NationStates Jolt Archive

stumbled across this on the net somehere recently, is it true ?


REMAGENAfter the capture of the Remagen Bridge, the US Army hastily erected dozens of Prisoner of War cages around the bridge-head. The camps were simply open fields surrounded by concertina wire. Those at the Rhine Meadows were situated at Remagen, Bad Kreuznach, Andernach, Buderich, Rheinbach and Sinzig. The German prisoners were hopeful of good treatment from the GIs but in this they were sadly disappointed. Herded into the open spaces like cattle, some were beaten and mistreated. No tents or toilets were supplied. The camps became huge latrines, a sea of urine from one end to the other. They had to sleep in holes in the ground which they dug with their bare hands. In the Bad Kreuznach cage, 560,000 men were interned in an area that could only comfortably hold 45,000. Denied enough food and water, they were forced to eat the grass under their feet and the camps soon became a sea of mud. After the concentration camps were discovered, their treatment became worse as the GIs vented their rage on the hapless prisoners. In the five camps around Bretzenheim, prisoners had to survive on 600-850 calories per day. With bloated bellies and teeth falling out, the died by the thousands. During the two and a half months (April-May, 1945) when the camps were under American control, a total of 18,100 prisoners died from malnutrition, disease and exposure. This extremely harsh treatment at the hands of the Americans resulted in the deaths of over 50,000 German prisoners in the Rhine Meadows camps, in the months just before and after the war ended.
It must however be borne in mind that with the best will in the world it proved almost impossible to care for the prisoners under the strict terms of the Geneva Convention. The task of guarding these prisoners, numbering around 920,000, fell to the 40,000 men of the US 106th. Infantry Division. The Remagen cage was set up to accommodate 100,000 men but ended up with twice that number. On the first afternoon 35,000 prisoners were counted through the gate. About 10,000 of these required urgent medical attention which in most cases was completely absent. All roads leading to the camps were clogged with hundreds of trucks bringing in even more prisoners, sent to the rear by the advancing 9th.US Army. Tourists, cruising down the Rhine today can pick out a small memorial and plaque built on the site of the former POW cage. In the Remagen cemetery there are 1,200 graves and at Bad Kreuznach, 1,000 graves.


Has anybody seen the memorial or got more details ?

Wow, I'd never heard anything about this before.

50,000 my ass. Try a thousand, which is a pittance compaired to the number of people the nazi scum killed.

(Not to mention that we did the best that we could, our supply lines were strained to the point of breaking, look at the mess we had after the war in Germany)

Try to avoid invading Poland next time

Try to avoid invading Poland next time
*nukes the US to hell and back*
Try to avoid invading Afghanistan and Iraq next time.

*nukes the US to hell and back*
Try to avoid invading Afghanistan and Iraq next time.

You don't have any.

Do you want me to list all the other countries Germany invaded?

You don't have any.

Do you want me to list all the other countries Germany invaded?
The US has and used them too. Do you want me to list all the other countries the US invaded?

Don't get into a pissing match about who's more reprehensible than who. The fact that Germany invaded Poland does not excuse behavior such as was reported.

The question at hand however, is that report accurate?

The US has and used them too. Do you want me to list all the other countries the US invaded?

Please. Are you going to count the ones that the US liberated from Germany?

Yes, the accuracy of the article is more relevant.

The US has and used them too. Do you want me to list all the other countries the US invaded?

just why dont you, i wanna see if you know them all...

Click on "Germany," then scroll down a bit

http://members.iinet.net.au/~gduncan/massacres.html#germany

just why dont you, i wanna see if you know them all...
I'd have to google a while, but I know that it's quite a lot. Not to forget the poor native Americans who had to die for the US ancestors to make room so they can plant their Mc Donald's, Parking lots and Starbucks all over the continent. Personally I don't like these pissing matches because I know myself that Hitler did horrible things during his dictatorship in Germany (note that Hitler was a dictator. I have yet to see someone blame the Iraqis for the things Hussein did...) but I really really hate it when the atrocities against Germans, which did happen very much, are being downplayed or ignored by self-righteous Americans.

I'd have to google a while, but I know that it's quite a lot. Not to forget the poor native Americans who had to die for the US ancestors to make room so they can plant their Mc Donald's, Parking lots and Starbucks all over the continent. Personally I don't like these pissing matches because I know myself that Hitler did horrible things during his dictatorship in Germany (note that Hitler was a dictator. I have yet to see someone blame the Iraqis for the things Hussein did...) but I really really hate it when the atrocities against Germans, which did happen very much, are being downplayed or ignored by self-righteous Americans.
It took more then one person to run the Holocaust.

I'd have to google a while, but I know that it's quite a lot. Not to forget the poor native Americans who had to die for the US ancestors to make room so they can plant their Mc Donald's, Parking lots and Starbucks all over the continent. Personally I don't like these pissing matches because I know myself that Hitler did horrible things during his dictatorship in Germany (note that Hitler was a dictator. I have yet to see someone blame the Iraqis for the things Hussein did...) but I really really hate it when the atrocities against Germans, which did happen very much, are being downplayed or ignored by self-righteous Americans.


I agree. We really do differentiate between Germans and Nazis. More importantly, younger Germans are as responsible for WWII as I am for Wounded Knee.

I'd have to google a while, but I know that it's quite a lot. Not to forget the poor native Americans who had to die for the US ancestors to make room so they can plant their Mc Donald's, Parking lots and Starbucks all over the continent. Personally I don't like these pissing matches because I know myself that Hitler did horrible things during his dictatorship in Germany (note that Hitler was a dictator. I have yet to see someone blame the Iraqis for the things Hussein did...) but I really really hate it when the atrocities against Germans, which did happen very much, are being downplayed or ignored by self-righteous Americans.
Yes, Americans have committed attrocities over the years... about as much as any other developed country... quite a bit less actually because we are quite a bit younger as a country goes, but per annual basis, we're probably right up there.

However, what we need to know, is this true, or some kind of hoax? Is there something else to go on, other than a single post on a forum?

Yes, Americans have committed attrocities over the years... about as much as any other developed country... quite a bit less actually because we are quite a bit younger as a country goes, but per annual basis, we're probably right up there.

However, what we need to know, is this true, or some kind of hoax? Is there something else to go on, other than a single post on a forum?

Scroll up to my other post. There is a link.

It took more then one person to run the Holocaust.
True that. It took the Versailles Treaty to get Hitler in power so he could overthrow the the Weimar Republic and install himself as dictator and with the help of his party (NSDAP) install the perfect nazi-regime. I am not sure what it was like back then here in Germany, since I wasn't born back then, but I know that propaganda can do a lot to demonize a minority and make people become insensitive to atrocities commited against fellow humans. I cannot say whether or not the Germans back then wanted all this to happen and supported it, but I somewhat doubt it. No human can be so cruel and knowing how Hitler's regime functioned (Gestapo, SS, SA were excellent tools to keep the "sheep" under control), I think the people had no other choice if they did not want to end up in a concentration camp/gas chamber themselves.

It took more then one person to run the Holocaust.
True, certainly a few hundred thousands directly or indirectly involved.
Though it didn´t require 75 million Germans and Austrians.

Yes, Americans have committed attrocities over the years... about as much as any other developed country... quite a bit less actually because we are quite a bit younger as a country goes, but per annual basis, we're probably right up there.

However, what we need to know, is this true, or some kind of hoax? Is there something else to go on, other than a single post on a forum?
It's true. But it's largely unprovable since our government refuses to let people who concern themselves with these things, dig at the sites of these POW camps to search for the remains of the diseased. The documents released from the soviet archives mainly, leave no other conclusion though. The missing people who were never found have to be somewhere.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gigatron
*nukes the US to hell and back*
Try to avoid invading Afghanistan and Iraq next time.



You don't have any.

Do you want me to list all the other countries Germany invaded?

Tecnically you're wrong since France (3th nuclear power in the world) declared that their nuclear force is one for the EU to (then they were 15). So Germany in fact can count on Frances nukes.

BTW, if the Germans would, they could easaly make 100's of nukes, don't forget this.

You guys, specially some extreme right die hard republicans aren't giving answers to the topic. Is it true? Heared about it? Hoax?

I heared smaller numbers (25.000) but I also know that even a Zionist historian like Daniel Goldhagen goes as far as 100.000's of them. And he really can't be seen as a pro German person.

You guys, specially some extreme right die hard republicans aren't giving answers to the topic. Is it true? Heared about it? Hoax?

I heared smaller numbers (25.000) but I also know that even a Zionist historian like Daniel Goldhagen goes as far as 100.000's of them. And he really can't be seen as a pro German person.

Dammit. What, am I talking to myself? See the link.

I heared smaller numbers (25.000).
The Soviets were worse. Due to the reorder of Europe after WW II it took Germany was reduced by a third (to Poland and the USSR) and the Soviets "ethnical cleaned" the area of its mainly German population, which had been about 14 million before. It is assumed that more than 2 million died during this "resettelment" to the areas west of the new borders.

Perhaps we might get back to the subject at hand: The Remagen Golden Mile.

It's true that around 560000 German PoWs were held in a location ("The Golden Mile") that really could only comfortably and safely hold 45000 prisioners.

As a result at least a thousand German PoWs died in the terrible conditions prevalent in the enclosures. There may have been many more deaths, but unfortunately history does not record the true figure. 50000? Not impossible.

This should a source of regret and shame for everyone involved. But sadly this is the kind of misery war engenders. There was no deliberate effort on the part of Americans to inflict suffering on their charges - as other posters have observed, they simply had insufficient resources to care for them.

This is arguably a far cry from the systematic slaughter of the Jews and other minorities by the Nazis, but then the temptation is to tar all Germans with the same brush as those responsible for nazi policy. Many of the troops at Remagen were Hitler Jugend, Reservists, and second line forces. Take a minute to realise that these were ordinary people like you and me, not monsters, any more than the American GIs were. I suspect many of them really just wanted to go home.

War has a tendency to reduce us all to animals - to condemn future generations for the sins of the fathers serves no purpose.

In the words of Cicero: Inter Arma, Enim Silent Leges - In Time of War, the Laws Fall Silent.

Perhaps we'll learn, eventually.

Dammit. What, am I talking to myself? See the link.

Read the link. Sounds like the prisoners were simply too great in number to handle for the Allied supply line that was already under incredible strain. Its a tragedy that so many people died but would it have been better to release all those German soldiers?

Tecnically you're wrong since France (3th nuclear power in the world) declared that their nuclear force is one for the EU to (then they were 15). So Germany in fact can count on Frances nukes.

BTW, if the Germans would, they could easaly make 100's of nukes, don't forget this.

So, technically they don't have any.

The US camps seem alot better than the German concentration camps.

Dammit. What, am I talking to myself? See the link.

Don't speak about thing's that you know shit about. Allways the same when you republican extremists mix up historical facts with an attack on your nation. Ignorance is the best friend of the right winger (and fascists), but you forgot Superbasil and his hobby, WWII :gundge:


The above quote is from the website

http://members.iinet.net.au/~gduncan/massacres.html

hosted by my friend George Duncan.

Nice chap, old George, but he seems to have been taken in by the fantasies of Mr. James Bacque:


THE BIG LIE

Just how many German POWs died in Allied camps?. For over forty years we have been told that many hundreds of thousands of German soldiers had died in Soviet prison camps while at the same time keeping quiet about the number of prisoners who had died in American, French and British camps. In 1997, around 1.1 million German soldiers were still officially listed as missing. According to the recently opened Soviet archives, which have been proved to be extremely precise and detailed, the Red Army captured 2,389,560 German soldiers. Of these, 423,168 died in captivity. In October, 1951, the West German government stated in the United Nations that 1.1 million soldiers had not returned home. In other words, we were led to believe they had died in Soviet camps. If we subtract the proven number of deaths in Soviet camps from the missing in Germany we arrive at the figure of around 677,000. Where are these men?. They must have been interned by the western Allies, the greatest majority being held in American and French camps where they died in their hundreds of thousands through deliberate starvation, disease and hard work.


which gives me a bad conscience for not having made him familiar with the assessment of German military casualties in World War II by German military historian Rüdiger Overmans, which leave little room for Bacque's farcical calculations:


4.2.5.3 Prisoners of War
Now to the last section of the assessment: captivity, which for many German soldiers was the last stage of their military career. Unlike in the previous sections it will be necessary in the following to explain the methodological aspects first of all. Only after this can we proceed to an interpretation of the contents of the data.
In the explanation of the conception it was pointed out that the variable “type of death” can be understood as a continuum, with a great degree of accuracy of information being linked to the two extremes “died on the German side” and “died in captivity”, whereas the middle category, “missing”, is a consequence of the fact that, whereas death is a certainty, the circumstances are not exactly known. The quantitative dimensions of this margin of insecurity are shown in table 63.

Table 63: Deaths by year and type of death

(i) Died on the German side
1941 and before 428,066
1942 451,066
1943 501,066
1944 911,561
1945 559,726
1946 and after 0
Sum 2,851,485

(ii) Missing
1941 and before 30,495
1942 115,881
1943 288,686
1944 844,695
1945 727,814
1946 0
Sum 2,007,571

(iii) Died in captivity
1941 and before 0
1942 5,033
1943 22,297
1944 45,330
1945 252,188
1946 and after 134,627
Sum 459,475

Sum of (i) +(ii)+(iii) 5,318,531

The first thing that becomes visible is that the part of deaths that clearly occurred on the German side is very high until about 1941, ca. 90 %. This part diminishes in every following year of the war until reaching only about one-third in 1945. On the other hand, the percentage of those who died as prisoners of war increases from marginal parts to about 16 % in the year 1945 – the later years are not taken into consideration given that after 1945 deaths can only have occurred in prisoner of war camps. What important for the present study, however, is mainly the part of the category “Missing” – which rises from less than 10 % to almost 50 %. The cases are not equally distributed over all fronts, however.
Table 64 still shows a rather clear distribution – mainly in the West, but also in the other theaters of war the number of those who died on the German side is very high. Altogether there are only about 180,000 persons regarding whom the exact circumstances of death are not known – a part of whom may thus have died in captivity.

Table 64: Deaths by Theaters of War and Destiny

Other Theaters of War
1941 and before
Died on the German side: 84,000
Missing: 0
1942
Died on the German side: 40,000
Missing: 8,132
1943
Died on the German side: 72,000
Missing: 6,099
1944
Died on the German side: 199,132
Missing: 79,287
1945
Died on the German side: 27,000
Missing: 30,495

Sum Other Theaters of War
Died on the German side: 422,132
Missing: 124,013

West (until 31.12.1944)
1941 and before
Died on the German side: 68,000
Missing: 4,066
1942
Died on the German side: 12,000
Missing: 0
1943
Died on the German side: 11,000
Missing: 0
1944
Died on the German side: 198,132
Missing: 46,759

Sum West (until 31.12.1944)
Died on the German side: 289,132
Missing: 50,825

East (until 31.12.1944)
1941 and before
Died on the German side: 276,066
Missing: 26,429
1942
Died on the German side: 399,066
Missing: 107,749
1943
Died on the German side: 418,066
Missing: 282,587
1944
Died on the German side: 514,297
Missing: 718,649

Sum East (until 31.12.1944)
Died on the German side: 1,607,495
Missing: 1,135,414

Final Battles 1945
Died on the German side: 532,726
Missing: 697,319

Wholly different is the distribution in the categories “Eastern Front” and “Final Battles”. Already in 1944 the part of the not clearly established cases is higher than that of those who are died on the German side. This applies even more to the Final Battles, the examination of the concrete cases having shown that two thirds of the losses of this phase were incurred by the units fighting in the East – especially in what concerns the not clearly established cases.
What do these considerations imply for the results of the present study? They show that the tables about deaths in captivity are to be looked at with reservations insofar as they, one the one hand, show not to the sum of those who died there but only to the sum of documented deaths. On the other hand it becomes clear where there are still greater margins of uncertainty – not in the West or in the other theaters of war, but mainly in the East. What relevance does this realization have for the central question of the examination, about the sum of deaths? None at all at right away, given that the death of those in question cannot be doubted – the sum of losses therefor doesn’t change. What changes, however, is the distribution of the variables with regard to the various theaters of war – not so much in the West, but mainly in the East. The dimension of these inexactitudes is what is to be examined in the interpretation of the contents of the results.
First of all an overview of the number of deaths in captivity:

Table 65: Deaths in captivity (by custodian state)

Total number of prisoners of war
France 940,000
Great Britain 3,640,000
USA 3,100,000
Yugoslavia 190,000
Other States 170,000
USSR 3,060,000
Sum 11,100,000

Deaths in captivity according to present study
France 34,000
Great Britain 21,000
USA 22,000
Yugoslavia 11,000
Other States 8.000
USSR 363,000
Sum 459,000

Deaths in captivity according to Maschke Commission
France 25,000
Great Britain 1,300
USA 5,000
Yugoslavia 80,000
Other States 13.000
USSR 1,090,000
Sum 1,214,300

When comparing the data about deaths related to the various custodian states, hardly a case of coincidence can be observed. The figures do, however, show a similar trend – custodian states with high death rates according to the data of the Maschke Commission also show an above average death rate in the present study. The same goes for states with low death rates. The question how the nevertheless existing differences in the absolute values can be explained will be examined in the following.
First it should be pointed out that – except in case of the Soviet Union – the losses in captivity in all custodian states are but fractions of percentages of the total losses and are thus in an order of magnitude that cannot be evaluated accurately even with the present, relatively large sample. Furthermore the methods of establishing the figures vary. The data of the Maschke Kommission are based on files of the custodian state and numerous testimonials of German prisoners of war. In matters of content they refer, in what concerns to the Western Allies, to those who died in Allied custody in a narrower sense. The compilation techniques of the present study, however, mandate the inclusion in the category “captivity” also of such cases that formally fall under that category but for which the respective custodian state was not responsible in material terms. This applies especially to the differences in the data related to Great Britain, the USA and the “other countries”.

Things are different in the case of France, where the numbers of the Maschke Commission are based on the official French data and there are substantial indications for the assumption that, of the ca. 180,000 missing in the West, a great number died indeed in French custody – or as mercenaries in Indochina. Even more difficult is the situation regarding deaths in Yugoslavian custody – apart from rather contradictory German testimonials on the one hand and the documented cases underlying the present study on the other there is no examination that could contribute to the clarification of the question.
Given this unsatisfactory state of research the question arises how reliable data about the deaths in captivity could be obtained. Not by means of an empiric compilation analogous to the present one, given that the information deficits pointed out are not caused by methodological deficiencies of the study – the study only demonstrates the fact that the information available to the German authorities is insufficient. Only the evaluation of reports presently coming in from the former Soviet Union, the recovery of unburied dead presently under way both in the former USSR and in Eastern Germany as well as the registration of graves in the Soviet Union by the VDK will lead to an improvement of the state of information in the next years or decades.
But independently of what the number of deaths in captivity actually is, the differences – at least in what concerns the Western Allies – are so small that they cannot significantly affect the results of this study so far. This does not apply in regard to Yugoslavia let alone for the Soviet Union – here the difference between 300,000 or a million deaths is so huge that it influences the distribution of the variables. It will thus be attempted in the following to localize the differences more closely.

Table 66: Deaths in Soviet custody by years

Deaths in Soviet captivity according to present study
1941/42 5,000
1943 21,000
1944 41,000
1945 178,000
1946 and after 118,000
Sum 363,000

Missing according to present study*
1941/42 134,000
1943 283,000
1944 719,000
1945 ca. 400,000
1946 and after -
Sum 1,536,000

* The number of missing in 1945 was estimated for the present study on the basis of the established fact that about two thirds of deaths during the Final Battles occurred in the East of Germany.

Deaths in Soviet captivity according to Maschke Commission
1941/42 166,000
1945 154,000
1946 224,000
1945 550,000
1946 and after included in 1945
Sum 1,094,000

Table 66, which differentiates the number of deaths by years, shows first the number of prisoners of war in Soviet custody and the missing on the Eastern Front, followed by the data of the Maschke Commission. According to the present study a total of ca. 363,000 German soldiers died in Soviet captivity – the sum of individually documented deaths. The approach of the Maschke Commission was another: they established, on the basis of various sources, the number of soldiers taken prisoner as well as the percentage of those who died every year. Although it is an estimate, it can be considered as well founded. When comparing the number of the missing established in the present study, ca. 1.5 million, with the difference in deaths considered by the present study on the one hand and the Maschke Commission on the other, it becomes visible that the difference, ca. 700,000 deaths, corresponds to about half of the number of missing. And it seems altogether plausible, although it cannot be proven, that half of those missing were killed in battle and the other half actually died in Soviet custody . Parting from this consideration the question arises how these ca. 700,000 cases are distributed temporarily. For this it is necessary to recall the conduction of military operations. In the first year, i.e. until ca. the middle of 1943, when the German armies were attacking, they were usually in conditions to recover their own dead in the conquered areas. This means that, at the beginning, the overwhelming majority of missing were taken prisoner and died in Soviet custody – out of the Germans taken prisoner at Stalingrad alone ca. 90,000 died rather soon in captivity. The more the initiative went over to the Soviet side and the more often large units were destroyed and taken prisoner, the greater the number of men killed in battle among those missing is likely to have been.
In relation to the above data this plausible if not provable consideration has the consequence that the results of the present study should be modified. Presumably the number of missing in the years 1941/42 must be almost wholly added to the deaths in captivity, whereas in the following years an ever growing part must be added to those killed on the German side. If the numbers of the present study are nevertheless used for the further assessment, this is only because the above considerations, while plausible, are not based on documented individual fates like the remaining results of the present study. As already mentioned, it must be left to a complementary study to evaluate the information arriving from the former Soviet Union at present and in the future, in order to obtain more accurate results in what concerns captivity.


I translated the above from Rüdiger Overmans, Deutsche Militarische Verluste im Zweiten Weltkrieg.

The total figure for German POW deaths in American captivity given by Overmans is 22,000, which is somewhat higher than the figure established by the West German government's Maschke Commission in 1974 (5,000). The figures of the Maschke Commission include 4,537 deaths at the Rhine Meadows camps of Remagen, Bad Kreuznach, Andernach, Buderich, Rheinbach and Sinzig camps, established in an investigation conducted by the surrounding communities - US authorities only admitted to 3,053 deaths at these camps.

For further information on the Rhein Meadows camps, I suggest you contact the webmaster of the "POW" web site, who seems to have done a lot of research on them. You may find the site under

http://home.arcor.de/kriegsgefangen/index.html

So long Force Majeure and other right wing ingnorant twats.

Read the link. Sounds like the prisoners were simply too great in number to handle for the Allied supply line that was already under incredible strain. Its a tragedy that so many people died but would it have been better to release all those German soldiers?

It also mentions that a large number were already in need of immediate medical care when they were captured. I'm sure that more could have been done, though.

The US camps seem alot better than the German concentration camps.

Zing!

Don't speak about thing's that you know shit about. Allways the same when you republican extremists mix up historical facts with an attack on your nation. Ignorance is the best friend of the right winger (and fascists), but you forgot Superbasil and his hobby, WWII :gundge:


So long Force Majeure and other right wing ingnorant twats.

What are you debating here? And I'm not a republican.

I'd have to google a while, but I know that it's quite a lot. Not to forget the poor native Americans who had to die for the US ancestors to make room so they can plant their Mc Donald's, Parking lots and Starbucks all over the continent. Personally I don't like these pissing matches because I know myself that Hitler did horrible things during his dictatorship in Germany (note that Hitler was a dictator. I have yet to see someone blame the Iraqis for the things Hussein did...) but I really really hate it when the atrocities against Germans, which did happen very much, are being downplayed or ignored by self-righteous Americans.

Actually Hitler was elected by people he fooled into believing in him, who were likely sorry later.
As for the atrocities, there were many on ALL sides in this war, the Japanese killed more Chinese than the Germans killed ANYBODY. Hitler and the Nazis were pretty much scum, no real need to repeat theirs, everyone knows it, but the allies(not just American btw) did indeed commit their share as well, however for the most part, allied POW camps were much better than axis POW camps. Many(as in thousands) of former Wehrmacht soldiers who were captured and imprisoned, moved to the US after their experience with caring US servicemen. There ALWAYS will be and have been exceptions however.
In the article quoted, and in the history of the units in question(German as well as US) the problem was far too many surrenders, of starving and wounded soldiers in many cases, to an army that had no real capability to deal effectively with taking care of them. Many froze or died of injuries (received BEFORE surrender) as there was simply not enough shelter or medicine to care for them, this was NOT a "US massacre" as whoever classless person seemed intent on proving, even the German army today does not count it as such, it was simply a problem of a nation speedily collapsing, and the victorious army not being fully prepared for the eventualities that come with victory, ie. mass surrenders, and collapse of the civilian agencies t hat may have aided(no hospital,little food other than what the US forces brought for their units, etc)

I'm not a republican.


Sorry for that because when you are a normal person, it is an insult.
But you acted like one in the posts here.

Hope you all enjoyed the information and facts. Pff was watching this topic before and it took me a lot of time typing. :rolleyes:

There were a few posts about numbers of missing German soldiers. In every war, many soldiers are unaccounted for. Most of these actually are KIA, but with no body to show for it. Some are dessertions(especially the case with German forces near the end, or any side which finds themself on the verge of defeat, it is often best to look out for yourself and blend in. Despite the fervent hopes of many Americans who cling to beliefs of servicemen in Vietnam somehow alive, the truth also is that most of those listed as MIA are a "vanishing ghost of hope".

There were a few posts about numbers of missing German soldiers. In every war, many soldiers are unaccounted for. Most of these actually are KIA, but with no body to show for it. Some are dessertions(especially the case with German forces near the end, or any side which finds themself on the verge of defeat, it is often best to look out for yourself and blend in. Despite the fervent hopes of many Americans who cling to beliefs of servicemen in Vietnam somehow alive, the truth also is that most of those listed as MIA are a "vanishing ghost of hope".

*points his finger towards the numbers I posted*
Everything is there ya know.

Sorry for that because when you are a normal person, it is an insult.
But you acted like one in the posts here.

Hope you all enjoyed the information and facts. Pff was watching this topic before and it took me a lot of time typing. :rolleyes:

Basil, are you German or other European? I could not tell from your posts before, but I assume German? Good post by the way, tho I AM Republican ;)

Basil, are you German or other European? I could not tell from your posts before, but I assume German? Good post by the way, tho I AM Republican ;)

Noop, not a German(but I like saurkraut like it is made in the Alsace region), born in Flanders and living and working since 1996 in the French Alps. But I often return to my homecountry,I am in Belgium for the moment because I've to make promotion for our region in the next wintersport happenings (tourism).

Job: mountainguide (summer, a bit winter to), skiteacher (winter).
And a slave for my guests at my simple bed and breakfast.

http:www.la-grave.com/english/meije.php
My village in ze mountzains

Noop, not a German(but I like saurkraut like it is made in the Alsace region), born in Flanders and living and working since 1996 in the French Alps. But I often return to my homecountry,I am in Belgium for the moment because I've to make promotion for our region in the next wintersport happenings (tourism).

Job: mountainguide (summer, a bit winter to), skiteacher (winter).
And a slave for my guests at my simple bed and breakfast.

http:www.la-grave.com/english/meije.php
My village in ze mountzains

Not bad..yeah it's off topic, just was curious. BTW skiing I have tried as well, and really lucky I have not broken my blery neck :)

The person who conducted the research you listed off did a very thorough job, with the exception that most Soviet/Russian WW2 records actually have been proven highly suspect. Nevertheless, an excellent job on research. In everything I have ever seen, including talking with POWs(German, now US citizens, and US held in Germany) the POW camps were at least as close to reasonable as one could expect(including the German ones) with even a fair amount of respect between the "enemies". The German soldiers were quite professional, and the same professionalism that *nearly* won them the war( if they had not tried taking on EVERYONE at the same time), that same professionalism, also tends to make soldiers fairer to captives, *elite* troops in general, do not have the problems with atrocity type situations that forces lower in morale will have more often.Allied forces, while not as *elite* still had high morale(by then, it was clear victory was not"if" rather"when") for this reason I am quite certain that there were actually few atrocities on either side near the end. Unfortunately it does not require an atrocity for deaths.

The person who conducted the research you listed off did a very thorough job, with the exception that most Soviet/Russian WW2 records actually have been proven highly suspect. Nevertheless, an excellent job on research. In everything I have ever seen, including talking with POWs(German, now US citizens, and US held in Germany) the POW camps were at least as close to reasonable as one could expect(including the German ones) with even a fair amount of respect between the "enemies". The German soldiers were quite professional, and the same professionalism that *nearly* won them the war( if they had not tried taking on EVERYONE at the same time), that same professionalism, also tends to make soldiers fairer to captives, *elite* troops in general, do not have the problems with atrocity type situations that forces lower in morale will have more often.Allied forces, while not as *elite* still had high morale(by then, it was clear victory was not"if" rather"when") for this reason I am quite certain that there were actually few atrocities on either side near the end. Unfortunately it does not require an atrocity for deaths.
On the other hand it needs to be admitted that the treatment of the Soviet POWs in contrast to the "western POWs" was far worse - as well as the treatment of the German POWs by the Soviets.
Well, two totalitarian dictatorships who tried to eliminiate each other at the end.

stumbled across this on the net somehere recently, is it true ?

REMAGENAfter the capture of the Remagen Bridge, the US Army hastily erected dozens of Prisoner of War cages around the bridge-head. The camps were simply open fields surrounded by concertina wire. Those at the Rhine Meadows were situated at Remagen, Bad Kreuznach, Andernach, Buderich, Rheinbach and Sinzig. The German prisoners were hopeful of good treatment from the GIs but in this they were sadly disappointed. Herded into the open spaces like cattle, some were beaten and mistreated. No tents or toilets were supplied. The camps became huge latrines, a sea of urine from one end to the other. They had to sleep in holes in the ground which they dug with their bare hands. In the Bad Kreuznach cage, 560,000 men were interned in an area that could only comfortably hold 45,000. Denied enough food and water, they were forced to eat the grass under their feet and the camps soon became a sea of mud. After the concentration camps were discovered, their treatment became worse as the GIs vented their rage on the hapless prisoners. In the five camps around Bretzenheim, prisoners had to survive on 600-850 calories per day. With bloated bellies and teeth falling out, the died by the thousands. During the two and a half months (April-May, 1945) when the camps were under American control, a total of 18,100 prisoners died from malnutrition, disease and exposure. This extremely harsh treatment at the hands of the Americans resulted in the deaths of over 50,000 German prisoners in the Rhine Meadows camps, in the months just before and after the war ended.
It must however be borne in mind that with the best will in the world it proved almost impossible to care for the prisoners under the strict terms of the Geneva Convention. The task of guarding these prisoners, numbering around 920,000, fell to the 40,000 men of the US 106th. Infantry Division. The Remagen cage was set up to accommodate 100,000 men but ended up with twice that number. On the first afternoon 35,000 prisoners were counted through the gate. About 10,000 of these required urgent medical attention which in most cases was completely absent. All roads leading to the camps were clogged with hundreds of trucks bringing in even more prisoners, sent to the rear by the advancing 9th.US Army. Tourists, cruising down the Rhine today can pick out a small memorial and plaque built on the site of the former POW cage. In the Remagen cemetery there are 1,200 graves and at Bad Kreuznach, 1,000 graves.


Has anybody seen the memorial or got more details ?
The Rheinwiesen camps. Yes. In 1943 the Allies agreed to not treat captured German soldiers as POW's but as ordinary prisoners. Which meant they could do with and to them whatever they wanted. On March 10. 1945 Eisenhower got permission from Washington to continue treating them as Disarmed Enemy Forces. Which gave him the right to keep them prisoner for as long as he wanted to. The last of them where released in 1956. 11 years after the war had ended. This is a clear violation of the Geneva convention and usualy considerd a warcrime. And before anyone starts, it's one thing for an inhumane dictatorial regime to disregard those treaties but it's a completely other matter if the self proclaimed champions of freedom, democracy and eguality does it. Short, the "good guys".
Estimates are that some 5 to 6 million prisoners where in the camps at the same time after the Americans closed up other prison camps. At first they where not given any medical treatment or food. No tents or other means of accomodation. They were left to the mercy of the elements. Allthough there
were tents, clothing and other supplies in the US as well as the Wehrmacht depots.
The prisoners dug holes in the earth to at least have some shelter from the cold but the Americans won't have it and close the holes with bulldozers along with everyone in them.
To empty the Wehrmacht depots quikly the Americans allowed them to be plundered.
And not all where soldiers. The Americans arrested all civilians who had a role in either government or industry near the camps. And placed them with the rest of the prisoners. Ages ranged from 9 years to 80.
Later on the Americans started distributing some food supplies from their stocks. But still hardly any water. With the Rhine only a few hundred metres away.
Which led to massive epedimics on top of the hunger. There have been stories of cannibalism in the camps. The international Red Cross was not allowed to enter the camps. And food and other relief goods send by the Swiss Red Cross where send back under orders of Eisenhower. The civilian population was denied under penalty of death to have any contact with the prisoners. Dying and wounded men where not treated while nearby hospitals where empty. From time to time the Americans started to shoot randomly into the crowd without provocation.

On the other hand it needs to be admitted that the treatment of the Soviet POWs in contrast to the "western POWs" was far worse - as well as the treatment of the German POWs by the Soviets.
Well, two totalitarian dictatorships who tried to eliminiate each other at the end.

This is quite true. Also worth noting that an argument could be made that the Germans did not actually wish to fight the British Empire or the US(there is evidence aplenty of at least two separate efforts by the Germans to call some sort of truce with the western allies and concentrate on the Sovs. If true, that could have changed history had it worked out.

I've been thinking how many wars have America been in just for some other country.

The Rheinwiesen camps. Yes. In 1943 the Allies agreed to not treat captured German soldiers as POW's but as ordinary prisoners. Which meant they could do with and to them whatever they wanted. On March 10. 1945 Eisenhower got permission from Washington to continue treating them as Disarmed Enemy Forces. Which gave him the right to keep them prisoner for as long as he wanted to. The last of them where released in 1956. 11 years after the war had ended. This is a clear violation of the Geneva convention and usualy considerd a warcrime. And before anyone starts, it's one thing for an inhumane dictatorial regime to disregard those treaties but it's a completely other matter if the self proclaimed champions of freedom, democracy and eguality does it. Short, the "good guys".
Estimates are that some 5 to 6 million prisoners where in the camps at the same time after the Americans closed up other prison camps. At first they where not given any medical treatment or food. No tents or other means of accomodation. They were left to the mercy of the elements. Allthough there
were tents, clothing and other supplies in the US as well as the Wehrmacht depots.
The prisoners dug holes in the earth to at least have some shelter from the cold but the Americans won't have it and close the holes with bulldozers along with everyone in them.
To empty the Wehrmacht depots quikly the Americans allowed them to be plundered.
And not all where soldiers. The Americans arrested all civilians who had a role in either government or industry near the camps. And placed them with the rest of the prisoners. Ages ranged from 9 years to 80.
Later on the Americans started distributing some food supplies from their stocks. But still hardly any water. With the Rhine only a few hundred metres away.
Which led to massive epedimics on top of the hunger. There have been stories of cannibalism in the camps. The international Red Cross was not allowed to enter the camps. And food and other relief send by the Swiss Red Cross where send back under orders of Eisenhower. The civilian population was denied under penalty of death to have any contact with the prisoners. Dying and wounded men where not treated while nearby hospitals where empty. From time to time the Americans started to shoot randomly into the crowd without provocation.

It is quite easy to make raw statements such as you just did. This is full of lies however, or, to give you the benefit of the doubt, I will use the term"inaccuracies" and is not even close to being backed up by any historical facts. Even the German government would be quite happy to set you straight I am certain were you to inquire.

I've been thinking how many wars have America been in just for some other country.
Not that many. Most wars in recent history the Americans involved themselves in, where to curb the spread of "evul" communism or to gain some other form of geostrategical advantage (Iraq oil being the most recent example).

This is quite true. Also worth noting that an argument could be made that the Germans did not actually wish to fight the British Empire or the US(there is evidence aplenty of at least two separate efforts by the Germans to call some sort of truce with the western allies and concentrate on the Sovs. If true, that could have changed history had it worked out.
The expansionists aims of Hitler (and his words in that respect (as well as unfortunately in other respects) can be taken seriously) were going eastward.
First he did it with the consent of the west, later when he went too far he shortly made an arrangement with the Soviets (1939) to divide Europe with them.
In 1940 he actually wanted to force an armistice to Britain - though Churchill declined that offer leading to a very brutal air campaign on British cities in order to break their will. Didn´t work out though.
And so the decision for the war with the Soviets was taken while there was still a conflict in the west. So there was again a two-front scenario, the same scenario which led to the German defeat in WW I after all.
The interesting aspect - from a historic viewpoint - is that Hitler actually followed the example of Napoleon who brought the German states down first, then blocked Britain before he went to Russia and lost.
Hitler had Napoleon as his example for his military strategy. He even visited his grave in 1940. Well - and with the same strategy he failed at the end of the day - fortunately.

I've been thinking how many wars have America been in just for some other country.

Nearly all of our wars in the 20th century actually were fought for *some other country* ranging from Bosnia/Kosovo,Kuwait,Korea,Vietnam,WW1,WW2.
The only war of the 20th century fought by Americans strictly for American causes was the invasion of Panama, conducted after the murders of American military officers in Panama and the rapes of American and other civilians.

It is quite easy to make raw statements such as you just did. This is full of lies however, or, to give you the benefit of the doubt, I will use the term"inaccuracies" and is not even close to being backed up by any historical facts. Even the German government would be quite happy to set you straight I am certain were you to inquire.
The German government has as little facts as anyone. Fact is, so long as organisations who would like to, are not allowed to dig at the sites of the camps, we will never know how many dead are buried there. Our government is trying to quiet it down and let it fade into the books of history, but it is a part of our history which also must be dealt with. Not just the endless harping on how evil Germany is because of what Hitler and his dictatorship did.

The expansionists aims of Hitler (and his words in that respect (as well as unfortunately in other respects) can be taken seriously) were going eastward.
First he did it with the consent of the west, later when he went too far he shortly made an arrangement with the Soviets (1939) to divide Europe with them.
In 1940 he actually wanted to force an armistice to Britain - though Churchill declined that offer leading to a very brutal air campaign on British cities in order to break their will. Didn´t work out though.
And so the decision for the war with the Soviets was taken while there was still a conflict in the west. So there was again a two-front scenario, the same scenario which led to the German defeat in WW I after all.
The interesting aspect - from a historic viewpoint - is that Hitler actually followed the example of Napoleon who brought the German states down first, then blocked Britain before he went to Russia and lost.
Hitler had Napoleon as his example for his military strategy. He even visited his grave in 1940. Well - and with the same strategy he failed at the end of the day - fortunately.

Yes, you would think he would have listened to his own generals rather than take an example from a(great)general, Napoleon, but that one example is actually Napoleons worst military move as well.

The Rheinwiesen camps. Yes. In 1943 the Allies agreed to not treat captured German soldiers as POW's but as ordinary prisoners.
As a matter of fact it was the Soviet Union which kept POWs till 1955. And at the end they released 500.000 less than they had captured. What happened to the rest? Well, we can assume what happened.
But that was part of the brutality of the treatment of the POWs on the Soviet side. The treatment of the Soviet POWs on the German side wasn´t better. And both were after all totalitarian dictatorships.

The German government has as little facts as anyone. Fact is, so long as organisations who would like to, are not allowed to dig at the sites of the camps, we will never know how many dead are buried there. Our government is trying to quiet it down and let it fade into the books of history, but it is a part of our history which also must be dealt with. Not just the endless harping on how evil Germany is because of what Hitler and his dictatorship did.

I find this difficult to believe. I do not doubt your word, however, you do live in a democracy, and I find it incomprehensible that your government would be ABLE to "shut it off"...secrets in a democracy are generally quite difficult to keep for long.

It is quite easy to make raw statements such as you just did.
It's quite easy to simply label them as lies.
This is full of lies however, or, to give you the benefit of the doubt, I will use the term"inaccuracies" and is not even close to being backed up by any historical facts.
"Historical" facts written by the victor who by then needed a loyal ally against the Soviet threat. And for some reason I believe telling them:"By the way, we had about a million or so of your men starve to death. No hard feelings, eeh old boy?" is not the way.
Even the German government would be quite happy to set you straight I am certain were you to inquire.
Pff..the German government. They would never dare say anything like this against their American lovers.

In response to the 1st post:

Whether or not it's true, all sides in a war, no matter how "just," are bound to commit atrocities

- fortunately.
Why fortunately? It's hard to tell how history would have advanced if Hitler had won WW2. He did not want to rule the world (that's impossible for a nation, especially back in the 1940s it would have been impossible). Would the Nazi regime have survived until the present? If yes, would it be the same or worse than it was in the 40s? If not, would Germany be a superpower like the US? History would have been a lot different, but I don't think that the destruction of our country was "fortunately". It was the course of history, which could have either made Germany a superpower or erradicated the nation altogether. Instead, we had a history of Germany being split for half a century and one side looting the country to the degree that even 15 years after reunification, we're still dealing with the problems. I do not think that this was a fortunate course of history, although it could have been worse, I can imagine alternatives which would have been good for Germany and possibly Europe as a whole.

but I don't think that the destruction of our country was "fortunately".
Don't forget, he's a wannabe American.

Don't forget, he's a wannabe American.

Indeed, let's not forget that his opinion is biased since he is waiting for his green card ;)

Indeed, let's not forget that his opinion is biased since he is waiting for his green card ;)
I just hope he gets it ASAP.

I find this difficult to believe. I do not doubt your word, however, you do live in a democracy, and I find it incomprehensible that your government would be ABLE to "shut it off"...secrets in a democracy are generally quite difficult to keep for long.
There are government agencies who deal with the conservation of historical monuments or old buildings and the like. This agency forbids any sort of excavation at these sites due to them being historically relevant and thus need to be conserved in the state they are. Our democracy is not really democratic and the government is not interested to find out the entirety of German history of that time. Instead, we've been drilled to accept that we're the evil guys, have to pay a ton of money to countries for stuff that happened 60 years ago and suck it up. Our government is interested in keeping their seats of power and sliming their way to the top at each election. Maybe you guessed it, but I do not hold our governmental system in high regard. The politicians are generally corrupt, selfish and slimy liars who'd do everything to keep their seats in the parliament.

Yes, you would think he would have listened to his own generals rather than take an example from a(great)general, Napoleon, but that one example is actually Napoleons worst military move as well.
Well, after the first successes in the war he believed to be invincible. He called himself greatest commander-in-chief of all times (Größter Feldherr aller Zeiten). That was secretly joked about as Gröfaz.
So he believed he could do what Napoleon failed on. And he exactly made the same move - which led to disaster.
The generals obeyed. He was after all the commander-in-chief. They use to obey. One reason why the readiness to question him or even to stop him was limitted. Though there was an attempt to kill him on June 20, 1944.
They went on the opinion that they could play on differences between East and West when it comes to making peace. However that was already unrealistic at that time - too late. They actually more or less knew that. None the less some military leaders wanted to give a sign for the history books (lead by General von Stauffenberg). A very difficult step - many chose not to join but to keep quiet about it. After all it was directed against the commander-in-chief. The attempt failed. Hitler was only slightly injurned. He was lucky. The people involved were executed.
In 2004 this event was especially honoured.

Sorry for that because when you are a normal person, it is an insult.
But you acted like one in the posts here.

Hope you all enjoyed the information and facts. Pff was watching this topic before and it took me a lot of time typing. :rolleyes:


Well, I am not a republican, nor am I a democrat. And I thought I was being rather neutral here.

Yes, thanks - I rather enjoy facts. They tend to speak for themselves.

It's quite easy to simply label them as lies.

"Historical" facts written by the victor who by then needed a loyal ally against the Soviet threat. And for some reason I believe telling them:"By the way, we had about a million or so of your men starve to death. No hard feelings, eeh old boy?" is not the way.

Pff..the German government. They would never dare say anything like this against their American lovers.

Actually your government has not been on very good terms with my government for several years;) And I do have facts to back up my position, you have none. As was mentioned in a later post, the camps you speak of were Soviet camps. If you would like I would be happy to connect you with German soldiers who now are US citizens who quite remember their treatment, and were impressed by it. If you read my posts, I also mentioned the fact that German POW camps were, at least to western allies, not as bad as they could have been either. I am hardly anti-German, being to the contrary quite fond of your nation's culture and history.

Well, after the first successes in the war he believed to be invincible. He called himself greatest commander-in-chief of all times (Größter Feldherr aller Zeiten). .+

Indeed, on WWII history sites, lot of people use "Grofaz" like he was called by lot of generals :)

Why fortunately? It's hard to tell how history would have advanced if Hitler had won WW2. He did not want to rule the world (that's impossible for a nation, especially back in the 1940s it would have been impossible). Would the Nazi regime have survived until the present? If yes, would it be the same or worse than it was in the 40s? If not, would Germany be a superpower like the US? History would have been a lot different, but I don't think that the destruction of our country was "fortunately". It was the course of history, which could have either made Germany a superpower or erradicated the nation altogether. Instead, we had a history of Germany being split for half a century and one side looting the country to the degree that even 15 years after reunification, we're still dealing with the problems. I do not think that this was a fortunate course of history, although it could have been worse, I can imagine alternatives which would have been good for Germany and possibly Europe as a whole.

I agree in a sense. Overall, I believe Europe would have been actually more relaxed had Germany(perhaps without Hitler) made a separate peace with the western allies and won in the east. It likely would have eliminated the cold war, allowed Germany not to have their economy destroyed(West recovered with allied help, East is still really afaik not recovered fully) And not to mention, shortened the war, which would have had a domino effect on many things.

Actually your government has not been on very good terms with my government for several years;) And I do have facts to back up my position, you have none. As was mentioned in a later post, the camps you speak of were Soviet camps. If you would like I would be happy to connect you with German soldiers who now are US citizens who quite remember their treatment, and were impressed by it. If you read my posts, I also mentioned the fact that German POW camps were, at least to western allies, not as bad as they could have been either. I am hardly anti-German, being to the contrary quite fond of your nation's culture and history.
Yes. The treatment of the prisoners in the US was remarkebal and was more like a holiday then a prison camp. But thats not how it was in the camps in Germany. And if by facts you mean some study from lets say the university of Virginia, who claims that all prisoners were treated according to the Geneva convention, thats like asking the Reichs Rassen Amt if the holocaust happened.
And not beeing on good terms isn't the same as revealing massacers by our "liberators" as some like to call them.

Try to avoid invading Poland next time

Aw, but you can't have a good European war without invading Poland. We Pollacks are getting pretty used to it. Sheesh, we worry if the old country DOSEN"T get invaded.

Aw, but you can't have a good European war without invading Poland. We Pollacks are getting pretty used to it. Sheesh, we worry if the old country DOSEN"T get invaded.
Now that would have been an acceptable reason for invading Iraq. Claiming they had invaded Poland.

Why fortunately? It's hard to tell how history would have advanced if Hitler had won WW2. He did not want to rule the world (that's impossible for a nation, especially back in the 1940s it would have been impossible). Would the Nazi regime have survived until the present? If yes, would it be the same or worse than it was in the 40s? If not, would Germany be a superpower like the US? History would have been a lot different, but I don't think that the destruction of our country was "fortunately". It was the course of history, which could have either made Germany a superpower or erradicated the nation altogether..
That was the attitude of Hitler: all or nothing: either the hegemony over Europe or the end of the German people. He himself said it at the end: If Germans are not able to fight anymore the Eastern people (Soviets) should rule. That is the wrong attitude. Europe is a multi-polar world with different powers. No hegemony is accepted. I wouldn´t like a French hegemony either - France tried that under Napoleon.
If the Nazis had won many million more people would have been killed. That is for shure. Everything else -like how the thing had developed after Hitlers death- is a speculation.

Instead, we had a history of Germany being split for half a century and one side looting the country to the degree that even 15 years after reunification, we're still dealing with the problems. I do not think that this was a fortunate course of history, although it could have been worse, I can imagine alternatives which would have been good for Germany and possibly Europe as a whole.
But that was a result of a policy which tried to conquor all of Europe. This agressive and evil policy led to this result.
Today we have the opportunity to build a better Europe.
I think Germany had more luck than brain in the history of the 20 th century.
We are no one country again. Korea for example is still divided into two states.
And to put it plain. East Germany is much better of than Poland or others thanks to the West Germans.
I think the country needs to grow together. But needs time.
The US also needed time to grow together after its civil war (1861-65) and Italy has even today still huge differences between south and north.
There needs to be acceptance of certain differences and about the value of democracy, especially in East Germany which was after all under a dictatorship from 1933-89. Democracy is not the best form of government but all others are worse. That is what Churchill said. And it is right.
I think the opinion in the abilities of government are too high - especially in East Germany. Any government would fail to deliver on it. A bit more realism and self-activity would be good. Or like Kennedy would have said wisely: "Don´t ask what your country can do for you. Ask what you can do for your country."

That is what Churchill said.
Oh yes. Let's quote a man who wanted to bomb us with anthrax.

Yes. The treatment of the prisoners in the US was remarkebal and was more like a holiday then a prison camp. But thats not how it was in the camps in Germany. And if by facts you mean some study from lets say the university of Virginia, who claims that all prisoners were treated according to the Geneva convention, thats like asking the Reichs Rassen Amt if the holocaust happened.
And not beeing on good terms isn't the same as revealing massacers by our "liberators" as some like to call them.

Actually I don't usually believe"studies" either as they can come to whatever conclusion they wish simply by changing the way data is presented.
I do not believe that in every case the Geneva convention was followed, however, there NEVER was an "arrangement" not to follow it. And generally speaking, the allies WERE liberators to Germans. One can imagine however certain cases(just as an example) where a jewish soldier for instance might see a chance to right perceived wrongs. To succesfully wage a war, sometimes you demonize the enemy to such a degree, that it can result in those situations...the Sovs advancing through Germany, were told horror stories of German armies which had raped and murdered "millions" of Soviet civilians, this in turn, led some of these soldiers to take matters in their own hands, trying to "even the score".

Now that would have been an acceptable reason for invading Iraq. Claiming they had invaded Poland.
..........Ok, it IS funny :D

Kybernatia is of topic again, but he's not the only one.
He just waits for his green card that is why his posts are biased and rather based on his political opinians then on facts. But that is a problem that most rightwing people have, it is contagous.

I've nothing more to add regarding the initial question, so by.

But Kybernetia's post has good points to: "That was the attitude of Hitler: all or nothing".

True, Hitler was a gambler. Made decissions based on luck rather then millitary insight.

the allies WERE liberators to Germans.
Sure. And Joseph Mengele was just a mild mannered man of science.

Aw, but you can't have a good European war without invading Poland. We Pollacks are getting pretty used to it. Sheesh, we worry if the old country DOSEN"T get invaded.
Poland was indeed the victim of Prussia/Germany, Austria and Russia over many centuries (from 1773-1989 very often).
Either by one or the other or all of them.
Today one needs to be weary about the development of Russia. There are certain generals who call the former soviet republics "near foreign countries" who have to be under Moscow control in some way. Russia supports separatism in Georgia and Moldova while itself is fighting it in its own country.
And the development of the political forms is a cause for concern. Not because of Putin but becaue of the person who comes after him.
For Germany I can say. It is today a different country. The world has changed and the interests have changed.
In the world of globalisation makes economic power and trade more important than ever before. That also binds countries together - also Poland and Germany of today. You don´t destroy your future market after all.
For Russia I´m not shure about the development. But I hope that we - in Europe - can also bind them in. After all they want to do business with us so they need to behave.

..........Ok, it IS funny :D
Well, I'm sure they had an embassy in Poland where they were massing millions of troops diguised as staff. And maybe even WMD's.

I'm a Jew and will never forgive Germany for what they did to my grandparents. (I had many relatives who I will never meet due to the scum.)

If 50,000 really died (and I doubt it is that many) I say fine. Too bad it wasn't more. If the German people had a brain and didn't support that bastard Hitler they would never have had to deal with it. The day I cry for a dead German in WWII who's death came at hands other than the Nazis is the day I get a sex change operation.

The day I cry for a dead German in WWII who's death came at hands other than the Nazis is the day I get a sex change operation.
The day I cry for a Jew beeing blown up by a Palestinian freedom fighter I'll convert.

I'm a Jew and will never forgive Germany for what they did to my grandparents. (I had many relatives who I will never meet due to the scum.) Whoa with the hatred there, mate. Germany now is not the Germany that caused the Holecaust, and neither are most of its people.

Sure. And Joseph Mengele was just a mild mannered man of science.

You missed the "And generally speaking..." part of the quote :)
Also, it is how the Germans received US and UK troops in particular, as liberators. The western sector rather quickly became a decent place to live(enough so that people risked death escaping from the east to it)

. And generally speaking, the allies WERE liberators to Germans.
That was actually a heavy discussion. Because at that time most didn´t see them that way and neither was that the case many years afterwards. In 1995 Chancellor Kohl chose not to participate on the memorial since Germany was the loser of WW II. Chancellor Schröder was in 2005 the first one who attended it.
The discussion about the interpretation was heavy and has no definate answer. For many it was the occupation, for some the liberation. At the end it paved the way for the second republic in the form of the foundation of the Federal Republic of Germany in 1949.
Though the Soviets can not be seen as liberator since they installed a dictatorship in East Germany (till 1990).

I'm a Jew

If 50,000 really died (and I doubt it is that many) I say fine. Too bad it wasn't more. If the German people had a brain and didn't support that bastard Hitler they would never have had to deal with it. The day I cry for a dead German in WWII who's death came at hands other than the Nazis is the day I get a sex change operation.

Wow, you are so full of shit, let's say that I hope that some Hamas freedomfighters kill your parents and rape your sister (no, not you, you would like it), crazy zionist nazi :upyours:



German women have come forward after 50 years to speak of their appalling treatment at the hands of Soviet soldiers, who raped their way across Germany for four years from 1945. Their ordeal has been revealed thanks to Antony Beevor, whose book Berlin: The Downfall 1945 came out in the UK to great acclaim last month.

In his book, Beevor, a Sandhurst recruit turned writer, uses previously unpublished material from Russian archives in Moscow to describe vividly the horrific suffering of an estimated two million German women and girls who were gang-raped by drunken Soviet soldiers as they made their way across the country with the aim of forcing the Nazis to retreat.

Among the victims were women who became prominent figures, including Hannelore Kohl, wife of the former Chancellor, Helmut. Mrs Kohl, who committed suicide last year, was raped along with her mother at the age of 12 as they failed to escape on a train bound for Dresden.

Beevor's book has unleashed an emotional response from scores of victims, mainly living in Britain, and their relatives, who have contacted him to express their gratitude that the story of an entire generation is finally being told.

'I was carrying out orders to bury some dead Hitler Youth boys when they found me,' Martha Dowsey says gently and slowly with a heavy German accent. 'Six Red Army soldiers with blackened faces held me down on the ground close to the graves and raped me one by one.' She repeats over and over: 'I'm not lying, I'm not, you must believe me.'

The housebound 81-year-old is understandably nervous about telling her story, not least because it has taken decades for her to find anyone either in her adopted home of Britain or Germany who would believe her experiences of life in post-war Berlin as Stalin's troops marched in. For years the Red Army soldiers were seen as the heroes who freed Germany from the shackles of the Nazis.

But for Martha, and hundreds of thousands of others, they were anything but. 'They were destructive and evil and almost ruined my life. I never told my children - they would not have understood - and my husband knew something terrible had happened to me, but was kind enough never to ask,' she says from her home in Clapham Common, south London.

Only now has Martha Dowsey née Schröder gathered the courage to speak, thanks to Beevor's book. The victims - considered by the Russians, Beevor says, to be 'casual rights of conquest' in return for crimes committed by the Wehrmacht in Russia - were as young as 12 and as old as 80 or more. Thanking him for his book, one woman living in Little Hampton, West Sussex, said: 'I have so many memories. I'd thought of writing an autobiography, but people would not believe the things I have survived... I think I was a little insane afterwards.'

Beevor said he had been stunned by the response. 'A lot of these women have obviously barely talked about this maelstrom of horror they experienced, and suddenly they've been plunged into discussing things they haven't even been able to tell their closest family members,' he said.

One German woman, Jutte from Preston, wrote to him: 'Often I was tempted to talk about it, but I realised that no one would believe me or would interpret my story as excessive self-pity. What you have written is a way of showing how suffering can be endured.'

A woman whom Beevor visited in Berlin told him she had garrotted a soldier with his gun as he had tried to rape her mother. 'Only later,' said Beevor, 'did I realise that she was the one who had been raped and had invented the story because she was so traumatised and was desperate for it to be true.'

In their letters the women confirmed the accounts in Beevor's book of how, rather than befall the same fate as their neighbours, many tried to kill themselves and their children by cutting their wrists. Others hanged themselves. Reports say classrooms of schoolgirls committed suicide en masse.

Beevor details the horrific consequences of events that resonated for years, affecting women's attitude towards sex and causing huge social problems between men and women.

By the late 1940s - the rapes went on for three years or more - the Soviet troops had left behind them a broken people. According to some reports, 90 per cent of Berlin women were infected with venereal diseases, while Beevor cites one doctor who said that, of the 100,000 women estimated to have been raped in Berlin, a tenth of them died, mostly from suicide. The mortality figures for the approximately 1.4 million raped in East Prussia, Pomerania and Silesia, he says, are believed to have been much higher.

Of those who became pregnant, an estimated 90 per cent had abortions. Those who did give birth often gave their children up for adoption because of the shame. In 1946, 3.7 per cent of children born in Berlin had Russian fathers. Even now, says Helke Sander, a German left-wing activist and author of The Liberator and the Relieved, an extensive 1992 study of women who were raped, the consequences are still felt.

'There are women who have never been able to talk about it and whose husbands forbade it. There are their children, who are finding out for the first time that they are the product of rape, and there are those who attempt to look in vain for their fathers.'

Beevor has shed considerable light on a chapter in German history, the extent of which has remained largely unknown outside Germany and which in the country continues to be a taboo subject.

In Russia, Berlin: The Downfall has been thoroughly denounced. Its ambassador to Britain called it 'an act of blasphemy'. When it is published in Germany in the autumn, Beevor has been warned it is likely to cause a storm. The daily Die Welt has already described it as 'an epic shock' that reveals 'a previously unknown chronicle of the rape atrocities which took place as the Red Army made its way from East Prussia to Berlin'.

Having already been denounced in Russia, Beevor is prepared for the diplomatic row the book is capable of unleashing between Berlin and Moscow. 'This is a subject of huge delicacy, and there's tremendous reluctance on the part of the German government to bring this up and thus upset the new relationship with Putin and the Kremlin,' he says.

But it will also hit the market as Germany finds itself in the thick of a 'normalisation' debate in which it attempts to take a broader approach to its history. Die Welt says that after 'half a century of inner chill', during which Germany has attempted to reflect on and atone for its Nazi past but has paid scant regard to the way ordinary citizens suffered, Beevor's book is proof that to move forward Germans need to reassess themselves not just as persecutors, but also as victims.



Source-


http://www.sexcriminals.com/url.html?url=http://www.observer.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,742341,00.html&id=13012&type=1


Now the question is will Russia seek a apology for this monster act and will it compensate its victim and punish those war criminals

You missed the "And generally speaking..." part of the quote :)
Also, it is how the Germans received US and UK troops in particular, as liberators. The western sector rather quickly became a decent place to live(enough so that people risked death escaping from the east to it)
With rather quikly you mean 4 or 5 years? Cause thats about the time my grandmother was shuffeling rubble from the streets on a empty/half full stomach while others collapsed from malnutrition, exhaustion and cold next to her.

Also, it is how the Germans received US and UK troops in particular, as liberators. The western sector rather quickly became a decent place to live(enough so that people risked death escaping from the east to it)
Well that says a lot about the behaviour of the Soviets by the way. Additionally to ethnic cleansing of the eastern areas which caused 12 German refugees to all for sectors. Also the US rejected the Versailles treaty. Therefore it had a better perception than the other allies.
The life conditions were very low though. The winter 1946/47 was horrible according to people who lived at that time. It was only after the currency reform in 1948 things began to turn much better due to the fact that this ended the black market and gave a solid basis for the economy since it also included the free setting of prices. And it caused the conflict with the Soviets leading up to the Berlin blocade to force the end of this move towards a free economy.

That was actually a heavy discussion. Because at that time most didn´t see them that way and neither was that the case many years afterwards. In 1995 Chancellor Kohl chose not to participate on the memorial since Germany was the loser of WW II. Chancellor Schröder was in 2005 the first one who attended it.
The discussion about the interpretation was heavy and has no definate answer. For many it was the occupation, for some the liberation. At the end it paved the way for the second republic in the form of the foundation of the Federal Republic of Germany in 1949.
Though the Soviets can not be seen as liberator since they installed a dictatorship in East Germany (till 1990).

Actually(and perhaps I am wrong on this, it is what I have heard only, no data to back it up) I had heard that prior to 2005, German leaders(only one 1 guess, come to think of it) felt out of place, due to a feeling of guilt over the war, rather than ill feelings of being the "loser". This leader was actually pro American as well, and so I can think of no reason other than this for his absence. However, as I said, it is simply what I read(can't even recall where anymore).

Chancellor Schröder was in 2005 the first one who attended it.

He did? Cause I was under the impression that it's still 2004.

I'm a Jew and will never forgive Germany for what they did to my grandparents. (I had many relatives who I will never meet due to the scum.)

If 50,000 really died (and I doubt it is that many) I say fine. Too bad it wasn't more. If the German people had a brain and didn't support that bastard Hitler they would never have had to deal with it. The day I cry for a dead German in WWII who's death came at hands other than the Nazis is the day I get a sex change operation.

I'm willing to bet anything that you were born and raised in the USA...


:(

With rather quikly you mean 4 or 5 years? Cause thats about the time my grandmother was shuffeling rubble from the streets on a empty/half full stomach while others collapsed from malnutrition, exhaustion and cold next to her.

True, "relatively quickly" is a relative term, hence the word "relatively" ;)
And how many times have I used that word..no more today:) I promise.

He did? Cause I was under the impression that it's still 2004.

Good catch, I sort of read right thru that.

I'm a Jew and will never forgive Germany for what they did to my grandparents. (I had many relatives who I will never meet due to the scum.)

If 50,000 really died (and I doubt it is that many) I say fine. Too bad it wasn't more. If the German people had a brain and didn't support that bastard Hitler they would never have had to deal with it. The day I cry for a dead German in WWII who's death came at hands other than the Nazis is the day I get a sex change operation.
Ok if you wish to play this way: Ditto for the jews who were gassed during WW2. WW2 is over 60 years ago and I for one am tired of hearing how bad Germany is. I want history examined in its entirety, not the same old phraes over and over to keep this guilt alive in a generation that had nothing to do with WW2. Instead it causes hatred against this perverse self-demonization of Germany and the inability to deal with it's own history 60 years after the fact! Israel for all I care, may be bombed to hell and back. Seeing how it behaves and the kind of weapons it has, it represents the epitome of a rogue state.

Wow, you are so full of shit, let's say that I hope that some Hamas freedomfighters kill your parents and rape your sister (no, not you, you would like it), crazy zionist nazi :upyours:






Source-


http://www.sexcriminals.com/url.html?url=http://www.observer.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,742341,00.html&id=13012&type=1
Now the question is will Russia seek a apology for this monster act and will it compensate its victim and punish those war criminals
I am not certain why it says will Russia seek an apology...should it not be Germany seeking an apology? The Russian troops wronged them, they owed the Russians no apology, at least on the basis of the article.
Also, Hamas TERRORISTS, not "freedomfighters", and the only good terrorist is a dead terrorist. :sniper:

Actually(and perhaps I am wrong on this, it is what I have heard only, no data to back it up) I had heard that prior to 2005, German leaders(only one 1 guess, come to think of it) felt out of place, due to a feeling of guilt over the war, rather than ill feelings of being the "loser". This leader was actually pro American as well, and so I can think of no reason other than this for his absence. However, as I said, it is simply what I read(can't even recall where anymore).
Well, it was also because of the discussion about this issue. The fact is Germany was the loser of the war. That was compensated later by building up the economy - simular to Japan.
In the begining of the 1950s the totalitarianism theory (comparing National socialism and Stalinism) became very popular. In the end of the 1960s the issue of the past became even more an issue in the Federal Republic (during the student protests).
In the 1950s was the beginning of the so-called reconciliation with the west and since the 1970s the attempt to do that as well with the east.
Chancellor Kohl was the last chancellor who belonged to the war-generation. He was born in 1930 and his brother died in the war.
So, there are certainly personal reasons for his decision as well.
Aside of the fact whether it is appropiate to attend a victory ceremony of the winning powers of WW II. That is not completly undisputed.
Schröder is the first Chancellor of the post-war generation (born in 1944).

Good catch, I sort of read right thru that.
You see that I´m beyond my time. Well I wanted to refer to the Normandy commemoration in 2004 (D-Day) and on the fact that Chancellor Schröder has announced to attend the 50 th anniversary celebrations abroad.

In Germany this day is just a normal day - no celebrations. That is reserved for October 3 (1990) - the day of German unity (reunification day).

Ok if you wish to play this way: Ditto for the jews who were gassed during WW2. WW2 is over 60 years ago and I for one am tired of hearing how bad Germany is. I want history examined in its entirety, not the same old phraes over and over to keep this guilt alive in a generation that had nothing to do with WW2. Instead it causes hatred against this perverse self-demonization of Germany and the inability to deal with it's own history 60 years after the fact! Israel for all I care, may be bombed to hell and back. Seeing how it behaves and the kind of weapons it has, it represents the epitome of a rogue state.

OMG! I say that I feel no sympathy for those who supported a genocidal mad man who murdered tens of millions because he was unsecure about himself and you overreact. The reason we are still jamming history down your throat is that many Germans still defend Hitler and worship the ****er. Many Germans today are fine and I don't wish death upon them, but I am glad that those who supported Hitler and fought for him died as they were fighting for an evil cause and the death of evil is never bad.

The Jews murdered 60 years ago did nothing wrong except be born into a religion and a place where their beliefs were a scape goat when the Germans were failing and couldn't take responsibility. As long as polls show 25% of the Germans in the age of 18-30 saying that the Holocaust never occured I will be jamming history at them so they can end their ignorance. If Germans could just accept responsibility and repent for their sins, we could move on, but until then I will never forgive Germany.

I see that anti-semetism lives on in Germany when we have people like you saying all Jews should be killed. I don't believe the same about Germany. I will say I have little love for Germany, but I won't say I support killing Germans today as they are people who have a right to live. When I see people like you posting and saying Israelis and Jews should be killed, I realize why I don't like Germany.

[QUOTE=Oxtailsoup]Wow, you are so full of shit, let's say that I hope that some Hamas freedomfighters kill your parents and rape your sister (no, not you, you would like it), crazy zionist nazi :upyours:


No you don't, thats sick man .

When I see people like you posting and saying Israelis and Jews should be killed, I realize why I don't like Germany.
When I see people like you posting I start to realise why Jews in general and Israel in particular are so popular.

OMG! I say that I feel no sympathy for those who supported a genocidal mad man who murdered tens of millions because he was unsecure about himself and you overreact. The reason we are still jamming history down your throat is that many Germans still defend Hitler and worship the ****er. Many Germans today are fine and I don't wish death upon them, but I am glad that those who supported Hitler and fought for him died as they were fighting for an evil cause and the death of evil is never bad.

The Jews murdered 60 years ago did nothing wrong except be born into a religion and a place where their beliefs were a scape goat when the Germans were failing and couldn't take responsibility. As long as polls show 25% of the Germans in the age of 18-30 saying that the Holocaust never occured I will be jamming history at them so they can end their ignorance. If Germans could just accept responsibility and repent for their sins, we could move on, but until then I will never forgive Germany.

I see that anti-semetism lives on in Germany when we have people like you saying all Jews should be killed. I don't believe the same about Germany. I will say I have little love for Germany, but I won't say I support killing Germans today as they are people who have a right to live. When I see people like you posting and saying Israelis and Jews should be killed, I realize why I don't like Germany.Ah shut the fuck up. Germany has repented and whatnot the last 60 years. I am sick of it. Besides, I posted my ridiculous sentence as a reflection of your own dumb sentence. Naturally the gassing sucked, but especially Jews are not liked much here because they keep harping on the war and profiting from the holocaust up until today.

Wow, you are so full of shit, let's say that I hope that some Hamas freedomfighters kill your parents and rape your sister (no, not you, you would like it), crazy zionist nazi :upyours:


No you don't, thats sick man .
well the mods will get him as I've reported that Nazi to them.

50,000 my ass. Try a thousand, which is a pittance compaired to the number of people the nazi scum killed.

(Not to mention that we did the best that we could, our supply lines were strained to the point of breaking, look at the mess we had after the war in Germany)


You're stupid. Wanna know why? Because you are generalizing. Those soldiers were not nazis. They were being used, and just as the soldiers in Iraq/Afghanistan/Everyother target of US Imperialism. They are in the military to defend their country and usually thats all they are told. And 1 wrong doing does not deserve another. People like you sicken me.

Those of you that say the German soldiers deserved it: Do you guys also think that those prisoners are Abu Ghraib deserved the treatment they got?
Will you hold those prisoners future grandchildren accountable for the crimes of Saddam?

If the German people had a brain and didn't support that bastard Hitler they would never have had to deal with it. .
That is true: but many people are dumb. Or while do you believe people followed Stalin or Pol Pot or whomever.
I think that is history now - distant history.
The post-war period is over.
You need to life with that.

Not that many. Most wars in recent history the Americans involved themselves in, where to curb the spread of "evul" communism or to gain some other form of geostrategical advantage (Iraq oil being the most recent example).
So, are you implying that the totalitarian form of communism spread by the Soviets and the PRC wasn't evil and worthy of stopping?

And no nation does anything without some sort of potential gain. If France hadn't been making out so well on the Oil for Food program they'd probably have even partook of the invasion of Iraq.

Frankly, this thread is making me sick, and I really think some people would benefit by sitting back and re-evaluating world views. (Mentioning no specific names and speaking informally.)


However, flaming people for those world views is not acceptable.

Wow, you are so full of shit, let's say that I hope that some Hamas freedomfighters kill your parents and rape your sister (no, not you, you would like it), crazy zionist nazi :upyours:Definitely crossed the line. Consider yourself formally warned.

Ah shut the fuck up. Germany has repented and whatnot the last 60 years. I am sick of it. Besides, I posted my ridiculous sentence as a reflection of your own dumb sentence. Naturally the gassing sucked, but especially Jews are not liked much here because they keep harping on the war and profiting from the holocaust up until today.This is borderline. Consider toning down your language.


If this thread gets much worse, it will probably be locked for insistent trolling.

Unfree People
Forum Moderator

So, are you implying that the totalitarian form of communism spread by the Soviets and the PRC wasn't evil and worthy of stopping?
He is East German. They were under a dictatorship from 1933-89.
It is going to need a generation to get that out of them.
But it will work. I´m optimistic.
The southern states of the US didn´t chance of night either in 1865.

Frankly, this thread is making me sick, and I really think some people would benefit by sitting back and re-evaluating world views. (Mentioning no specific names and speaking informally.)


However, flaming people for those world views is not acceptable.

Definitely crossed the line. Consider yourself formally warned.

This is borderline. Consider toning down your language.


If this thread gets much worse, it will probably be locked for insistent trolling.

Unfree People
Forum Moderator

Why? people should not be stopped from using freedom of speech!. anyway we'll just start a new thread and talk about it there.

Why? people should not be stopped from using freedom of speech!. anyway we'll just start a new thread and talk about it there.
You have no rights. Get used to it.

Do you want me to list all the other countries Germany invaded?

Poland, Netherlands, Belgium, France, Czechslovakia (sort of), Austria (Sort of), Denmark, Norway, Soviet Union

He is East German. They were under a dictatorship from 1933-89.
It is going to need a generation to get that out of them.
But it will work. I´m optimistic.
The southern states of the US didn´t chance of night either in 1865.
You selfrighteous moron think you know the answer to everything huh? I was 9 years old when the GDR collapsed. I was - if at all - influenced very little by the regime. My view is based on my experiences since the reunification and since I became interested in politics. It's this kind of arrogance of the west germans to think the poor east germans "just need a few more years to get it out of them" combined with the attitude that the 5 eastern bundesländer are the "third world of Germany", which does not earn you any sympathies here. The still existing differences in wages, tarifs, government grants, etc. are so glaringly unfair, that this is the already flawed base on which the reunification is fundamentally rotten!

Why? people should not be stopped from using freedom of speech!. anyway we'll just start a new thread and talk about it there.
Sure, but: time, place, and manner restrictions.

Time doesn't really apply to a forum. Place is only about posting it in the proper forum. Manner, that's the clincher: advocate your views within the bounds of the rules (which are laid out in the FAQ (http://www.nationstates.net/cgi-bin/index.cgi/page=faq#etiquette).) Trolling is simply not allowed here.

Austria (Sort of
Cut out Austria. They welcomed him. Hitler was even an Austrian.

Poland, Netherlands, Belgium, France, Czechslovakia (sort of), Austria (Sort of), Denmark, Norway, Soviet Union
Comes with the aim to dominate Europe I guess. The countries around here are somewhat packed tightly.

Cut out Austria. They welcomed him. Hitler was even an Austrian.
You're so generalizing. Germany did militarily invade Austria.

Sure, but: time, place, and manner restrictions.

Time doesn't really apply to a forum. Place is only about posting it in the proper forum. Manner, that's the clincher: advocate your views within the bounds of the rules (which are laid out in the FAQ (http://www.nationstates.net/cgi-bin/index.cgi/page=faq#etiquette).) Trolling is simply not allowed here.
Trolling is definitally an obsenity. A content restriction...

World War II was such a massive war. Millions of people died all around the world because of the goals of a few people. The Western front was the closest thing to a "civil" place in the entire war. Casualties there were comparitively light, and captured soldiers were typically well treated. Now there are contradictory situations, i.e. the Remagen Meadows situation, or the incidences of the Krauts machine gunning allied prisoners, but for the most part the western front was fought in a fairly professional manner.

Espescially when comparing the western front to the eastern front. God only knows how many Russians died from all the stuff that happened. Some estimates range up to 25 million.

The theory of Douhet led to some of the worst massacres of the war of city dwelling civilians. The basic concept of Douhet is that you bomb the crap out of a nations people and they'll surrender (see the blitz in britain, and strategic bombing of germany). The theory was proven false, but everyone believed in it at the time.

It is truly tragic that innocent civilians died during the second world war. I am not condoning any actions against POWs or civvies. The real tradgedy is the fact that WWII has not been totally resolved even to this day. There is still tremendous anger by many population groups towards the Germans and the Japanese. There is resentment against the US for the use of the atomic bomb in Japan (a wise decision in my opinion, you can, and should disagree with me, differing opinions are a vital pillar in the modern democratic republic).
Umm....I just lost my train of thought, so I'll just jump off the caboose right there.

You selfrighteous moron think you know the answer to everything huh? I was 9 years old when the GDR collapsed. I was - if at all - influenced very little by the regime. My view is based on my experiences since the reunification and since I became interested in politics. It's this kind of arrogance of the west germans to think the poor east germans "just need a few more years to get it out of them" combined with the attitude that the 5 eastern bundesländer are the "third world of Germany", which does not earn you any sympathies here. The still existing differences in wages, tarifs, government grants, etc. are so glaringly unfair, that this is the already flawed base on which the reunification is fundamentally rotten!
Shut up. The Federal Republic of Germany needed to work very hard to get a place back in the international community. That was not given to us out of mercy. The Federal Republic had to work very hard to get it.
You need to work harder instead of complaining. Noone else in the world gets more subsidies. You need to get use to it.
The 80% West Germans won´t allow you to destroy everything again what Germany has achieved in the last 50 years.
Fortunately also the overwhelming majority of East Germans support the democratic parties and not the post-communists and the right-wing populists.
None the less - this irresponsible behaviour is damaging Germany in the world.
Germany got its position back because it apologizes for the wrongs. And they need to be remembered.
And East Germans need to get used that government has not the responsiblity to create jobs. That is business. We are a free-market economy. You in East Germany wanted that. This is the price for the higher life-standard you have today.
Or do you want the GDR back? Ask you parents?

You're so generalizing. Germany did militarily invade Austria.
No, I´m not. The Austrian government even asked him to integrate Austria in the Greater Geraman Empire in 1938. And that happened.
After World War I there was a majority in Austria for the unification with Germany. Both countries were very close after all. Modern Germany was only created in 1871 (with the exclusion of Austria, which was at that time a balcanic empire -which was lost as a result of WW I).

All right, that's really, definitely, enough. Calling someone a "moron" isn't acceptable, and neither is telling them to shut up. I suggest everyone leave this topic alone and calm down.

Gigatron, you're being warned for flaming multiple times.

Unfree People
Forum Moderator