Page 10 of 10 First ... 678910

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Third_Wave

Well, it can happen anywhere.

Reply

Which goes to individual behavior - return to the beginning and you will see the point about taking gold teeth from japanese dead. So in other words an individual crime committed by individuals, reports differ on how severe it was but no-one has defended the practice as anything more or less then it was. So in essence you wanted to play the game but you can't find a winning hand.

Oh the proof is in the facts. Something you don't want to acknowledge.

That I find your arguement amusing.

Bad comprasion there Panzar bad WW2 POW interment camps do not compare to Genocide processing camps. Now a more accurate comparision should be made concerning POW camps. Here the Germans would lose again when one compares British Treatment of POW to German treatment of POW's.


It says nothing of the government since it has not been proven to be true. You really should look into the lend-lease program it fits what you are attempting much better since its actually true.

Tsk Tsk - you fail again. Allied proganda during the war painted Germany as Evil. You really should pay more attention to what was stated versus attempting to claim a greater understanding. Evidence indiciates that the Allied high command knew of the possiblity before they were actually discovered. Now when were they discovered in Spring of 1945. Claiming I am using hindsight to review things is kind of funny - since all judgements are from hindsight. Understanding I got in spades, judgments I can make.

Oh I know about the German women running from the Soviet Army because of the rapes being committed by Soviet soldiers - first hand knowledge given to me by a family friend who escaped Germany one step ahead of the Soviet Army. So in other words Panzer I have made a judgement about the military of Germany on informed inputs from multiple sources that allows me to make a judgement based upon a review of information, one that I can update as better informaton comes forward. It is not hard to make a judgement that in Total the German Military committed war crimes.

That is not a actual European Viewpoint concerning WW2. Try again.

Funny attempt - however it still falls short.

Oh panzer you really are reaching aren't you. Your point has been defeat repeatly by yourself for one simple reason - your attempting to excuse proved bad behavior by pointing to other unproving bad behavior.

Oh a reaching arguement again. One that would be extremely difficult to prove beyond the limited numbers of actual crimes committed by the soldiers involved. Got a grandfather that fought in three island campaigns -got some first hand stories on that one to. Did some American soldiers commit war crimes - oh wait I have stated that several times, and that some were indeed prosecuted for their crime. Again a reaching arguement their panzer

Sorry Panzer wasn't much of an assumption given your postion - Skill does not equate to honor either, Courage can and often influences honorable conduct, but as evident with German actions during WW2, it does not necessarily transpose into honor. Determination also has its faults when attempting to apply it to honor. For instance Germany was determined to destroy the Jews - not much honor in that now is there.

Edit: After reading Brenus post one can find that some German soldiers did indeed act under great courage and honor, (something that I did ackownledge in the beginning by the way). This is the type of arguement that you should of used to demonstrate that some German soldiers did indeed act with great courage and honor, versus attempting the bad behavior counter arguement.

Then why the attempts to excuse bad behavior by pointing to lesser bad behavior. Not much understanding there from you with that sort of arguement.

Reply

I knew about the Katyn massacre of the polish officer corps and the mass rape of 1945, but I didn't know about the Polish intelligentsia. I knew the Bolsheviks had a habit of liquidating the bourgeoisie in their republics, but I didn't know they did that in conquered territories as well.

Reply

There is some interesting history concerning the Soviet Advance into Poland and Germany. Trying to remember where I read it - so I can verify its accuracy, but I remember reading about how the Soviet's used three fronts in their advance, the first being the Attacking army groups, the second being a consildation and break through front, and the third being a composite army of occupation and re-education. Read what you want into the term but one can safely assume it was not a polite re-education.

There was a reason why German civilians were fleeing in front of the Soviet Advance - the Soviets had a bad habit of paying back the Germans in spades for thier activities in Russia.

Needless to say the Soviets were not very nice to their own people once they took over the German Occuiped areas. Kind of it you were not an active resistance fighter - you were part of the problem.

All in all one can safely say war crimes were committed by the Allies, one just has to focus on what was actually done in violation of the Hague Convention, and what has the emotional appeal of being a warcrime. Many of the allied actions have an emotional appeal for being a warcrime, I can name several to include the atomic bombings - the problem with emotional appeal is that one often leaves out the critical component that constitutes a war crime.

The Avalon Project has some interesting reading that alludes to some soviet war crimes - however because of the allied victory most crimes that were publically prosecuted were committed by Germany and Japan. Allied war crime prosecution takes a lot of research and effort to discover how much was prosecuted, many were often painted with a different brush - charged as criminal behavior or violation of the the allied army military law. Hard to track but its there.

Reply

The circumstances differ from Dresden, quite simply.


I'm not debating the honour of German soldiers at all, though I easily could. Ultimately, it comes down to Hitler. When you see the pain in your family from the deaths of two great-uncles, when you see your grandmother's haunted face if you mention Lubyanka, when you see your grandfather being dragged off to work in forced labour camps, even though he never even put on a military uniform, you realize there are two sides to blame, not just one.

Maybe, or maybe not, but the Russians were already good at atrocities. Somebody has already mentioned Katyn. On the other hand, it doesn't matter who started it - a war crime is a war crime, plain and simple.

Now look at it from the pre-WWII German perspective, something you and Redleg are failing to do.

A) You've been fed a ton of propaganda. Propaganda makes people believe things they otherwise wouldn't.
B) You've had Danzig, Alsace-Lorraine, and other German territories (at least considered German at the time) ripped out of your country.

To the individual, that would seem a war of defense (or honourable aggression), a war of pride, rather than one of pure, unhindered aggression.

I would disagree with that. High Command protested on numerous occasions, including right after Poland, some generals in the field refused to follow the orders of extermination, and, anyways, High Command had no control over the Einsatzgruppen or Concentration Camps. Protest was all they could do. On the other hand, they could try to assassinate Hitler. There's an interesting book I have that I could refer you to - assassinations of Hitler were tried many times, not just on July 20th, but they all failed.

Good attempt, but that's certainly not true with me, if that's what you're implying. The only thing less desirable to me than Nazism is Stalinism. I have been quite willing in the past to denounce fascism.

Something you're all too willing to brush aside if they come from the other side. At least I actually find a rebuttal to what you're saying that's not "read the articles closer. Read them closer. Read them closer..."

Reply

Not really when one comes down to it.

Edit: Misread of the Initial statement, removed a statemnt.

Proganda would explain why the average German Soldier felt it was necessary to fight again. However have you given thought to logical conclusion to this statement? And then place it into the concept of the discussion about Dresden and Military Necessity. Some claim I haven't looked into the events of the time, which I find extremely amusing - but you have just begun to delve into part of the reasoning behind the bombing of cities that was executed by the Allies against Germany. Military Necessity allows for certain activities, which must be judged based upon the information and understanding of the time.

Futhermore when one committs an act of aggression to initiate a conflict - one can not argue defensive war. A War of pride is not an honorable war by the way.


As many times as they might have done this - there are more exambles of them doing the exact thing brenus stated.

The study is actually true for all individuals. Very few people can actually resist following into that pattern. Those that don't are the expectation not the rule.

your having failed to actually read them initially was proof enough to my comment. Rebuttals were given by the way. Now I know this is slightly harsh but I find it rather telling that at first you did not read the Hague Conventions prior to this discussion taking place. Sometimes its better to just lead the horse to water and then browbeat him off enough that he actually begins to see the water.

Reply

Hey Mars ,I think I have worked out a way to easily demonstrate how your approach is flawed .......
If one person kills another is it murder , murder is after all killing someone isn't it , its quite simple , there are laws on it and everything , so it must be murder , person A killed person B so person A is a murderer and must be brought to trial for murder and the only verdict can be guilty of murder , it cannot be denied that the killing took place since person B is dead and they were certainly killed by person A so it is definately murder ....
That in essence has been your approach to the branch of this topic concerning war crimes .... it is a bollox approach isn't it .

Reply

Very much so, actually. Unless civilians were one of the primary targets, if not the primary target at Lyon?

You were the one who stated earlier in this thread that one war crime does not deserve another. I don't care what Germany would have done, nor do I care at the moment what Germany did do. That's not what I'm debating. You can take that up with Panzer. I'm talking about Dresden.

Why not? Regardless, it follows mine.

I don't doubt that I may well have fallen into the same pattern in that opportunity, just that now I don't.

LOL - the fact I did read them and manage to bring up Dresden in three articles to your one is proof enough for my comment. I freely admit that I did not read most of the Hague Convention before this debate, but the fact I have read it, can make points based upon it, and have made good points based upon it that are backed up by the Allied Bomber Command itself is a good indication that I understand it. The text is all there in front of me, and I have read it. I understand it. I have backed up my points.

You'd have to know the circumstances under which murder was committed. Fortunately, I have shown the circumstances under which murder was committed at Dresden from Allied Bomber Command and Mr. Churchill themselves.

Therefore, your analogy is what is bullox, not my reasoning.

Reply

What I was implying is that noone can sit on a high horse and blame soldiers who were indoctrinated by an evil regime for doing what the regime wanted them to do. Well, maybe they can but they should be aware that it could have happened to them and be thankful that it didn't. That some of us feel like "it wouldn't work with me" has probably a lot to do with the fact that we, especially here in Germany, are more or less "indoctrinated" to hate nazism and such patterns etc., we learn how bad it is, how all humans are equal etc. Had we instead been instructed by Obersturmführer von Brunzenberg in our Hitlerjugend and other preschool nazi groups etc, we might now actually believe that jews are ugly moneygrabbing animals. The hypothetical argument that some of us may or may not have gone with the flow is moot since the only way to really find out would be to travel back in time and be young and stupid again.

Of course I don't know to what extent the average german soldier was indoctrinated but the regime had quite a few years to influence at least the younger generations of soldiers.

Reply

I see your point, and I must agree with it.

Reply

As stated before civilians were considered in the targeting - but they were not the primary target.

As stated this was not an examble of one war crime leading to another. It was a statement that shows that in Pre-WW2 Germany that that the military of Germany would of done the same type of attack, hence their behavior in the war. An examble of using a examble of bad behavior to justify other bad behavior would be written different. However I did initially misread the statement and has since edited it.

As for Dresden....

your not in a similiar situtation as the study now either I am willing to bet.


With some major failures however. Your arguement is based primarily on emotional appeal, which is fine, but it lacks the ability to prove a crime when one looks at the techinical data. BTW the US Airforce document was a study of the Allied Bomber Command. Notice that it conflicts with a majority of your view point.

Reply

Actually it is a very good analogy , because like the fact that killing someone may not be murder due to lots of different laws and the fact that it would have to fit all the relevant lws with no exception to make it actually murder ....so it is that the bombing of Dresden isn't a war crime because it doesn't fit the laws neccesary without exception to make it a war crime .
Its all in the techniclities that lawyers are so fond of , and even though you write .... you definately do not understand it . If you did understand it you wouldn't still be going on .

Panzer wrote earlier about the spirit of the law in the document which is all well and good but that doesn't matter when the letter of the law has holes so big you can drive a panzer division through them.
You yourself posted an attempt to try and close some of those holes prior to WW2 , perhaps if the holes had been closed you would have more of a case , but the were not so you do not .
I did suggest that you perhaps should try another raid from earlier in the war to try your arguement , but no you are fixated on the big one and as such come completely unstuck since by that time Germany had opened another bloody big loophole for the lawyers to exploit .(plus there were at least a dozen loopholes concerning Dresden anyway )

Reply

Page 10 of 10 First ... 678910