes of the May and June 1940 defeat. I understand you are wanting recognition for the suffering inflicted by the Allies. As they say "history is written by the victors", which isn't always a balanced version. I think Neville Chamberlain really tried to stay out of war with Germany. It is a pity Hitler was such a greedy man and was able to carry the German population along with him. After the War it was my Grandmothers German friends who tried to help her find her son's grave. It's also ironic that my Uncle loved Germany and the people, but died as a POW.
On the whole it's true that the German advance in the west 1940 was mostly "clean". I'd still like to point out that some major massacres were committed by the German Heer (Vinkt, Oignies and Courrières) and the Waffen-SS; the latter being disproportionally often involved in crimes from the start (which sort of even fits the thread title, phew). The Waffen SS was indeed the exception. Also in the Netherlands, where SS-Der Führer (of SS V-Division) committed a whole series of war-crimes during the Battle of the Grebbeberg. The estimates of Dutch military getting killed from that run from around 25 to about 100. Also indeed the other two SS masacres are well known. The Waffen SS seem to have accepted the Lex Belli only as a set of rules that could be used, not as a code that had to be submitted to. As to the SS-Totenkopf en even more the SS-Polizei Divisions, they were not even regular military, which the SS-V Division was. The first two were entirely useless as field army formations in 1940, whereas SS-V Division and the SS-Leibstandarte regiment were (partially) already a seasoned bunch, rock-hard ideologized troopers. There where the SS-V Division also gained some owe for its operational achievements, the others merely showed themselves pretty useless and moreover, with criminal intents on the verge too. The Waffen SS were rare and not used in first line combat until the second phase of the campaign, except in Holland where SS-Leibstandarte and V-Division proved themself operationally worthy, being the only fit-for-purpose SS outfit.
The Waffen SS was indeed the exception. . You haven't responded to Willis' post regarding the Luftwaffe and refugee strafing in France yet. And when you do, please explain why millions of civilians were fleeing to the south west for in the first place. Dave
Dear Barbara, I don't want recognition for the losses that Allied doing inflicted, not at all. I appreciate that war inflicts losses. My appeal is to those who spam us with the unbalanced crap of atrocities which were / are the ingredients of every war, but blame that on the losing side alone. Many people forget that war is an act that is internationally recognized as a right. My people and the British so often initiated wars that our history books are massive and bulky. Britannia ruled the waves, but through war. So did my country, and even after 1945 we managed to fight an all out war in the Dutch East Indies (Indonesia nowadays), which caused tens of thousands of KIA. As I said, war is an act that is internationally recognized, as long as it is taken along the lines of the international code, which we call the Lex Belli. War casualties are also accepted by this code, also when they are civil casualties. The code demands that belligerents take measures to minimize civil casualties, but at the same time, in 1939, the codes were unfit for the all out war - the Total War - that the modern war was. We - the Allies - later bombed German, Italian, Austrian and Japanese cities like if it was our daily business. We did this because 'we' considered ourselves the good side, the side that had God and right on our hand. That sort of devine premisses is, however, as thin as paper. We should realize that. The civilian casualties of the German airforce when strafing roads, were they more (or less) provoked than the ever appearing RAF and USAAF over Dutch roads strafing ordinary civilians of occupied Holland during the 1943-1945 period? We took those victims as 'premium' for freedom, and still cheered our liberators. And we still cheer our liberators and rightly so. But I cannot get along with the 'simple mind' that tells me that a strafing German pilot in May 1940 was a criminal. And a German soldier killing a civilian because he genuinly suspects him, was more of a criminal than the Dutch or British soldier killing him under the same suspicion. And when it comes to root causes for the war? What country in the world today would except the absurd Treaty of Versailles? Germany was not mobilized into war by Adolf Hitler. The Versailles treaty had Germany adopt a devil like Hitler.
I understand you are wanting recognition for the suffering inflicted by the Allies. As they say "history is written by the victors", which isn't always a balanced version. Sowing winds, reaping whirlwinds and all that. I think you've heard that before. And if the foot were in the other shoe, history written by the National Socialists would be interesting, very very interesting. And when you do, please explain why millions of civilians were fleeing to the south west for in the first place. You have to bear in mind that the very same people had had to flee from a war 26 years before, WW1 was more than fresh within very living memory. It was the same time interval that separates us from the Space Shuttle Challenger event, for example. Civilians wouldn't need much prompting to get out of the way.
Exactly right Heimbrent. That's what I said. Moreover, SS-T was led by Theodore Eicke, the man who formed the bases under the education of the SS Camp Capo at Dachau, together with SS-Sturmbannführer Wäckerle. The latter was leading the 3rd battalion of SS Der Führer at the Grebbeberg, known to commit one crime after the other on the battlefield. Paul Hausser, commanding SS-V, was however not a man of that stature. He was indeed a regular army man that had switched to the SS for a career improvement. The SS-V, than comprising SS-Germania, SS-Deutschland and SS-Der Führer, would be split up during the Summer of 1940. Part of it would become SS Das Reich, others SS-Wiking, etc. etc. It was however SS-V that formed the basis of most of the later Waffen SS units.
Who strafed refugees to clear the roads for the advance? The army the SS or those gallant knights of the sky the Luftwaffe Well it is pretty easy for us Armchair Generals but wars have to be won. Unpleasant and unethical at it is, there was a military advantage in causing an exodus of refugees to clog up the roads and hinder Allied retreat and deployment. Murdering soldiers who had surrendered or Jews or civilians was gratuitous evil and would not even advance the winning of the campaign in anyway. On the question of the refugees, I do recall one incident in 1940 where a British Engineer had prepared a bridge to be blown but was unable to bring himself to detonate the charges since there were refugees crossing. The infantry commander had it blown up, unfortunately killing refugees, to stem the German advance - the British Commander clearly did not want to do this but it was necessary and is not war crime in my book. PS - I did realise the difference between the various SS and the changes in Waffen SS and Army attitudes as the war progressed.This has been well examined in various excellent threads on this site.
