D-day. "Greater love has no man than this..."

[East Street Trader]

I agree that the people of Germany are blameworthy for allowing such a deep died **** as Adolph Hitler to come to power in their country.

That the paramount necessity of preventing such a thing is currently being forgotten (a bit) both in the US and the UK is a worry.

But that blameworthiness does not mean that all german people of that time take a share of blame for every bad thing that came about as a result of Hitler embarking upon his war of conquest and his persecutions.

Rather each individual German gets to answer for their own actions. Just as any of the allied soldiers answer for theirs.

Perhaps there were some soldiers, on either side, who fought in Normandy who were deep died bastards. But, for certain sure there were lots who were very ordinary folk - thrust into taking part in a huge military undertaking and doing their best from simple motives of patriotism and the desire not to let their comrades down.

When you see these men interviewd - from either side - that is what they talk of and that is what you see.

There was one short but striking interview which appeared on british TV this week. It was of a german ex-soldier remembering how he felt and describing how he spent most of the battle praying to his God. And he said when he spoke to a british veteran who fought nearby but on the other side it turned out that is exactly what he was doing also. So, said the ex-soldier, there we each were. Trying to kill each other and earnestly praying both at the same time.

You can think of "the enemy" as universally evil. Or as simply fellow human beings. In all the accounts of war and battle I have heard there have been countless sets of circumstances which revealed the shared humanity of the combatants. There are some stories of the war against the Japanese which bring home how radically different the cultures of those opposing combatants were. But, in the end, I have not actually heard or read of any case which brings home the "universally evil" proposition. What supports that proposition is propaganda and the patriotic imperative to take sides, not the experience of individuals.

Which accords with what simple common sense would suggest.

[Patroklos]

I wish I could write as well as you to EST.

[Dry]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
But they were defending their Motherland from evil Imperial US forces.

I don't think so.

Germans/Nazi main crusade was against communism/bolshevism.
The biggest nazi efforts, and the most success/help/recruit/money they got was on that crusade. That was the way they got manpower. Most and best SS troops were on the russian front. And generaly speaken, morale and fighting spirit was much higher on that front. Biggest evil, for nazi followers, in that time was communism.
Simply for what it was for ordinary people; as a jewish tool to pervert human's mind for anti-semitics.

America wasn't seen as imperialistic (UK was probably more, and imperialism was not an insult then) and was not despicted as such by Nazi propaganda.
USA was more: 'a ploutocracy ruled by jews and freemasons'. Only a side crusade that got less success and needed alot of propaganda to find a link between the two (USA/capitalism and Communism). 'They are both jewish inventions': this of course convinced only anti-semetics.
When you read memories of old (non nazi) german leaders, you'll see they had great difficulties understanding why USA were fighting them and why they sided the Reds.
This difficulty to understand still exists. I remember having talked to people being thankfull to americans, because USA sided us and not the nazis. They are thankfull, because in their mind, it was not the logical choice. Worst cases will argue USA would have joined the nazis if it wasn't Roosevelt who was in charge.

[Patroklos]

And that confusion hammers the point that they, in their hearts and minds, thought they were right.

And that brings up another good point. That the Eastern and Western fronts were vastly different animals and shoud not be compared directly. That front was idiological warfare on a scale never sceen. And worse than todays muslim extremists because both sides were extremists instead of one, and both controlled world powers.

It should be noted that the main social stress for Germany in the 20's was not Christian and Jew, but Communist and Social Democrat. THAT is what was driving a good deal of the Germans before and during the war, and ideed afterwards. Not to say Jew hating didn't enter the mix, but it did not hold a monopoly on motives for their actions. Obviously the motives that drove the Germans to fight Britian, France and America were not to rid the world of Jews. They are not Jewish states and despite the propoganda from the top it is clear through WWII writing that most Germans were not covinced by that propoganda. Even if you hated Jews why fight the West for that purpose? They were very much convinced of the life or death struggle against bolshivism.

[BeBMan]

Originally posted by Dry
America wasn't seen as imperialistic (UK was probably more, and imperialism was not an insult then) and was not despicted as such by Nazi propaganda.
USA was more: 'a ploutocracy ruled by jews and freemasons'. Only a side crusade that got less success and needed alot of propaganda to find a link between the two (USA/capitalism and Communism). 'They are both jewish inventions': this of course convinced only anti-semetics.
When you read memories of old (non nazi) german leaders, you'll see they had great difficulties understanding why USA were fighting them and why they sided the Reds.

Well, OTOH there was a big anti-american sentiment amongst many big nazi guys. Sure it was a lot of propaganda going on against "Jewish Bolshevism" from the east, and "Anglo-American/Jewish capitalism" from the west. But this propaganda came from a strange world view that many nazis really seemed to share: nazi-ideology has a certain irrational, anti-modern, and pseudo-romantic element. Modern capitalism was seen as a force which destroyed (in the Nazi's view) the idealized, glorified pre-industrial world, and the most successful capitalist countries were of course the UK and the US. Within those countries, Jews were seen as the main "agents" of this capitalism, so they were especially targetted, but "Anglo-American capitalism" in general was seen as evil as well, often you still find similar views amongst neo-nazis today.

[Patroklos]

Agreed, but that anomosity was not nearly enough to motivate them to fight America. Nazi ideology maintained that Jews were secretly controling things everywhere, even in Germany to some extent.

And most people agree that France and Britian only became involved in the war because they honored their treaty with Poland (good on them). Hitler's ideology was directed mainly on hostilites to the East, with the West having to be fought as a consequence of actions there. There was little racial hatred agains the French and British, just historical precedent hatred. In fact after France and Normady fell their was great effort to portray them as racial allies that had only ended up fighting each other because of the "conspiricy."

Hitler's sights would have turned back West once he got his way in the East, which of course is why France and Britian got involved in the beginning. I honestly believe that had we let Hitler have his way in the East it would have been a decade before war in the West occured. We would get two smaller wars.

But in that hypothetical Russia would be the one thing to make the West and Germany fight, and in the end I think we would be happy to let the Commies fry, and might even help them.

Now I have a question. When Japan attacked us Germnay declared war to honor their treaties. Russia however, though allied with us (not explicitly against Japan) never declared war on Japan untill it was a superficial act. Had Germany played the same game and not declared war on the US, what woudl the consequences to the timeline be?

[Tingkai]

Every Remembrance Day in Canada, Canadians say "Lest We Forget". It saddens me that people have forgotten what happened in the 1930s and the 1940s. The ignorance displayed here is shocking. People who claim to "know" their history have forgotten it.

The Second World War was not a typical war. It was nothing like the First World War or the Napoleanic wars. This was a war started by people who wanted to destroy others. It was a war driven by hatred of others, the likes of which the world has never seen before. It was a unique war because one side was truely evil.

The Germans in the 1930s wanted war. The French and British did not. When Germany invaded Austria, France and Germany did nothing. When Germany threatened Czechoslovakia, France and Britain tried to keep the peace with the Munich agreement. When Germany invaded Czechoslovakia in March 1939, Britain and France still did nothing, but everyone knew that the Germans wanted war.

And remember that each time Hitler decided to invade a country and start a new war, the German people fully supported him. They, the overwhelming majority of Germans, wanted to conquer Europe. They believe that they were the "master race" and they had a right to kill others and take their lands.

The Germans soldiers in Normandy were not defending their country. They were defending conquered territory. They had turned a blind eye to genocide, or actively took part in it. Their atrocities were not just in the heat of battle, but in cold blood.

There is nothing honourable in what the German soldiers did. Yes, many were courageous. Yes, many did not commit atrocitites. But all of them were defending a dishonourable, sick, evil, atrocitious government.

For people like people to deny this is to deny history.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Patroklos
Considering the complete lack of accurate knowledge both KH and AH have showed in general here, I can't really hold you accontable for your mistaken impression of those events.

1. There was not a single major SS formation on the beaches on D-Day. Three Divisions arrived several days to weeks afterward.

I never claimed there was.

3. All SS and Heer members were not volunteers. Germany had mandatory service before the war and conscripted most after it started. As for the SS, whole division of the armywere transfered wholesale from the Heer. It was a normal trend as the Waffen SS grew and especially as they were attrited. Officers suffered this especially.

Never claimed they all were.

4. SS units varied widely in makup, ethnicity, operational theatres, quality, and equipment. Treating all of them the same is extremely ignorant.

Treating all of them the same is a generalisation to be made in comparing them with Wehrmacht troops, and is most definitely a useful one

5. The Wehrmacht had foreign troops as well, in fact many times more.

I don't recall ever saying anything about the proportions of foreigners in the German Army

6. If you were a Lithuanian, Ukranian, or Finn then the good side for you was who ever was fighting the Russians.

No it wasn't. You might provide that as an excuse, but you were definitely fighting for the wrong side. I find it unbelievable that you would say this.

7. Nobody fights as hard and courageously for a cause to the degree the Germans did unless they truly believe they are right or are bieng forced too. Can't fault someone for fighting for what he believes (I know this is alien to some of you homebodies who live as parasites off these people) or someone who had no choice. Right and wrong are relative, no matter how obvious some situations might seem.

Bull****. If they truly believed that the German race needed to conquer and enslave all foreigners then they weren't simply weak men; they were evil ****s and no better than Hitler himself. If they were being forced then they were weak.

Not at all, and once again this is your attempt to bundle concepts you can't understand into easily labeld packages. Germans WWII = Mass Murderers. True in many individual cases, not in most. Documentation does not show this in the slightest. This is a troubleing trend in history where liberal "popular" historians write history how they want it to be, without documentation. The fact is that for forty years of historical work right after the war, when veterans were still alive and hard evidence still available, came to the opposite conclusion AH. You want WWII to fit your ideological outlook, so you made them all evil. And you know what, that is easier for people to digest so they believe it.

Blah blah blah. I didn't call the entire German Army mass murderers now did I. I said that they fought for evil because they did not have the courage not to, for the most part.

This was a single incident in Normandy that you are talking about, and there was a similar one in the Ardennes with the Americans. There are many more. Horrible. But that is all you ever hear about. It is common fact in the historical community that Germany was not the worst at killing prisoners in WWII (Western Front). Americans and Brits were notorious for killing POWs, because after all they were just stinking Nazis (aren't there two people here that have the same opinion?). Who was #1? Canadians.

Bulllsheeet.

There was little differance in the day to day operations of the Armies in WWII concerning POW killing and civilian abuses on the Western Front. Germans did puncuate that with attrocities, which they have paid for to the degree we are able too achieve. But don't think we were clean in any way, or that the majority of the German behavior was in any way abnormal to the militaries of the time.

And I challenge you to find where I said that it was.

a) Perhaps you should read what people are actually saying.

b) Your disregard for personal responsibility for one's actions is reprehensible. It seems that you're happy when people are sheep. I expect more from them.

[KrazyHorse]

EST, I agree that the average German soldier was not a criminal nor necessarily evil simply for joining up and fighting. He simply did not have the courage to do what was right.

As I said, I respect the war dead from Germany as I respect the dead civilians along the way. I give my compassion to the wounded and the surviving families.

But I do not honour or admire men who fought for evil, no matter how much pressure they were put under. A man is not a machine. When put into uniform by a regime as obviously evil as the Third Reich he can choose to either conform or rebel. The Germans who fought the Allies conformed, and thus their courage failed when it was needed most.

The extent of your moral relativism is repugnant Patroklos. It's also inconsistent. According to this mode of thought the Nazis did nothing wrong as long as they believed in what they were doing.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Patroklos
Now I have a question. When Japan attacked us Germnay declared war to honor their treaties. Russia however, though allied with us (not explicitly against Japan) never declared war on Japan untill it was a superficial act. Had Germany played the same game and not declared war on the US, what woudl the consequences to the timeline be?

None. In fact, had Germany not declared war they would not be able to attack shipping in the Atlantic.

[alva]

Weren't they already attacking American ships? I thought they were.

[Patroklos]

The extent of your moral relativism is repugnant Patroklos. It's also inconsistent. According to this mode of thought the Nazis did nothing wrong as long as they believed in what they were doing.

I hope you believe the same 100 years down the road when a people with totally different ideology rule the world and think what WE did was reprehensible and wrong. Could you ever imagine fighting for free speach, liberty of foriegners, and what not could be proven wrong and you are the bad guy? No, because you whole heartedly believe you are right (not that you would fight for anything). That is what happened to them, and the only reason they are evil is because they lost. I believe their cause was evil, but I am on the other side and not so narrow minded as you as not to realize how relative such things are. YOUR monolithic view is disturbing, and exactly the same sort as the Nazis. You believe in your sided completely, and thus are unable to exam it fully. You are a jack booted, formation marching machine, simply of another creed and cult. You talk of sheep, well it takes one to know one.

Do you think all the American soldiers right now are in favor of abortion, gun control, tax cuts, protective tariffs, affirmitive action or any other myraid of topics. Do you think all of them agree with Iraq? Well they do not, and they fight anyways because they are wards of their state and have a duty to do what their people want. Basic Democratic principle. I am one of those, so don't preach to me home body. Duty does not include killing children and holocaust style slaughter, but you just said that included a minimum of them.

---------------------

As far as moral relativism, there is a reason WWII veterans from opposites sides embrace each other as feinds from the moment the war ended, and even during. According to reletivism they did nothing wrong unless

a). They repent after being convinced our side is right, thus changing position.

b). They won and our view of morality is not existant anymore.

c). They never repent and from our victor status we impose our moral terms on them (Nuremberg).

You seem like a good liberal chap, you should know all about moral relativism. Of course I never said they did nothing wrong, but I admire any man who will fight for what he believes, over say you who are just the sheep of which you speak. But only in that facet alone.

And a post that mentions AH and CH means not all of it is addressed to you. So you are right in that someone needs to read posts.

So while I sit a few thousand miles away from my loved ones right now, in perilous times in harms way, I and my fellows will critique the great veterans of the past with something more than your Monday morning quarterback intellect at home, enjoying the life those great men gave you. And the same people will critique our enemies, whome WE fight and thus can judge.

[Pekka]

KH, You keep using the expression fighting for someones side. For the record we never fought for anyones side but ourself. The Germans who gave us weapons and ammunition (because we didn't have that, to defend ourselves), and they gave us just that, doesn't really mean we fought for Germany now does it? We were very alone in there, thanks to many people, so to say we would have been fighting for Hitler, Germany or anyone elses side is not correct.

[Tattila the Hun]

Ever read any books by Sven Hassel? They paint a grim picture of the Prussian way of turning men into, well, machines. They broke your mind, they broke your body, not too badly, of course, you still had to be able to fight... And indeed, there was none as efficient fighting force on the face of the earth back then.

For a Wehrmacht soldier, turning against ones superiors, disobeying orders, was the same thing as to stop breathing. In many cases, it eventually was... It's not easy to turn your rifle against your own superiors, when you are absolutely certain, that you will be alone to do that. And will end up dead. So you fight, and the propaganda is so much easier to swallow, when it gives you more reasons to fight. Only thing the average german soldier really wanted, was no lebensraum, no extermination of the jewish race, nor the defeat of bolschevism. It was the same thing every tommy, or yank or any other soldier of WWII wanted, to stay alive, in more or less one piece, and return home.

If a person dies in war, he should be remembered with dignity, and respect, barring the real psychopaths, who actually enjoyed all of it. My general faith in humanity forces me to believe, there were very few of those.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Pekka
KH, You keep using the expression fighting for someones side. For the record we never fought for anyones side but ourself. The Germans who gave us weapons and ammunition (because we didn't have that, to defend ourselves), and they gave us just that, doesn't really mean we fought for Germany now does it? We were very alone in there, thanks to many people, so to say we would have been fighting for Hitler, Germany or anyone elses side is not correct.

You know, it's been almost a day since I made the slippery Finn comment. Give it up. I'm not talking to you any more...