Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

German soldiers talking about war crimes


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
26 replies to this topic

#1 Jenisch

Jenisch

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 330 posts

Posted 16 February 2012 - 08:45 PM



Interest German perspective.

Since most Soviet civilians killed by the Germans were reprisals from partisan activities, and since the Soviet Union didn't signed the Geneva convention, what the Germans done in Russia can really be called crimes? In where things such as the Katyn massacre and Russian attrocites against German civilians and the civilians in Manchuria enter, not to mention the deportations? :rolleyes:

#2 Tamino

Tamino

    Doc

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,150 posts
  • LocationUntersteiermark

Posted 16 February 2012 - 09:23 PM

Interest German perspective.

Since most Soviet civilians killed by the Germans were reprisals from partisan activities, and since the Soviet Union didn't signed the Geneva convention, what the Germans done in Russia can really be called crimes? In where things such as the Katyn massacre and Russian attrocites against German civilians and the civilians in Manchuria enter, not to mention the deportations? :rolleyes:

Can you please tell us what is your opinion?

Edited by Tamino, 16 February 2012 - 09:31 PM.

Aut viam inveniam aut faciam.


#3 lwd

lwd

    Ace

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,885 posts
  • LocationMichigan

Posted 16 February 2012 - 09:43 PM

The status of the Soviets and the conventions is not that clear. In any case there were portions the Germans were bound to by their own signature even if the Soviets weren't bound by them. While the conventions did allow reprisals the Germans didn't follow the rules required to make that legal. Furthermore it's not at all clear that "most Soviet civilians" were killed as reprisals, I challenge you to present some proof of that. So yes what they did in the USSR can and should be considered a crime.
  • belasar and rkline56 like this

#4 Tamino

Tamino

    Doc

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,150 posts
  • LocationUntersteiermark

Posted 16 February 2012 - 09:52 PM

The status of the Soviets and the conventions is not that clear. In any case there were portions the Germans were bound to by their own signature even if the Soviets weren't bound by them. While the conventions did allow reprisals the Germans didn't follow the rules required to make that legal. Furthermore it's not at all clear that "most Soviet civilians" were killed as reprisals, I challenge you to present some proof of that. So yes what they did in the USSR can and should be considered a crime.

Yes, a massive crime against humanity, unprecedented in history, since the Creation. Just read Jensch the quote below, you might find an answer you was looking for. :)

In Belarussia the Germans reputedly destroyed 209 towns and 9200 villages, some so totally that they were never rebuilt, some to the last soul. The memorial to Belorussian civilans remembers 2 million plus civilians killed and is located at Khatyn ( a village burnt down by Dirlewangers Brigade and 156 of it's 160 inhabitants killed). In the Ukraine it was 3 million plus civilians and 28,000 villages, hamlets and towns destroyed. Figures vary but I have seen 1700 towns and 90,000 villages and hamlets destroyed across the Soviet Union even if you half that figure it is still a staggering amount. However horrendous the Soviet terror in Germany can you offer any evidence of a similar level of crime and destruction. If the Soviets had wanted to there was nothing to stop them and in some ways when you the figures above in some ways it could have been much worse for the Germans.


Aut viam inveniam aut faciam.


#5 LRusso216

LRusso216

    Graybeard

  • ModeratorsOKF Moderator
  • 9,724 posts
  • LocationPennsylvania

Posted 16 February 2012 - 10:25 PM

Both sides committed serious crimes against humanity. I see no evidence that most Russians were killed because of partisan activities. They were killed as a result of a conscious German policy of liquidation. The Russians, though brutal in their reprisals, had no such policy against the Germans.
  • Tamino and SKYLINEDRIVE like this

image001.png

Lou


#6 SKYLINEDRIVE

SKYLINEDRIVE

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,019 posts
  • Locationwww.ceba.lu

Posted 17 February 2012 - 04:40 AM

Google "Wehrmachtsaustellung", that should answer any questions.

#7 SKYLINEDRIVE

SKYLINEDRIVE

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,019 posts
  • Locationwww.ceba.lu

Posted 17 February 2012 - 04:46 AM

The old man nearly utterd enough BS to end up before a german court! They want us to thank them for saving our asses from Stalin!?!? WTF!

Edited by SKYLINEDRIVE, 17 February 2012 - 04:54 AM.

  • Tamino likes this

#8 Mehar

Mehar

    Ace

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,348 posts

Posted 17 February 2012 - 03:42 PM

The old man nearly utterd enough BS to end up before a german court! They want us to thank them for saving our asses from Stalin!?!? WTF!


They are talking about their experiences in the war, German propaganda in Europe said exactly that, that they were saving Europe from Bolshevism which is what many believed at the time and perhaps still do today (it's not that uncommon to find veterans worldwide that echo war time statements). Even when they talk about the final days of the war, many of those sentiments (that they were defending their homeland from the Soviets, etc) were very common then and perhaps even officially supported by the party as well to try and bolster morale/efficiency.

As for the village, I'm not that familiar with what had happened there but from some of the memoirs I've read it wouldn't surprise me if such actions were taken after a partisan attack (since soldiers would usually go into neighboring areas to search for them, I haven't heard of deportation following an attack but it could be possible). I do feel bad for the girl though, while the veterans might simply be trying to explain protocol they had to her at the end of the day it's still her family and many others who were likely innocent that were impacted.

PS: Wehrmachtsausstellung has been brought under scrutiny not just from the public but academic scrutiny as well. It's known that the Wehrmacht/its members did commit crimes but that exhibit might not be the best use for an argument.

Edit: http://en.wikipedia....iki/Putten_raid
  • belasar likes this

#9 Tamino

Tamino

    Doc

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,150 posts
  • LocationUntersteiermark

Posted 17 February 2012 - 04:10 PM

They are talking about their experiences in the war, German propaganda in Europe said exactly that, that they were saving Europe from Bolshevism which is what many believed at the time and perhaps still do

These old men are quite ugly but aren't retarded to believe propaganda BS. Of course they knew that little kids they've killed in front of their mothers weren't "Bolschewiks".

… from some of the memoirs I've read it wouldn't surprise me if such actions were taken after a partisan attack.

They could have fought partizans, like real men, but killing kids was easier and more convinient: to provide Lebensraum for their own kids.

Such public statements are shame for German nation and to German courts for failing to punish all those who glorify Nazi crimes.

PS: "Bolschewiks" saved Europe from Nazi turd.

Edited by Tamino, 17 February 2012 - 04:15 PM.

Aut viam inveniam aut faciam.


#10 ptimms

ptimms

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 245 posts

Posted 17 February 2012 - 04:42 PM

All below from Gerlach via AHF. My highlight at the bottom. The facts

140,000 civilians killed in anti-partisan operations (of whom it seems 90% weren't actual partisans)
700,000 POW's killed (mainly starved)
500,000 ish Jews
100,000 Communist officals (? could be anyone I guess)

Pushing 1.5 million people of whom 800,000 are civilians killed Belorussia alone. Someone should ask these heroes of the German Army to justify these figures.


Codename; Period; Area; Number of Dead Partisans/Civilians; Number of Captured Firearms; Number of Dead in German Formations


1942

Bamberg; 26.03 - 06.04; Glusk, Bobruisk; 4,396; 47; 7

?; 09.05 - 12.05; Klitshev, Bobruisk; 520; 3; 10

?; Beginning of June; Slovodka, Bobruisk; 1,000; ?; ?

?; 15.06; Borki; 1,741; 7; 0

?; 21.06; Zbyshin; 1,076; ?; ?

?; 25.06; Timkovtshi; 900; ?;?

?; 26.06; Studenka; 836; ?;?

?; 18.07; Yelsk; 1,000; ?; ?

Adler; 15.07-07.08; Bobruisk, Mogilev, Beresino; 1,381; 438; 25

Greif; 14.08-20.08; Orsha, Vitebsk; 796; ?; 26

Sumpffieber; 22.08-21.09; White Ruthenia; 10,063; ?; ?

?; 22.09-26.09; Malorita; 4,038; 0; 0

Blitz; 23.09-03.10; Polozk, Vitebsk; 567; ?; 8

Karlsbad; 11.10-23.10; Orsha, Vitebsk; 1,051; 178; 24

Nürnberg; 23.11-29.11; Dubrovka; 2,974; ?; 6

Hamburg; 10.12-21.12; Neman-Shtshara; 6,172; 28; 7

Altona; 22.12-29.12; Slonim; 1,032; ?; 0

1943

Franz; 06.01-14.01; Grodsyanka; 2,025; 280; 19

Peter; 10.01-11.01; Klitshev, Kolbtsha; 1,400; ?; ?

?; 18.01-23.01; Sluzk,Minsk, Tsherven; 825; 141; 0

Waldwinter; until 01.02; Sirotino-Trudy; 1,627; 159; 20

Erntefest I; until 28.01; Tsherven, Ossipovitshi; 1,228; 163; 7

Erntefest II; until 09.02; Sluzk, Kopyl; 2,325; 314; 6

Hornung; 08.02-26.02; Lenin, Hansevitshi; 12,897; 133; 29

Schneehase; 28.01-15.02; Polozk, Rossony, Krasnopolye; 2,283; 54; 37

Winterzauber; 15.02 - end of March; Osveja, Latvian border; 3,904; ?; 30

Kugelblitz; 22.02-08.03; Polozk, Osweja, Drissa, Rossony; 3,780; 583; 117

Nixe; until 19.03; Ptitsh-Mikashevitshi, Pinsk; 400; ?; ?

Föhn; until 21.03; Pinsk; 543; ?; 12

Donnerkeil; 21.03-02.04; Polozk, Vitebsk; 542; 91; 5

Draufgänger II; 01.05-09.05; Rudnya and Manyly forest; 680; 110; 0

Maigewitter; 17.05-21.05; Vitebsk, Surash, Gorodok; 2,441; 143; ?

Cottbus; 20.05-23.06; Lepel, Begomel, Ushatshi; 11,796; 1,057; 128

Weichsel; 27.05-10.06; Dniepr-Pripiet Triangle southwest of Gomel; 4,018; 1,570; 28

Ziethen; 13.06-16.06; Retshitza; 160; ?; 5

Seydlitz; 25.06-27.07; Ovrutsh-Mosyr; 5,106; 528; 34

?; 30.07; Mosyr; 501; ?; ?

Günther; until 14.07; Voloshin, Lagoisk; 3,993; ?; 11

Hermann; 13.07-11-08; Ivje, Novogrodek, Wolishin, Stolbzy; 4,280; 986; 52

Fritz; 24.09-10.10; Glebokie; 509; 46; 12

?; 09.10 - 22.10; Stary Bychov; 1,769; 302; 64

Heinrich; 01.11-18.11; Rossony, Polozk, Idritza; 5,452; 476; 358

?; December; Spaskoye; 628; ?;?

?; December; Beloye; 1,453; ?; ?

Otto; 20.12-01.01.1944; Osveja; 1,920; 30; 21

1944

?; 14.01; Ala; 1,758; ?; ?

?; 22.01; Baiki; 987; ?; ?

Wolfsjagd; 03.02-15.02; Glusk, Bobruisk; 467; ?; 6

Sumpfhahn; until 19.02; Glusk, Bobruisk; 538; ?; 6

?; Beginning of March; Beresino, Belnytshi; 686; ?; ?

Auerhahn; 07.04-17.04; Bobruisk; 1,000; ?; ?

Frühlingsfest; 17.04-12.05; Polozk, Ushatshi; 7,011; 1,065; 300

Pfingstausflug; June; Senno; 653; ?; ?

Windwirbel; June; Chidra; 560; 103; 3

Pfingsrose; 02.06-13.06; Talka; 499; ?; ?

Kormoran; 25.05-17.06; Vileika, Borissov, Minsk; 7,697; 325; 110


Total I:
139,884 partisans/civilians killed

Total II:
100,070 partisans/civilians killed, 9,360 firearms captured

Total III:
112,603 partisans/civilians killed, 1,533 dead in German and auxiliary formations

In the above listed major anti-partisan actions in Belorussia between 1942 and 1944, at least 139,884 partisans and civilians were killed. The list is a transcription / translation of the one in Gerlach’s a.m. book, which is based on the contemporary German records that the author could get hold of. The number of dead was probably even higher, given that Gerlach’s list also includes the “prisoners” who, according to Gerlach, were mostly executed. These figures I have left out for simplification reasons.

The “Total II” of the above list gives the number of partisan / civilian dead in such operations for which the total of apprehended firearms of all types (rifles, pistols, machine guns, occasionally also heavy weapons) could be established. It shows that the number of dead was more than ten times higher than the number of apprehended firearms, which suggests that 90 % of those killed were not partisans but unarmed civilians.

The “Total II” of the above list gives the number of partisan / civilian dead in such operations for which the number of dead in the German and auxiliary formations could be established. It shows that in these operations 112,603 “partisans” but only 1,533 members of anti-partisan formations were killed – a ratio of 73 to 1 - , which is another indication of how few of those killed by the German formations were actually partisans.

The major actions listed above were not those that accounted for the greatest number of victims. On the contrary, most of those killed in anti-partisan warfare in Belorussia between 1941 and 1944 fell victim to countless smaller operations, as demonstrated by Gerlach in his a.m. book.

For the whole of Belorussia and the period between July 1941 and July 1944, Gerlach established a total of 345,000 victims of rural anti-partisan operations among the population. 14,000 of these were Jews. Partisan losses, according to Soviet sources quoted by Gerlach, were 26,000 plus 11,800 missing most of whom, according to Gerlach, must be considered as dead. These data confirm the assumptions that result from comparing the number of dead “partisans” in the major actions on the one hand with the number of apprehended firearms and the German losses on the other: 9 in every 10 people killed by German anti-partisan units were not partisans, but unarmed civilians (Gerlach, as above, pages 957/958).

Beside the victims of anti-partisan operations, according to Gerlach, the German occupiers killed on the territory of Belorussia about 700,000 prisoners of war, 500,000 to 550,000 Jews and 100,000 others, mainly Communist functionaries, members of the Polish intelligentsia as well as urban resistance fighters and their supporters – altogether between 1.6 million and 1.7 million people.
  • Tamino and SKYLINEDRIVE like this


Lo there do I see my Father,

Lo there do I see my Mother,

My Sisters and my Brothers ,

Lo there do I see the line of my people, back to the beginning.

Lo, they do call me, they bid me take my place among them,

in the halls of Valhalla, where the brave may live forever


#11 Biak

Biak

    Adjutant

  • ModeratorsOKF Moderator
  • 5,412 posts

Posted 17 February 2012 - 05:23 PM

What I take away from the short video is : Personal prejudice coupled with indoctrination allows one to excuse their own inexcusable actions. No humane person kills for the sake of killing as an example.

Happiness is nice but it can't buy money.

 

Kilroy_Was_Here_by_catluvr2.gif


#12 Mehar

Mehar

    Ace

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,348 posts

Posted 17 February 2012 - 05:24 PM

These old men are quite ugly but aren't retarded to believe propaganda BS. Of course they knew that little kids they've killed in front of their mothers weren't "Bolschewiks".
They could have fought partizans, like real men, but killing kids was easier and more convinient: to provide Lebensraum for their own kids.


So I assume you have proof then that the men in the video committed war crimes?

Partisans used guerrilla tactics and often intentionally ran into crowded areas to hide, their opponents could easily say the partisans should have fought like real men hence that argument goes no where.

You are underestimating propaganda if you think no one will believe it, one needs to look no further than the Eastern Front to see propaganda at its worst, don't think we are immune to propaganda today either, perhaps we are already under its spell in our day to day lives without knowing it.

Such public statements are shame for German nation and to German courts for failing to punish all those who glorify Nazi crimes.


I don't think they said anything in that video which glorified crimes, at most perhaps you can say they made excuses for what occurred at Putten.

PS: "Bolschewiks" saved Europe from Nazi turd.


Sorry but I don't see what this has to do with what I've said.

#13 SKYLINEDRIVE

SKYLINEDRIVE

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,019 posts
  • Locationwww.ceba.lu

Posted 17 February 2012 - 05:25 PM

First of all the translation does not render the full content of the spoken german words, there is much of the innuendo missing. So by only reading the english subtitles you will only get a part of what the **** said.

They are talking about their experiences in the war, German propaganda in Europe said exactly that, that they were saving Europe from Bolshevism which is what many believed at the time and perhaps still do today (it's not that uncommon to find veterans worldwide that echo war time statements). Even when they talk about the final days of the war, many of those sentiments (that they were defending their homeland from the Soviets, etc) were very common then and perhaps even officially supported by the party as well to try and bolster morale/efficiency.

As for the village, I'm not that familiar with what had happened there but from some of the memoirs I've read it wouldn't surprise me if such actions were taken after a partisan attack (since soldiers would usually go into neighboring areas to search for them, I haven't heard of deportation following an attack but it could be possible). I do feel bad for the girl though, while the veterans might simply be trying to explain protocol they had to her at the end of the day it's still her family and many others who were likely innocent that were impacted.

PS: Wehrmachtsausstellung has been brought under scrutiny not just from the public but academic scrutiny as well. It's known that the Wehrmacht/its members did commit crimes but that exhibit might not be the best use for an argument.

Edit: Putten raid - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


So you accept that german veterans stick to the indoctrination they went through as young people and after all those years are not capable of seeing what really happened????

I will ask you a few very simple question:

1) Do you think that trying to save Europe from the Soviets was the main reason for the german leadership to fight in WW2????

2) If your answer is negative: how do you explain that so many years after the war and after so many historical research a veteran of the Wehrmacht still can maintain such a thesis and how comes you condone such negationism?

3) Regarding the Putten raid: Do you condone the notion of collective guilt? Do you think it is moraly and legally justified to deport over 600 people, without any inquiry or due process? Does, in your eyes, the fact, that one soldier was killed by Partisans, explain the Putten raid?

Finally regarding the Wehrmachtsaustellung, I've visited both of them. No, not even a single serious historian negated the main message of the first Wehrmachtsaustellung. There was a valid criticism of it's provocative broad brush and there were some faults regarding image material. The main content though was nothing new, it was the result of research done in the 60's that has never been refuted!

The second, revised, Wehrmachtsaustellung was well recepted by all serious historians.

The only "historians" that denied the factual basis of the main message of the Wehrmachtsaustellung were known negationists, right wing fringe activists, fascists and neo-nazis.

I agree to the fact that most Wehrmachtveterans, as individuals, were honourble men, who fought for their country and did not have an easy choice. But the Wehrmacht as a whole, as an institution, was in my eyes a murdering bunch without any sense of honour. From 1944 there wasn't even any respect for their own soldiers and citizens left, the worst that can happen to a professional military force. It was a mirror image of the moraly corrupt and perverted political regime it served!

#14 Mehar

Mehar

    Ace

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,348 posts

Posted 17 February 2012 - 06:26 PM

It seems like you've jumped to a lot of conclusions regarding my post but I'll attempt to clarify.

First of all the translation does not render the full content of the spoken german words, there is much of the innuendo missing. So by only reading the english subtitles you will only get a part of what the **** said.


If you think you can provide a better translation then please do but my German isn't that great and I (as I assume many on this forum) only have the original video to go on for the time being.

So you accept that german veterans stick to the indoctrination they went through as young people and after all those years are not capable of seeing what really happened????


In a way I actually consider this to be in the same vein of PTSD, one can't merely wake up from its effects. Do you really think it would be easy to convince a battle heartened veteran who killed people, saw people die, etc (basically saw humanity at its worst) that everything he was told was a lie, that people died for nothing? It's not that easy. Some cope better than others of course. We're fortunate now to be living in an era where veterans can receive help for war related issues in certain parts of the world but this was not always the case and it certainly wasn't the case after World War 2.

1) Do you think that trying to save Europe from the Soviets was the main reason for the german leadership to fight in WW2????


Of course not but it served as a useful propaganda tool to convince the masses. This specific reason was applied throughout Europe and we can see its effects in occupied territories with forces that allied themselves with the Axis to fight the Soviet Union (I guess in Eastern Europe many "liberated" nations may have had living memory reasons to fight back but I remember reading an interview with a French Waffen S.S. soldier where he stated the reason he and many others joined initially was because they wanted to help fight Communism in the East, I think it might have been from the book "To the Death's Head True" but I'll see if I can find it).

2) If your answer is negative: how do you explain that so many years after the war and after so many historical research a veteran of the Wehrmacht still can maintain such a thesis and how comes you condone such negationism?


Excluding your presumptions, please see above.

Edit: I should also add that it's hard enough to get some veterans to talk about war, studying the topic further especially regarding such emotional topics as war crimes may be a bit difficult. Large armies fought in World War 2 and as a result quite a few generalizations have to be made either intentionally or unintentionally about certain things which may not reflect a soldiers personal experiences.

3) Regarding the Putten raid: Do you condone the notion of collective guilt? Do you think it is moraly and legally justified to deport over 600 people, without any inquiry or due process? Does, in your eyes, the fact, that one soldier was killed by Partisans, explain the Putten raid?


I don't recall ever saying anything that remotely hinted at this. As a rule of thumb I like to look at issues on a case by case basis versus the wide brush approach, in regards to collective guilt though I can't think of anything off the top of my head where it's good.

The unfortunate reality is that in war one of the first things to fly out the window are legal rights (although thanks to technology making strides this is becoming less of an issue but still one that is present in conflict) but this does not justify what happened at Putten, legality aside, there is an obvious moral/human issue present with what happened.

Finally regarding the Wehrmachtsaustellung, I've visited both of them. No, not even a single serious historian negated the main message of the first Wehrmachtsaustellung. There was a valid criticism of it's provocative broad brush and there were some faults regarding image material. The main content though was nothing new, it was the result of research done in the 60's that has never been refuted!

The second, revised, Wehrmachtsaustellung was well recepted by all serious historians.

The only "historians" that denied the factual basis of the main message of the Wehrmachtsaustellung were known negationists, right wing fringe activists, fascists and neo-nazis.

I agree to the fact that most Wehrmachtveterans, as individuals, were honourble men, who fought for their country and did not have an easy choice. But the Wehrmacht as a whole, as an institution, was in my eyes a murdering bunch without any sense of honour. From 1944 there wasn't even any respect for their own soldiers and citizens left, the worst that can happen to a professional military force. It was a mirror image of the moraly corrupt and perverted political regime it served!


I don't know about the individuals that opposed the exhibit but I highly doubt everyone that was against it was a right wing Neo Nazi. As I've previously stated the Wehrmacht was responsible for its share of issues which is generally an accepted statement, there is certainly some controversy over how much this includes but I doubt we'll ever have a conclusive answer to any of it.

The Wehrmacht was a very large organization and many of the issues they ran into were on the Eastern Front, I personally won't go as far as saying they were corrupt or even righteous as a result but the reality can probably be found between the two.

Edited by Mehar, 17 February 2012 - 06:48 PM.

  • A-58 likes this

#15 SKYLINEDRIVE

SKYLINEDRIVE

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,019 posts
  • Locationwww.ceba.lu

Posted 18 February 2012 - 06:56 AM

Don't hide behind smoke screens Mehar! The veterans in the interview are not talking about their personal experiences! Not a single word!!! Nobody accused them personnaly of any warcrime or misbehaviour. They say that they only fought against Stalin and Bolshevism, they even suggest that the rest of Europe, they cite France and the Netherlands, should thank them for saving them from Stalin and Bolshevism. It is themselves who start accusing the Soviets of atrocities rape and molesting civilians. Then the dutch lady askes them about possible Wehrmacht wrongdoings, in a very considered and unoffensive way btw., she calls it "Unangenehmheiten" = "disagreeable events" and they deny that there were any such wrongdoings! When the lady mentions the Putten raid, they first deny it and then blame it on the partisans! In the end they insinuate that it was the dutch's own fault that they were invaded!

So, i'm jumping to conclusions again, what part of their proposal is acceptable for you?

#16 Tamino

Tamino

    Doc

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,150 posts
  • LocationUntersteiermark

Posted 18 February 2012 - 11:39 AM

A question:

Does anyone believe what these people have said? Honestly!

Edited by Tamino, 18 February 2012 - 11:48 AM.

Aut viam inveniam aut faciam.


#17 Mehar

Mehar

    Ace

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,348 posts

Posted 18 February 2012 - 05:31 PM

Don't hide behind smoke screens Mehar! The veterans in the interview are not talking about their personal experiences! Not a single word!!! Nobody accused them personnaly of any warcrime or misbehaviour. They say that they only fought against Stalin and Bolshevism, they even suggest that the rest of Europe, they cite France and the Netherlands, should thank them for saving them from Stalin and Bolshevism. It is themselves who start accusing the Soviets of atrocities rape and molesting civilians. Then the dutch lady askes them about possible Wehrmacht wrongdoings, in a very considered and unoffensive way btw., she calls it "Unangenehmheiten" = "disagreeable events" and they deny that there were any such wrongdoings! When the lady mentions the Putten raid, they first deny it and then blame it on the partisans! In the end they insinuate that it was the dutch's own fault that they were invaded!

So, i'm jumping to conclusions again, what part of their proposal is acceptable for you?


Generally when people use terms like "we" it means they are talking about themselves or a group of people they are with. If you bothered to read my posts correctly instead of trying to paint me in a certain light you would see that I was only talking about the "saving Europe" mentality and giving my opinion on their comments about Putten (which were later confirmed via the link).

It's possible that they didn't know about Putten, it's also possible that when they were in the army their senior officers were more strict towards certain things, we technically don't even know what front they fought on which has a lot to do with it, it could also be possible that they are lying but since we don't know anything about them or where they fought it's impossible to say for certain. What can be confirmed however by using memoirs is that themes like Bolshevism was going to destroy Europe were common due to Nazi propaganda and it did impact perceptions (the book Frontsoldaten has quite a few memoir snippets that show this).

No one in the video accused the men of anything but Tamino threw around a few accusations that I asked him to explain.

If you think language or wording is an issue (since it certainly seems like there is a communication issue somewhere down the line either on my end, yours, or both) then please feel free to ask me to clarify but you're really going about it the wrong way here in my opinion.

#18 Tamino

Tamino

    Doc

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,150 posts
  • LocationUntersteiermark

Posted 18 February 2012 - 06:23 PM

Mehar,

I have friends, business partners and distant relatives both in Germany and Austria. I am from territory which was for centuries under strong German cultural influence and I can say I know Germans very well. My slang is based on German language. All native Germans and Austrians I had privilege to meet are decent people with high moral principles, without exception. I don't think any German would ever support such foolish statements like these on that video. They wouldn't even bother supporting such foolish statements, I am very sure about that. What I can understand is that you are from quite different cultural environment and you cannot understand the background of our European matters.

Furthermore, the Council of Europe defines statements from the video under consideration as the "denial, gross minimisation, approval or justification of genocide or crimes against humanity" (article 6, Additional Protocol to the Convention on cybercrime). Don't worry, European jurisdiction doesn't apply to you, so you are free to say whatever you want.

.

Edited by Tamino, 18 February 2012 - 06:33 PM.

Aut viam inveniam aut faciam.


#19 Mehar

Mehar

    Ace

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,348 posts

Posted 18 February 2012 - 06:36 PM

Mehar,

I have friends, business partners and distant relatives both in Germany and Austria. I am from territory which was for centuries under strong German cultural influence and I can say I know Germans very well. My slang is based on German language. All native Germans and Austrians I had privilege to meet are decent people with high moral principles, without exception. I don't think any German would ever support such foolish statements like these on that video. They wouldn't even bother supporting such foolish statements, I am very sure about that. What I can understand is that you are from quite different cultural environment and you cannot understand the background of our European matters.

Furthermore, the Council of Europe defines statements from the video under consideration as the "denial, gross minimisation, approval or justification of genocide or crimes against humanity" (article 6, Additional Protocol to the Convention on cybercrime). Don't worry, European jurisdiction doesn't apply to you, so you are free to say whatever you want.

Good riddance.


Are you accusing me of saying these things? If so, please point out exactly what I have said which gives you this impression as I haven't said anything of the sort which would deny a crime or glorify it in anyway.

#20 SKYLINEDRIVE

SKYLINEDRIVE

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,019 posts
  • Locationwww.ceba.lu

Posted 18 February 2012 - 06:42 PM

I can't see where there would be a communication problem. In my opinion the statements of the veterans are unacceptable, calling their sputer BS is putting it mildly, you started relativizing their proposals and even worse youshowed either a complete ignorance or a clear bias of which nature whatsoever against the Wehrmachtsaustellung!

Quote/ PS: Wehrmachtsausstellung has been brought under scrutiny not just from the public but academic scrutiny as well. It's known that the Wehrmacht/its members did commit crimes but that exhibit might not be the best use for an argument./Unquote

I formulated a few very simple and easily understandable questions, a simple yes or no would have left no doubts and would have cut out any room for possible misunderstandings, in ever which way! Instead of giving clearcut answers you went on rambling about mostly unrelated matters. You coloured your answers with undertones of victimization and whining. Christ on a pushbike, I do not try to paint you brown or black or red because I don't give a donkey's backside about your political views!

The proposals of the german vets are totally unacceptable, that's what we are talking about.
  • Tamino likes this

#21 Mehar

Mehar

    Ace

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,348 posts

Posted 18 February 2012 - 06:57 PM

I can't see where there would be a communication problem. In my opinion the statements of the veterans are unacceptable, calling their sputer BS is putting it mildly, you started relativizing their proposals and even worse youshowed either a complete ignorance or a clear bias of which nature whatsoever against the Wehrmachtsaustellung!

Quote/ PS: Wehrmachtsausstellung has been brought under scrutiny not just from the public but academic scrutiny as well. It's known that the Wehrmacht/its members did commit crimes but that exhibit might not be the best use for an argument./Unquote



A communication problem between you and I since one obviously exists if you are attempting to paint me with a bias. My statements were neutral merely pointing out conditions that existed at the time which could allow for such impressions to exist. As for Putten, I specifically stated that I don't know anything about the event but it wouldn't surprise me if such an event did occur because protocol was to search neighboring areas after a Partisan attack (with my edit I added a link to the Wiki page as a sign of me looking into the matter and providing further reading for those who did not know either). In your reply you try to spin it as me saying the only reason Nazi Germany wanted to go to war was to save Europe from communism and that somehow I justified the actions of the Wehrmacht at Putten among other things.

I point out that the exhibit was controversial but in the same breath point out that the Wehrmacht was indeed responsible for crimes makes me bias to which side exactly?

I formulated a few very simple and easily understandable questions, a simple yes or no would have left no doubts and would have cut out any room for possible misunderstandings, in ever which way! Instead of giving clearcut answers you went on rambling about mostly unrelated matters. You coloured your answers with undertones of victimization and whining. Christ on a pushbike, I do not try to paint you brown or black or red because I don't give a donkey's backside about your political views!


You asked me questions and I answered them as was applicable, you weren't honestly expecting such complex matters to be answered with a simple yes or no, were you?

The proposals of the german vets are totally unacceptable, that's what we are talking about.


As per your replies, that is obviously not what we are talking about which is why I opened up an avenue in my previous post to clarify matters regarding my post but you seem intent on continuing with your perceived notions of my post (which for the record are completely incorrect).

#22 Tamino

Tamino

    Doc

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,150 posts
  • LocationUntersteiermark

Posted 18 February 2012 - 07:06 PM

I can't see where there would be a communication problem. In my opinion the statements of the veterans are unacceptable, calling their sputer BS is putting it mildly, you started relativizing their proposals and even worse youshowed either a complete ignorance or a clear bias of which nature whatsoever against the Wehrmachtsaustellung!

Quote/ PS: Wehrmachtsausstellung has been brought under scrutiny not just from the public but academic scrutiny as well. It's known that the Wehrmacht/its members did commit crimes but that exhibit might not be the best use for an argument./Unquote

I formulated a few very simple and easily understandable questions, a simple yes or no would have left no doubts and would have cut out any room for possible misunderstandings, in ever which way! Instead of giving clearcut answers you went on rambling about mostly unrelated matters. You coloured your answers with undertones of victimization and whining. Christ on a pushbike, I do not try to paint you brown or black or red because I don't give a donkey's backside about your political views!

The proposals of the german vets are totally unacceptable, that's what we are talking about.

Well said SkyLineDrive. b ^.^ d

And finally, let me paraphrase Skipper:

This is why I love Germans!

As decent people, nobody even bothered supporting denial.

Aut viam inveniam aut faciam.


#23 Mehar

Mehar

    Ace

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,348 posts

Posted 18 February 2012 - 07:12 PM

Well said SkyLineDrive. b ^.^ d

And finally, let me paraphrase Skipper:

This is why I love Germans!

As decent people, nobody even bothered supporting denial.


You haven't answered my question.

#24 SKYLINEDRIVE

SKYLINEDRIVE

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,019 posts
  • Locationwww.ceba.lu

Posted 18 February 2012 - 07:37 PM

I rest my case. No offense meant Mehar!

#25 Mehar

Mehar

    Ace

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,348 posts

Posted 18 February 2012 - 07:54 PM

I rest my case. No offense meant Mehar!


Rest your case at what? Sorry but with some of the accusations that were thrown around I think I'll need a bit more closure than that.

Since you guys are new here and if any confusion still remains I am firmly against denial of events, injustice, etc. Over the years I've gotten into quite a few heated debates with members about some of these issues so obviously if I said something in this thread that is taken the wrong way or perhaps needs further clarification then simply ask, if this is the case I most likely didn't mean anything in an offensive or negative way so if it is taken as such I'd love to be able to clarify whenever possible.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users