"Why the Germans?" Topic

I started to collect Germans for a simple reason: they fought against everybody else.

Now I have a small German company (based for FoW but to be used in any interesting ruleset) and now I will collect some British (Polish, actually), and may be some Americans too.

Not in a hurry though, as WWII is not my main interest!

Wow,

This is the reason I don't game WW2 anymore.

(The thread above).

That and the Spearhead Rules.

Duncan.

Oh come on, duncanh, you really don't play the period because people disagree on something? I'd love to know what period there is where everybody is in unison!

I'm with you on Spearhead though… ;)

And once the 'Final Solution' was initiated, there was no remorse for it, no refrain from it, right up until the end. No challenge from anywhere within.

I think thats a little easy to say given the free and democratic society we currently live in?

Now imagine living in a brutal police state, where information and movement is totally controlled. What about the average Russian citizen during Stalins purges and pogroms? Were they remorseful? Are they somehow lacking because of a lack of challenge from within? Personally, I don't know if I can make those judgments.

Wow,
This is the reason I don't game WW2 anymore.

I don't know about that. I'm having a good conversation with Gary and he seems like someone I'd have a game and a beer with. Doesn't mean we have to agree 100%. In fact that would probably be boring.

Ralph

…..you really don't play the period because people disagree on something? I'd love to know what period there is where everybody is in unison!

Exactly, and that why I can't play those Assyrian bastards! I can't stomach the way they treated those poor Hittites!

Ralph

I cannot play the Germans since … I never play the Soviets either since they murdered millions of Germans on their ramapge on the Reich.

So, to be consistent, you don't play WWII anymore, right?

I have a major brow furrowing at folks who feel they can't play the bad guys but play with the bad guys in games.
--
Tim

" now I will collect some British (Polish, actually)"

Ouch! You really have it in for your Germans…

Leland R. Erickson
Metal Express
metal-express.net

I cannot play the Germans since … I never play the Soviets either since they murdered millions of Germans on their ramapge on the Reich.

So not hte Americans or Brits for their bombing, nor the Italians for their use of gas in Abysinia….the Poles were more rabidly anti-Semitic than Germany was in 1939 and were real helpful with hte final solution for hte most part….so yuo can't have them…the French weren't very nice either – plenty of them helped out so they're out along with the Dutch and Belgians for the same reason.

Greeks? Yugoslavs? Except of course they massacred lots of other yugoslavs 'cos they weer all fighting a civil war at het same tiem as fighting for/against the German and Italian occupiers…

Greeks?

bulgarians werent' too bad – they didnt' actually declare war on the Soviet Union until a943 or some si8lly tiem like that and persistantly failed to hand over jews IIRC.

So that leaves Norway, Bulgaria and Greece…..Denmark too I guess

Have fun with WW2…..

"Frans, that's just guff. I challenge you to find one time where I have stated that only the Germans could be up for something like this. As it happens see the Burma Raiulroad for details. I have also not ever suggested that my own people might not be susceptible., However we spent most of our time taking the out of Oswald Moseley rather than licking his boots, so we (that would be my country, Britain) are on decently solid ground. Given the choice of signing up to Hitler's dream or standing alone, it's also common historical knowledge what path we chose."

Glad to hear you don't think "only the Germans could be up for something like this", must have confused you with someone else from the black and white community, still sad you link the "something like this" to a people instead of a regime.
Typical you're referring to the Japanese instead of the Russians, you also don't have a problem with the nuking of Hiroshima/Nagasaki and the incineration of Tokyo and many of Japans other major population centres to I guess.
In most European countries the major licking of fascist boots only started after they became occupied btw, probably wouldn't have been any different in Britain.
And concerning Britain; conform the standards applied by your side of the argument the fine history of the British empire clearly indicates a degenerated people the world would be better of without too, wouldn't it?

"Now you are just being foolishly offensive because you have nowehere to go with what is a futile and ridiculous argument. "

No, I'm not being "foolishly offensive", I'm only warning you, and those who think like you, about the danger embedded in your way of thinking.

"And for your information you did in fact imply that genocide was a shade of grey. I suggest you re-read some of your own posts for details."

You're using my words somewhat out of context here; this was a response on a response, my remark referred back to war not being black and white, not to the response that summarised the whole of German WW2 history as state sponsored genocide.
To clear things up a bit; I find any deliberate murder of civilians outside the boundaries of collateral damage an atrocity, whatever the means used to accomplish it, for me these acts are ALL black, not only some of them.

If you start a war against evil you can't fall back on evil yourself without compromising the whole purpose of that war. The French and the British didn't declare war against Germany because it was an "evil empire" anyway, they also didn't declare war out of concern for Poland either, they declared war simply because it was in their own interest to do so. And then the British decided to go and kill masses of German civilians without any knowledge of the Nazi atrocities they later used to justify it, that's as black as it comes. Haven't you ever wondered how the British would have looked if they hadn't been so lucky Nazi war crimes proved to surpass their own afterwards?

The post-war justification of the allied targeting of civilians during the war created a very dangerous precedent with consequences reaching into the present day.
It means that the atrocities committed by regimes currently residing in a number of countries, and the fact these regimes are largely supported by a heavily indoctrinated population, justifies nuking their main population centres.

Greetings, Frans.

Just a thought but would those posters who appear to think that all Germans are equally as guilty for the war crimes of the Third Reich consider that all Americans and British are equally as guilty for the carnage inflicted on ordinary Iraqis due to our illegal war on those people? particularly as we are "free and democratic societies" and presumably have a choice? we don,t of course even if we voted for them in the first place, much like the Germans?

Hooray, we've made it to five pages, only six more to go.

Careful with the last one though, straying into CA territory.

Back to the original thread, the 'Kampfgruppe' thread also provides an excellent reason to play the Germans – they have cool sounding (to non-German speakers) names for quite mundane military activities.

Dearest Frans, you said: "Glad to hear you don't think "only the Germans could be up for something like this", must have confused you with someone else from the black and white community, still sad you link the "something like this" to a people instead of a regime."

The only accurate comment in the above is that you are indeed confused.

Then you said: "Typical you're referring to the Japanese instead of the Russians, you also don't have a problem with the nuking of Hiroshima/Nagasaki and the incineration of Tokyo and many of Japans other major population centres to I guess."

Are you suggesting that I have no issue with the Russians because I haven't mentioned them on this threead about the Germans, and by extension, the Axis? If so, I suggest you take a look at the thread about celebrating the Russian version of VE Day for my thoughts on Joe Stalin and his mob.

Then: "And concerning Britain; conform the standards applied by your side of the argument the fine history of the British empire clearly indicates a degenerated people the world would be better of without too, wouldn't it?"

This isn't your first language, I reckon, and you're doing better than i would in yours, but once more you are spouting garbage. presumably ypou are trying a cheap pop at the British Empire, the only empire in history to have been willingly given up, as far as I know. In fact, many of us are so eaten with guilt that we try and pretend we never had an empire. You'll be pleased to know I'm not one of them though.

And finally: "You're using my words somewhat out of context here; this was a response on a response, my remark referred back to war not being black and white, not to the response that summarised the whole of German WW2 history as state sponsored genocide.
To clear things up a bit; I find any deliberate murder of civilians outside the boundaries of collateral damage an atrocity, whatever the means used to accomplish it, for me these acts are ALL black, not only some of them."

I have to tell you that this is in complete cotradiction of what you earlier said when you stated that all areas were shades of grey and NOT black and white. Revisionism is alive and well, I see.

Back to the original thread, the 'Kampfgruppe' thread also provides an excellent reason to play the Germans – they have cool sounding (to non-German speakers) names for quite mundane military activities.

And nifty camo on their AFV's…

BRING BACK CA!

Because the best thing to do during a heated discussion about WWII is to bring the Iraq War into it…(/sarcasm)

You've doomed us all you fool!

Ivan the Reasonable you sure ain't.

"I don't know about that. I'm having a good conversation with Gary and he seems like someone I'd have a game and a beer with. Doesn't mean we have to agree 100%. In fact that would probably be boring."

Ralph

The irony is I don't drink and I don't wargame – but if this thread goes on any longer I might have to reconsider the former!

Gary

"Ivan the Reasonable you sure ain,t" Well in your member profile you claim that you are extremely charming…(/sarcasm)

Ivan: just reporting what I've been told! hahaha.

But it also says I'm absent minded, so take that for what it's worth…

The irony is I don't drink and I don't wargame – but if this thread goes on any longer I might have to reconsider the former!

LOL

Ralph

I'm thinking that not drinking and not wargaming equate to being pre-dead…

Some days, it feels like you could well be right…

That's why we have threads like this to get the blood flowing!

Gary

Your wish is my command ;o)

"Dearest Frans, you said: "Glad to hear you don't think "only the Germans could be up for something like this", must have confused you with someone else from the black and white community, still sad you link the "something like this" to a people instead of a regime."

The only accurate comment in the above is that you are indeed confused."

Well, what part of you not stating "only the Germans could be up for something like this" did I not get?
By using "Germans" instead of "Nazis" you clearly put the blame on a people instead of a regime.

"Then you said: "Typical you're referring to the Japanese instead of the Russians, you also don't have a problem with the nuking of Hiroshima/Nagasaki and the incineration of Tokyo and many of Japans other major population centres to I guess."

Are you suggesting that I have no issue with the Russians because I haven't mentioned them on this threead about the Germans, and by extension, the Axis? "

The only thing I suggest is that it is typical for those who think all Germans were evil to only refer to the side that lost when it comes to discussing war crimes.

"If so, I suggest you take a look at the thread about celebrating the Russian version of VE Day for my thoughts on Joe Stalin and his mob."

What you did or did not say in other discussions I have no knowledge of and thus cannot react upon.

"Then: "And concerning Britain; conform the standards applied by your side of the argument the fine history of the British empire clearly indicates a degenerated people the world would be better of without too, wouldn't it?"

This isn't your first language, I reckon, and you're doing better than i would in yours, but once more you are spouting garbage. "

Well, after over a decade of Internet discussions (in English) you're the first to complain.
Maybe your willingness to understand simply isn't as great as it is with the rest of the English speaking Internet community.
And your own rantings would certainly benefit from the regular use of the "spell check" function btw ;o)

"presumably ypou are trying a cheap pop at the British Empire, the only empire in history to have been willingly given up, as far as I know. In fact, many of us are so eaten with guilt that we try and pretend we never had an empire. You'll be pleased to know I'm not one of them though."

After WW2 holding on to their empire in the "old way" simply wasn't feasible anymore, so the "commonwealth" became the new way to hold on to some of the former empires economical advantages. I don't blame the British for doing so, but please don't confuse cleverly adapting to reality with some selfless act of remorse.

"And finally: "You're using my words somewhat out of context here; this was a response on a response, my remark referred back to war not being black and white, not to the response that summarised the whole of German WW2 history as state sponsored genocide.
To clear things up a bit; I find any deliberate murder of civilians outside the boundaries of collateral damage an atrocity, whatever the means used to accomplish it, for me these acts are ALL black, not only some of them."

I have to tell you that this is in complete cotradiction of what you earlier said when you stated that all areas were shades of grey and NOT black and white. Revisionism is alive and well, I see."

It sure isn't, what I stated exactly was that nations involved in wars are seldom black or white. Nations involved in wars seldom manage to keep their hands clean, as a result they usually come in many different shades of grey, the actual shade depending on just how dirty they managed their hands to get.

Are you now planning on defending your point of view solely by trying to discredit me (questioning my ability to write English, declaring me confused, crediting me with statements I never made, declaring my arguments garbage, accusing me of being a Nazi-apologist) or are you going to come up with some solid arguments why the WW2 targeting of Germanys main population centres for strategic bombing by the British wasn't a war crime?

Greetings, Frans.

My serve, I think…

Frans said: "By using "Germans" instead of "Nazis" you clearly put the blame on a people instead of a regime."

Being as no other country in WW2 is called after it's ruling overnment faction I don't see why I should give such a courtesy to the Germans. We fought the Germans. I certainly bet that nobody stopped on a battlefield to consider the voting peculiarities of his oponent. Just sounds like another bought of alologism from you, Frans. You sure you aren't a German just living in Holland?

Then: "What you did or did not say in other discussions I have no knowledge of and thus cannot react upon."

Then perhaps you should be better read.

Then: "Well, after over a decade of Internet discussions (in English) you're the first to complain.
Maybe your willingness to understand simply isn't as great as it is with the rest of the English speaking Internet community.
And your own rantings would certainly benefit from the regular use of the "spell check" function btw ;o)"

It wasn't a complaint, as you should have been able to grasp after so long on the internet. As for ranting, that would appear to be in the eye of the beholder. Finally, as such a veteran of internet communication you should be aware it's considered somewhat crass to go with the spellchecker attack, as the next sentence you type will invariably have a glaring error in it. Simply put, the reason I brought it up was that the paragraph to which I was referring was total gobbledigook but I'm far too well-mannered to say so.

Finally: "Are you now planning on defending your point of view solely by trying to discredit me (questioning my ability to write English, declaring me confused, crediting me with statements I never made, declaring my arguments garbage, accusing me of being a Nazi-apologist) or are you going to come up with some solid arguments why the WW2 targeting of Germanys main population centres for strategic bombing by the British wasn't a war crime?"

Yes…and No. There's an apostrophe in 'Germanys' (one from last line above) by the way. Didn't you use a spellchecker?

"Frans said: "By using "Germans" instead of "Nazis" you clearly put the blame on a people instead of a regime."

Being as no other country in WW2 is called after it's ruling overnment faction I don't see why I should give such a courtesy to the Germans. We fought the Germans. I certainly bet that nobody stopped on a battlefield to consider the voting peculiarities of his oponent. Just sounds like another bought of alologism from you, Frans. You sure you aren't a German just living in Holland?"

No, I'm not, and, for your information, I'm actually not living in Holland either.
When you don't want to differentiate between Germans and Nazis you also shouldn't blame the first for the crimes committed by the latter.

"Then: "What you did or did not say in other discussions I have no knowledge of and thus cannot react upon."
Then perhaps you should be better read."

You sound like a real Vogon now.

"Then: "Well, after over a decade of Internet discussions (in English) you're the first to complain.
Maybe your willingness to understand simply isn't as great as it is with the rest of the English speaking Internet community.
And your own rantings would certainly benefit from the regular use of the "spell check" function btw ;o)"

It wasn't a complaint, as you should have been able to grasp after so long on the internet. As for ranting, that would appear to be in the eye of the beholder. Finally, as such a veteran of internet communication you should be aware it's considered somewhat crass to go with the spellchecker attack, as the next sentence you type will invariably have a glaring error in it. Simply put, the reason I brought it up was that the paragraph to which I was referring was total gobbledigook but I'm far too well-mannered to say so."

I consider describing someone's language skill as "spouting garbage" far from being well mannered.

"Finally: "Are you now planning on defending your point of view solely by trying to discredit me (questioning my ability to write English, declaring me confused, crediting me with statements I never made, declaring my arguments garbage, accusing me of being a Nazi-apologist) or are you going to come up with some solid arguments why the WW2 targeting of Germanys main population centres for strategic bombing by the British wasn't a war crime?"

Yes…and No. There's an apostrophe in 'Germanys' (one from last line above) by the way. Didn't you use a spellchecker?"

Well, if you can't come up with a good argument you also can't challenge my view that the targeting of Germanys main population centres for strategic bombing by the British was a war crime.
And if you can't challenge my view that the British committed war crimes during WW2 you can't challenge my view of them being grey instead of white either.

Greetings, Frans.

Frans, it's only you and me keeping this alive now so be a good bloke and leave it be. I would suggest a couple of things though:

1. Change your details – it says you are in the Netherlands.

2. The winners make the rules. We won. We bombed who we liked. Tough, isn't it?

Seems to be petering out a bit now, that is a shame.

Perhaps we should start monty vs patton again and see if we can hit the magic 11 pages of posts??

Do you get ancients players who won't touch Romans, or maybe Chinese or perhaps Macedonions or countless other massacre and genocide commiting nationalities because of the individuals' inability to clamber down from the old moral high ground? Just curious.

2. The winners make the rules.We won.We bombed who we liked.Tough,is,nt it?

Nice to see you agree with the points Frans has been attempting to put across at last. Or judging by that comment perhaps you just ran out of arguments?

I work on things like this. I reason with people for as long as I consider it a worthwhile effort. At a point where they are so plainly in the opposite corner I just stamp on their heads.

"1. Change your details – it says you are in the Netherlands."

My profile says "Netherlands, Limburg", and as Limburg happens to be another part of the Netherlands than Holland is you're wrong again.

"2. The winners make the rules. We won. We bombed who we liked. Tough, isn't it?"

Well, Ivan the Reasonable already answered this one quite nicely I think.

"I work on things like this. I reason with people for as long as I consider it a worthwhile effort. At a point where they are so plainly in the opposite corner I just stamp on their heads."

How subtle, that brown shirt would have fitted you rather well I guess.

Greetings, Frans.

So there are people who actually think that if I chose to paint little tiny toy soldiers in certain colors and call them "German Army" that I am some sort of closet Nazi?

Wow.

"My profile says "Netherlands, Limburg", and as Limburg happens to be another part of the Netherlands than Holland is you're wrong again."

It's all Dutch to me.

"How subtle, that brown shirt would have fitted you rather well I guess."

At least I would have had the comfort of knowing there'd be folks like yourself queueing up to apologise for me and point out that the good guys were just as bad.

"At least I would have had the comfort of knowing there'd be folks like yourself queueing up to apologise for me and point out that the good guys were just as bad."

You would be disappointed, I would probably be defending your fellow British against those insinuating they were ALL wearing brown shirts though.

I just can't stand it when people get accused of crimes they didn't commit, especially if these people can't defend themselves anymore.
The average German soldier was only performing his duty, if no one steps in on his behalf I will, If you have a problem with that; tough luck!

Greetings, Frans.

Ok, this is all getting very close to the habitual "We were only following orders" defence.

At least, Frans taugh us something worth
thinking about :

- bombing cities defended by AA guns and aces
pilots and belonging to a state INTENTLY at war
with other powers.

is equal to :

- exterminating millions of unarmed people by
way of gases and/or starvation

Perhaps naïvely, I suppose that 95% if not more
of the Germans wouldn't have wanted this to occur,
and this include the 63% of November 1932 German
voters who didn't support the NSDAP program.

Even if among those 63%, all were not in favor
of any democratic political system, and this
includes the KPD, which, by KOMINTERN orders,
choose to prevent a SPD and Zentrum coalition
from forming a government.

Germans were among the first victims of a
monster they had, for good and bad reasons,
choosen or not to make birth to.

I can't see the point in comparing actions
taken by those who stopped this monster with
those who ruled it.

>The French and the British didn't declare war
>against Germany because it was an "evil empire"
>anyway, they also didn't declare war out of concern
>for Poland either, they declared war simply because
>it was in their own interest to do so.

A fireman's "interest" is to extinguish fires, a
policeman's "interest" is to arrest criminals.
They picked the job and get paid for doing it.
For some reasons, I feel more appreciation
for their "interest" than for those of fire
setters and criminals.

What type of "interest" would you credit any
nation, including Germany, in 1939 ?
Stopping the 3rd Reich, or letting it gobble the
rest of emerged lands and wipe out any
undesirable person untill the fool in the
Reichkanzlerei get tired or died from age ?

BTW, didn't Imperial Japan massacred Nankin's
population before Hiroshima and Nagazaki were
bombed ?
If the US had bombed these cities first, then
Japan had bombed Washington and NY back, would
you say that Japan was as much guilty of war
crimes than the US ?

Looks like history written by loosers is as much
accurate as history written by winners.

"I just can't stand it when people get accused of crimes they didn't commit, especially if these people can't defend themselves anymore.
The average German soldier was only performing his duty, if no one steps in on his behalf I will, If you have a problem with that; tough luck!"

'We were just obeying orders…' Have you actually taken in any of the pictures and footage of German soldiers executing Jews and other 'untermensche'? You have no idea about the mentality of the average German soldier, so don't even start trying to be their saviour.

Your choice of who to stand up for is lamentably distasteful. Why not watch the band of Brothers episode about the death camp to get a picture of the nice Germans down the road turning a blind eye to things – and they weren't even soldiers.

So, you defend who you want. You go ahead and compare Dresden to the Holocaust. You tell everybody that most Germans were good blokes just getting along. It's a free country, so to speak, which of course is considerably more than would have been the situation if the Germans would have won.

Oh, the irony.

"So there are people who actually think that if I chose to paint little tiny toy soldiers in certain colors and call them "German Army" that I am some sort of closet Nazi?"

No, not really. You'd need to read the whole thread to see where this has all come from.

"No, not really. You'd need to read the whole thread to see where this has all come from."

I did.

I think I need a new hobby.

"No, not really. You'd need to read the whole thread to see where this has all come from."

I did too and seems there are some people that thinks if someone collects and/or paints german troops as accurately as possible is some kind of closet nazi, that's weird and a very shortsighted thinking.

Recently I painted BTD Hitler in 28mm and looked on several sources until I found the colour picture where the figure was modelled from and painted with the same colours, I also had to study the different German camo patterns in the West in 1944 when airbrushed a Stug III and a SDKFZ 250, when playing IABSM for the Blinds I use the flags of the countries including the svastika one for the germans (if you're used to IABSM you'll know it's something normal), I suppose this would make me a closet nazi in some eyes.

But incidentally when I painted a British para company I looked on at least 7 sources to learn all the fine details of the denison smock and the Ox and Bucks insignias, bought two books when I painted a single regiment of 15mm ACW zouaves and also before started painting my British desert army I bought all Starmer books and 4 more on the desert just for the camos and uniforms. Currently I'm painting Le Haye Santé, Hougomount, and the Union and Household Brigades, some more BTD personalities (Patton, a German general, De Gaulle, Stalin and Ike) and again reading, getting and buying a lot of sources. So I guess I'm more an obsessive to details rather than a nazi which I know very well I'm not.

Of course there are pronazi gamers, but you can not tell who's a nazi just for the minis they use or paint, it's as stupid as saying someone is a racist for collecting and painting with detail an ACW confederate army.

"Ok, this is all getting very close to the habitual "We were only following orders" defence."

Generalisation again; what has the fact that some criminals used the "we were only following orders" routine to excuse their crimes to do with the average German soldier following their orders just like all soldiers are supposed to?

"At least, Frans taugh us something worth
thinking about :

- bombing cities defended by AA guns and aces
pilots and belonging to a state INTENTLY at war
with other powers.

is equal to :

- exterminating millions of unarmed people by
way of gases and/or starvation."

I never said it was, I only said a crime is a crime and you can't use one to excuse the other, especially if you hadn't even knowledge of that other crime when you were committing yours. Commit a war crime and you're tainted, regardless how many more, or how more evil, the war crimes committed by your adversary are. I never implied the British were as evil as the Nazi's were, I only said their slate wasn't clean either.

"Perhaps naïvely, I suppose that 95% if not more
of the Germans wouldn't have wanted this to occur,
and this include the 63% of November 1932 German
voters who didn't support the NSDAP program.
Even if among those 63%, all were not in favor
of any democratic political system, and this
includes the KPD, which, by KOMINTERN orders,
choose to prevent a SPD and Zentrum coalition
from forming a government.
Germans were among the first victims of a
monster they had, for good and bad reasons,
choosen or not to make birth to.
I can't see the point in comparing actions
taken by those who stopped this monster with
those who ruled it."

First the Germans didn't rule Adolf Hitler, he ruled them.
And he only came into being because of a situation the Germans were hardly alone responsible for.

">The French and the British didn't declare war
>against Germany because it was an "evil empire"
>anyway, they also didn't declare war out of concern
>for Poland either, they declared war simply because
>it was in their own interest to do so.

A fireman's "interest" is to extinguish fires, a
policeman's "interest" is to arrest criminals."

And a politicians "interest" is to either gain or preserve power.

"They picked the job and get paid for doing it.
For some reasons, I feel more appreciation
for their "interest" than for those of fire
setters and criminals."

Unfortunately many arsonists were also firemen, and the percentage of criminals amongst policemen often surpasses the average for the rest of the population.
Apart from that your whole comparison is flawed anyway due to the small detail that war isn't, per definition, a crime.

"What type of "interest" would you credit any
nation, including Germany, in 1939 ?
Stopping the 3rd Reich, or letting it gobble the
rest of emerged lands and wipe out any
undesirable person untill the fool in the
Reichkanzlerei get tired or died from age ?"

So you don't think that two powers with large parts of the world, and the economic benefits associated with them, under their colonialist boots had any "interest" in preserving the "Status Quo"?

Two dictators got hungry for land, one of them was a mass murderer, the other not.
At the time France and Britain declared war on Germany there hadn't been any wiping out of undesirable people, that wasn't even expected to happen.
Stalin, on the other hand, had already murdered millions of people, so if they were indeed acting on moral reasoning they should have declared war on the Soviet Union even before they declared war on Germany, but they didn't.
So moral reasoning clearly wasn't the reason, it was the excuse.

"BTW, didn't Imperial Japan massacred Nankin's
population before Hiroshima and Nagazaki were
bombed ?
If the US had bombed these cities first, then
Japan had bombed Washington and NY back, would
you say that Japan was as much guilty of war
crimes than the US ?"

They would both be guilty of war crimes, the severity of these crimes depending on the amount of killing inflicted

"Looks like history written by loosers is as much
accurate as history written by winners."

Losers generally don't write history.

""I just can't stand it when people get accused of crimes they didn't commit, especially if these people can't defend themselves anymore.
The average German soldier was only performing his duty, if no one steps in on his behalf I will, If you have a problem with that; tough luck!"

'We were just obeying orders…' Have you actually taken in any of the pictures and footage of German soldiers executing Jews and other 'untermensche'? You have no idea about the mentality of the average German soldier, so don't even start trying to be their saviour.

Your choice of who to stand up for is lamentably distasteful. Why not watch the band of Brothers episode about the death camp to get a picture of the nice Germans down the road turning a blind eye to things – and they weren't even soldiers."

Ah yes, all Germans were hard core Nazi-worshippers because an episode of a US glorifying TV-series paying tribute to popular history showed some Germans turning a blind eye.

Did you ever consider that living in a totalitarian state with full control over all the available media might severely influence your view on the world around you?

Did you ever consider that being under the boot of a totalitarian regime might severely limit what you can and cannot see without ending up dead?

Did you ever consider that some of these Germans might have been the targets of indiscriminate British bombing of civilians beforehand, and that their views on "right" and "wrong" could have gotten somewhat blurred in the process?

I guess you did not.

Most atrocities committed by German soldiers happened at the Eastern front, were their Soviet adversaries were as prone to committing them as they themselves were.
Does this mean these men, both German and Soviet, possessed some "evil" treat the soldiers of other nations did not? It doesn't; Hitler wanted to convince his soldiers their enemies were indeed "untermenschen", and Stalin was as eager to convince his soldiers that the Germans were even worse than his own regime was, both deployed special units with the sole purpose of creating and feeding a spiral of hate, and the level of atrocities on the Eastern front rose accordingly.

Someone mentioned the existence of US and/or British soldiers that did refuse to follow questionable orders, well, refusing orders and/or deserting gets a lot easier if doing so will have you ending up in jail instead of in front of a firing-squad, doesn't it?

I have a question for you; does the fact that some US soldiers massacred civilians in Vietnam mean that the average US soldiers was a baby killing bastard?

"So, you defend who you want. You go ahead and compare Dresden to the Holocaust."

I'm getting rather tired about being accused of saying things I never did.

"You tell everybody that most Germans were good blokes just getting along. It's a free country, so to speak, which of course is considerably more than would have been the situation if the Germans would have won.

Oh, the irony."

Well, as the Russians happen to be free these days that's something we'll never know isn't it?

""So there are people who actually think that if I chose to paint little tiny toy soldiers in certain colors and call them "German Army" that I am some sort of closet Nazi?"

No, not really. You'd need to read the whole thread to see where this has all come from."

As long as you clearly advertise the opinion that all Germans were, per definition, war criminals, and that notthing the allies did can't be justified by "the good cause", you're fairly save I guess ;o)

Greetings, Frans.

Frans, I think you're comparing two things that can not be compared. England and France regimes were not as bad as Germany nazi regime, England and France had nothing to gain declaring war on Germany, they were worried with Pangermanism and acted complying with their pacts when Germany attacked unjustifiedly Poland and the Western allies did not indulge in a state sponsored mass genocide so there's a moral issue here.

"Ah yes, all Germans were hard core Nazi-worshippers because an episode of a US glorifying TV-series paying tribute to popular history showed some Germans turning a blind eye."

Are you now saying that Band of Brothers is built on fraud and lies? That's interesting as most people seem to consider it one of the most realistic and thorough portrayals of not just WW2, but any war.

"Well, as the Russians happen to be free these days that's something we'll never know isn't it?"

What has that got to do with anything whatsoever?

"As long as you clearly advertise the opinion that all Germans were, per definition, war criminals, and that notthing the allies did can't be justified by "the good cause", you're fairly save I guess ;o)"

You rant on about other people misrespresenting you, but I challenge you to find one example from anybody who has posted here saying that ALL Germans were actual war criminals. Your problem is you have a fixed agenda and you are twisting anything you like around to maintain it.

"Are you now saying that Band of Brothers is built on fraud and lies? That's interesting as most people seem to consider it one of the most realistic and thorough portrayals of not just WW2, but any war."

Ambrose was a very good storyteller, but he was a sloppy historian. He tended to accept veteran's accounts at face value and portray them as fact without appropriate further investigation.

Although the portrayals of combat were excellent (I'm a combat vet myself, USMC) and the book and TV series make a good "101 level" history of that Airborne company's participation in the war, this is by no means a thorough or exhaustively researched history.

Just an FYI…

I've already adjudicated Frans versus iron ivan Keith.

Now, the score board for Old Bear versus Frans – Old bear kicks Frans all over the place, I'm afraid…

Well done Old Bear.
--
Tim

"Although the portrayals of combat were excellent (I'm a combat vet myself, USMC) and the book and TV series make a good "101 level" history of that Airborne company's participation in the war, this is by no means a thorough or exhaustively researched history."

Whilst I take your point, the activities around the death camp are either right or wrong. I have no reason to doubt what went on there nor that at the very best all across Germany in similar situations a lot of people just looked the other way. How many were actively complicit I guess we will never know.

"Whilst I take your point, the activities around the death camp are either right or wrong. I have no reason to doubt what went on there nor that at the very best all across Germany in similar situations a lot of people just looked the other way. How many were actively complicit I guess we will never know."

Oh, understood.

I'm just pointing out that as far as histories of WWII go, "Band of Brothers" isn't the gold standard.

"I'm just pointing out that as far as histories of WWII go, "Band of Brothers" isn't the gold standard."

Well, no, as a "history of WW2", it isn't. But, in all fairness was it meant to be? It is the story of one particular unit and what THEY experienced, after all.

"Well, no, as a "history of WW2", it isn't. But, in all fairness was it meant to be?"

No, not at all. But I'm not the one who referred to is as:

"one of the most realistic and thorough portrayals of not just WW2, but any war.

And I would stand by it's accuracy as a portrayal of combat.

Oh Dear, I appear to have picked up a stifle in the last couple of days. How pathetic.