NationStates Jolt Archive

Justice, at long last. At least some sorta recognition of the suffering of the German side.
I'll def watch this tho I also think it was silly for the producers and the writers to include a love story which wasnt in the diary.
Anyway, what do you guys think? Both about the movie and the historical aspects...


BERLIN (AFP) — One of the long-ignored chapters of World War II hit German screens this month with a harrowing account of the mass rapes of German women by Russian soldiers as the Nazi regime crumbled around them.

"Anonyma - A Woman in Berlin" stars A-list German actress Nina Hoss and has returned a victim's anonymous diary to the forefront of an extremely tentative debate about German suffering during and after the war.

"There were tens of thousands (of rape victims) -- that is for certain. Perhaps even hundreds of thousands," US historian Norman Naimark, director of the Center for European Studies at Stanford, told German weekly Die Zeit.

"Some estimates go up to two million if you include all the Eastern European territories with German populations."

While the horrors inflicted by Nazis troops across the Soviet bloc are well documented, the price German women paid for the revenge taken by Russian soldiers was long unspoken here -- overshadowed by the overwhelming guilt of Hitler's followers.

The new film by Max Faerberboeck, 58, was inspired by the intimate journal a Berlin woman kept from April 20 to June 22, 1945 in which she recounts the excruciating hunger and repeated violations she suffered in the vanquished German capital.

The nameless author bears witness in a laconic tone, with searing insights into the apocalyptic world around her.

The chilling journal was first published in the United States in 1954 and then in several other countries before arriving in West German bookstores in 1959 thanks to a small Swiss publishing house.

It was an era in which no one cared to hear about German suffering after the horrors wrought by Nazi troops -- least of all the guilt-wracked Germans.

And in communist East Germany, a Soviet satellite, a blanket of silence suffocated any public discussion until the Berlin Wall fell in 1989.

The diary disappeared into obscurity for nearly half a century until noted writer Hans Magnus Enzenberger had it re-released in 2003. It became a bestseller in Germany.

The author appeared to have been in her 30s, well-educated, with a passion for photography and a basic knowledge of Russian picked up on her extensive travels before the war.

The daily Sueddeutsche Zeitung claimed to have unmasked her in 2003 as Marta Hillers, a journalist who made a name for herself with pro-Nazi propaganda -- the prevailing theory to this day.

Although researchers such as Naimark and Britain's Anthony Beevor have documented the enormous scale of sexual assaults of German women at the war's end, such first-person accounts are extremely rare in the historical record.

The University of Greifswald in northeastern Germany has just launched what it says will be the first scientific study of the rapes of German women at the end of the war.

The study will focus on Berlin, the surrounding state of Brandenburg and the northeast of the country near today's Polish border.

It will concentrate on the long-term psychological effects suffered by the affected women, all of whom, if still alive six decades on, are elderly.

The research team is advertising a telephone number for volunteers, just as the film has whipped up renewed public interest in the story.

"Anonyma" itself has received mixed reviews despite a riveting performance by Hoss in the lead role, with critics incensed about the introduction of a love story to the plot.

The journal recounts the woman's decision to seduce a high-ranking Russian officer so he will protect her from the other soldiers -- "packs of wolves", as she calls them -- preying on her and her neighbours.

There was no mention of love.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5gdAb_H3CPLYF4UsufpsJx-HhepZA

I won't be watching this film because it sounds depressing

I won't be watching this film because it sounds depressing

For fucks sake don't watch the news later then......

Sounds interesting.

Not knowing anything about the subject really, even after reading the article (which seemed vague on a few points), I think it would be interesting. Unsurprising that little attention has been paid to it. A good-bad dichotomy is much easier for many people to understand and accept than the idea that there are very few true heroes or villains, that morality is subjective and circumstantial, and that ordinarily decent people do bad things, and vice-versa.

I remember getting into an argument with a Jewish classmate in junior high about the war. I dared to make the claim that not all--not even the majority--of Germans during the war were evil Jew-haters. My great uncle was a German soldier (which too many people interpret as "Nazi"). He fought because his country was at war. He didn't hate Jews (in fact, he married one later). This was apparently too much for my classmate, who blew up, yelled all the facts I already knew about the Holocaust, and wouldn't speak to me for days.

I actually want to read this journal, and they mention its in bookstores. Anyone know what its called?


Besides, I dont know why the movie would be considered contraversial today. Sure, the Nazis were terrible people, but so were the Soviets.


I remember getting into an argument with a Jewish classmate in junior high about the war. I dared to make the claim that not all--not even the majority--of Germans during the war were evil Jew-haters. My great uncle was a German soldier (which too many people interpret as "Nazi"). He fought because his country was at war. He didn't hate Jews (in fact, he married one later). This was apparently too much for my classmate, who blew up, yelled all the facts I already knew about the Holocaust, and wouldn't speak to me for days.

Why do you hate Jews?

I actually want to read this journal, and they mention its in bookstores. Anyone know what its called?


Besides, I dont know why the movie would be considered contraversial today. Sure, the Nazis were terrible people, but so were the Soviets.


Why do you hate Jews?

A woman in Berlin

For fucks sake don't watch the news later then......

local news FTW!

Besides, I dont know why the movie would be considered contraversial today. Sure, the Nazis were terrible people, but so were the Soviets.

the movie is trying to look controversial so it sells

Har is hell. Soldiers rape. Don't mention the war - I did once but I think I got away with it

Just out of curiosity, why is justice only available now that the subject at hand has been made into a film? While I agree that the widespread rape of German women by Russian soldiers was horrific, I'm not sure it follows that now that it's been commercialized as a Very-Special-Movie-Event, that therefore justice has been served. After all, I'm not sure there's any Jews who think "Now that Schindler's List is out, I can finally claim justice over the Nazis".

Just out of curiosity, why is justice only available now that the subject at hand has been made into a film? While I agree that the widespread rape of German women by Russian soldiers was horrific, I'm not sure it follows that now that it's been commercialized as a Very-Special-Movie-Event, that therefore justice has been served. After all, I'm not sure there's any Jews who think "Now that Schindler's List is out, I can finally claim justice over the Nazis".

With most of the victims and perpetrators dead, then public recognition of what happened and that it was wrong is really about as far as justice can go.

With most of the victims and perpetrators dead, then public recognition of what happened and that it was wrong is really about as far as justice can go.

That, and itd be hard, near impossible, to hunt down all those Soviet troops.

With most of the victims and perpetrators dead, then public recognition of what happened and that it was wrong is really about as far as justice can go.

That's what I suspected: sympathy is a better term. I can go with that a lot better than I can justice, although I admit my Midwestern Lutheranism does not permit me to feel good about appeals to someone else's sympathy.

It's hard not to feel sympathy for the German women who were violated.

But I wonder if there was an honest German who said, "Mien fuhrer, maybe this operation Barbarossa is not such a good idea. The Soviet Union is still at peace with us and we haven't concluded the Battle of Britain yet!"
If there were such an honest man, I wonder which concentation camp they sent him to?

It's hard not to feel sympathy for the German women who were violated.

But I wonder if there was an honest German who said, "Mien fuhrer, maybe this operation Barbarossa is not such a good idea. The Soviet Union is still at peace with us and we haven't concluded the Battle of Britain yet!"
If there were such an honest man, I wonder which concentation camp they sent him to?

Auschwitz, most definitely. (Pardon me if I murdered the spelling of that first word.)

Auschwitz, most definitely. (Pardon me if I murdered the spelling of that first word.)

You got the spelling right...

You got the spelling right...

Good, God forbid I fall on the mouths of the grammar nazis of the forum.:tongue:

Ve don't punish schwien! Ve punctuate!

Ve don't punish schwien! Ve punctuate!

lol

Ve don't punish schwien! Ve punctuate!

Lol!
:D

Har is hell.
Har is well, I think you mean. And indeed it is, absolutely undeniable that the Har is currently as satisfactory as always.
Soldiers rape.
Soldiers aren't inherently rapists, that is a result of individual failings and a systematic lack of discipline and professionalism.

Auschwitz, most definitely. (Pardon me if I murdered the spelling of that first word.)

That's definitely not the most PC thing to say.

That's definitely not the most PC thing to say.

I was going to use grammar rape, but that wasn't politically correct either.

Besides, I dont know why the movie would be considered contraversial today. Sure, the Nazis were terrible people, but so were the Soviets.

Because they are the NAZI's and all germans are NAZI's too.

It's hard not to feel sympathy for the German women who were violated.

But I wonder if there was an honest German who said, "Mien fuhrer, maybe this operation Barbarossa is not such a good idea. The Soviet Union is still at peace with us and we haven't concluded the Battle of Britain yet!"
If there were such an honest man, I wonder which concentation camp they sent him to?

A lot of political prisoners were sent to Dachau. Though perhaps a lot of men were also scared of saying that to be sent to the concentration camps and/or the propaganda worked well enough for people to allow it to happen thinking it was right.

So Germany really did get raped in World War II, I always thought that it was just a figure of speech.

For fucks sake don't watch the news later then......

News broadcasts don't generally include dramatic re-enactments of war crimes. :tongue: It's usually more a statement of facts.

I think I'll skip it as well, though I wouldn't be averse to reading the book.

I dared to make the claim that not all--not even the majority--of Germans during the war were evil Jew-haters. My great uncle was a German soldier (which too many people interpret as "Nazi"). He fought because his country was at war. He didn't hate Jews (in fact, he married one later). This was apparently too much for my classmate, who blew up, yelled all the facts I already knew about the Holocaust, and wouldn't speak to me for days.

A great-uncle of mine both hated jews *and* killed Germans in Italy during the war - the good/bad Hollywood picture pretty much always fails, I think.

Soldiers aren't inherently rapists, that is a result of individual failings and a systematic lack of discipline and professionalism.
its also a resault of cultures of sexual repression. (and beliefs that promote them)(but then so is the concept of rape as the term is currently defined)(and the traumas associated with it are to a very large degree a direct resault of the perspective of those cultures too)

In russia at the time it was considered to be a very manly and admirable thing to have sex while you are away at war.
It didn't much matter to them whether or not the woman was willing.

Stalin specifically gave them carte blanche to rape German women - because it would break the will of any Germans to resist, apparently. Also, revenge for 20 million dead Soviets would have been a motive.

Just out of curiosity, why is justice only available now that the subject at hand has been made into a film? While I agree that the widespread rape of German women by Russian soldiers was horrific, I'm not sure it follows that now that it's been commercialized as a Very-Special-Movie-Event, that therefore justice has been served. After all, I'm not sure there's any Jews who think "Now that Schindler's List is out, I can finally claim justice over the Nazis".

Their slang is a bit out of date. They meant that Justice got Served (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7qP_8Kk6wI&feature=related).

I don't want to bagatellize the suffering mentioned in the title of this thread, but I'm a bit wary of the person who started it. Just look at his name: Nova Magna Germania... that's Latin for Neu Großdeutschland or New Greater Germany. Is it correct to assume that we're dealing here with a nazilover who lusts for the rise of the Fourth Reich?

Not if you're basing that assumption only on the name.

moar raep

Just out of curiosity, why is justice only available now that the subject at hand has been made into a film? While I agree that the widespread rape of German women by Russian soldiers was horrific, I'm not sure it follows that now that it's been commercialized as a Very-Special-Movie-Event, that therefore justice has been served. After all, I'm not sure there's any Jews who think "Now that Schindler's List is out, I can finally claim justice over the Nazis".

Because this part of the history was mostly ignored, now there's a movie about it.

Of course it'd be better if the german government recognized this and erected a monument for these women in Berlin as well as adding it to history books.

Given the attitude of todays Russia, I dont expect them issuing an apology or something, let alone bringing 90 yo's to justice.

I don't want to bagatellize the suffering mentioned in the title of this thread, but I'm a bit wary of the person who started it. Just look at his name: Nova Magna Germania... that's Latin for Neu Großdeutschland or New Greater Germany. Is it correct to assume that we're dealing here with a nazilover who lusts for the rise of the Fourth Reich?

I really hate answering to trolls, but do you know what NS in my location stands for?

Nova Scotia, as far as I know. Are you insinuating that it's impossible for the inhabitants of that Canadian province to be enamoured by totalitarian and genocidal ideologies?

Nova Scotia, as far as I know. Are you insinuating that it's impossible for the inhabitants of that Canadian province to be enamoured by totalitarian and genocidal ideologies?

No, never mind.

Not if you're basing that assumption only on the name.

You've got a point there. Still I wonder why he chose exactly that name. It's a rather peculiar choice, one would think that he has a specific reason for it.

You've got a point there. Still I wonder why he chose exactly that name. It's a rather peculiar choice, one would think that he has a specific reason for it.
RP more likely than not. I don't think he's posted anything that would really put him in the Nazi category.

Anyways, as long as they handle the film well, it's ok. For example pointing out that it wasn't the front-line troops that did the raping and pillaging, but the second, less professional line of random conscripts.

As for justice, I think these women would get a lot more from a public apology to how they and especially their kids were treated in post-war Germany at times. The actual rapes, I don't think there is a whole lot to be done. Judging from my own grandmother, I think she has different things on her mind than what happened back then. People get over it, perhaps by repressing memories, perhaps in more healthy ways.

You've got a point there. Still I wonder why he chose exactly that name. It's a rather peculiar choice, one would think that he has a specific reason for it.

I'm sure Nova Magna Germania did. I'd go out on a limb and say we all have a specific reason for choosing our names - even if it's just the "how about a random series of letters" kind. But why link it to any assumed Nazi sympathies without any other justification beyond the name? "Germania" could just as easily refer to the area of the various Germanic tribes (modern day Germany, the Netherlands, Denmark, Sweden, Finland - and their various "colonies" of Iceland, Greenland, Ireland, and Ukraine to name a few) from the pre-Christian period. Maybe the nation is an alternate-history progression of the Holy Roman Empire, but Germanized. Or a democratic Prussian Empire. The possibilities are legion.

Why not chose the name?

Stalin specifically gave them carte blanche to rape German women - because it would break the will of any Germans to resist, apparently. Also, revenge for 20 million dead Soviets would have been a motive.

Lets be honost. Uncle Joe Stalin didnt give a shit about the 20 million dead Soviets.

Lets be honost. Uncle Joe Stalin didnt give a shit about the 20 million dead Soviets.

Well, to be fair to Old Uncle Joe, he really did miss those twenty million+ factory workers and soldiers he could've used to help build his empire MOAR! :tongue:

this film must not be released or we will invade germany, the us needs to understand east germany is still our sphere of influence and stay out of this.
omg WWIII

omg WWIII

Its best not to post things in quotes that no one actually said.

Its best not to post things in quotes that no one actually said.

if anyone took me seriously they are too dumb for teh internet.

Well, to be fair to Old Uncle Joe, he really did miss those twenty million+ factory workers and soldiers he could've used to help build his empire MOAR! :tongue:

Actually, those 20 million probably would've either revolted or taken up arms as Hiwis against the Soviets when Germany invaded.

Justice, at long last. At least some sorta recognition of the suffering of the German side.

We might also talk about Allied troops raping italian women in Siena. Things like that happen in war (extremely numerous examples), though some officers (on both sides) try and manage to keep their soldiers under control and to prevent rapes and atrocities against civilians.

RP more likely than not. I don't think he's posted anything that would really put him in the Nazi category.
Unless I'm much mistaken, she has German parents.

We might also talk about Allied troops raping italian women in Siena. Things like that happen in war (extremely numerous examples), though some officers (on both sides) try and manage to keep their soldiers under control and to prevent rapes and atrocities against civilians.The Soviets were probably the worst (followed by the French). Unlike the Western Allies, the Soviet leadership actively urged their soldiers to commit atrocities out of revenge up until they realized they needed to win the East German hearts and minds, when rape was officially sanctioned again.

The Soviets were probably the worst (followed by the French). Unlike the Western Allies, the Soviet leadership actively urged their soldiers to commit atrocities out of revenge up until they realized they needed to win the East German hearts and minds, when rape was officially sanctioned again.

Actually, afaik, the behaviour of Red Army troops, expecially during the battle for Berlin, varied greatly from a city district to another: this is a hint that there wasn't an order from the topmost levels of Soviet leadership, but more of a pilatesque free rein to single units' commanders. "Good" soviet commanders enforced good behaviour, and "bad" soviet commanders let their worst elements have their way, or even worse urged to commit atrocities systematically.

(of course this doesn't excuse the soviet leadership from their responsibilities! they should have punished the "bad" commanders).

As for "winning East German hearts and minds", I think this is quite inaccurate, since Stalin initially wanted a unified and demilitarized Germany (it was the western powers who began the splitting of Germany). So they had to win all German hearts and minds.

Actually, afaik, the behaviour of Red Army troops, expecially during the battle for Berlin, varied greatly from a city district to another: this is a hint that there wasn't an order from the topmost levels of Soviet leadership, but more of a pilatesque free rein to single units' commanders. "Good" soviet commanders enforced good behaviour, and "bad" soviet commanders let their worst elements have their way, or even worse urged to commit atrocities systematically.

(of course this doesn't excuse the soviet leadership from their responsibilities! they should have punished the "bad" commanders).Nyeh. I can't remember the name of the Soviet dignitary that did it, so I haven't been able to look it up, but there were actual speeches that ordered and urged the Soviet troops to rape German women. Perhaps no direct orders, and hence no systematic rapes, as opposed to widespread rapes (not that that's any consolation), but Stalin and his fellows were certainly complicit by inciting the atrocities.
Unlike the Germans, though, you had men like Kopolev and Solzhenitsyn who actively sought to prevent this. (Though, as it turns out, both got sent to Gulags for doing so.)
As for "winning East German hearts and minds", I think this is quite inaccurate, since Stalin initially wanted a unified and demilitarized Germany (it was the western powers who began the splitting of Germany). So they had to win all German hearts and minds.He did, but it wasn't until the Soviets realized that there was going to be two Germanies that they began to try and polish the image of being Big Brothers as opposed to occupiers.

Perhaps no direct orders, and hence no systematic rapes, as opposed to widespread rapes (not that that's any consolation), but Stalin and his fellows were certainly complicit by inciting the atrocities.

Yah. To make my point clear, not giving a direct order "do not rape!" isn't morally different to give the order "rape!" in wartime. Maybe legally different, but not morally.

Unless I'm much mistaken, she has German parents.

That doesn't automatically mean that she wants a the third Reich to be risen again.

That doesn't automatically mean that she wants a the third Reich to be risen again.Indeed, but it was meant to explain why she picked that name.

Indeed, but it was meant to explain why she picked that name.

Oh well yes that is a plausible reason as to why.

Here's a little light Noel Coward, written in 1943 to enetertain you:
http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=wveW9Tw2JKE&feature=related

The irony of that song was that the BBC banned it because they thought that it was pro-German but Churchill saw the humour in it. It shows you that in 1943, irony was a rather scared shared commodity. The significance of all this, however, is that people were talking about rebuilding Germany and assisting them after the war. This attitude contrasts sharply with that of the Allies in 1918 (Woodrow Wilson excepted). Stalin, however, wanted to punish Germany and for him, rape was just another weapon of war.

I'm rather reluctant to entertain the concept of "This shows that the Soviets were just as evil as the Nazis!" I think a few million rapes are not as evil as a few million imprisonment and executions. The Soviets and the Nazis both engaged in genocide on a vast scale, and that's what shows they were each as evil as the other. Though I'm also reluctant to entertain the concept of a rating system of evilness, so whatever.

And it's somewhat surprising, Neo Leonstein and Laerod, that you've completely forgotten NMG's posting history (under his previous name which was a very close variant on this one) as one of the classic NSG trolls. His harsh views on immigrants and foreigners, his attempts to show that "non-whites" are more criminal by nature, his Islamophobic angle. All of which could be (and of course has been) categorized as 'nazi-like' and certainly bigoted.

Unless I'm much mistaken, she has German parents.

He.

Dads german, moms canuck from sask. of partial german ancestry (german is the largest ancestry group in that province).

And I live in Nova Scotia so I was gonna pick Nova Germania which is kinda similar to that but it was taken, hence this nick.

So I'm basically not a neo-nazi female. Now, can we get a move on and not reinforce Hurdegaryp's trolling by giving it attention?

I'm rather reluctant to entertain the concept of "This shows that the Soviets were just as evil as the Nazis!" I think a few million rapes are not as evil as a few million imprisonment and executions. The Soviets and the Nazis both engaged in genocide on a vast scale, and that's what shows they were each as evil as the other. Though I'm also reluctant to entertain the concept of a rating system of evilness, so whatever.

And it's somewhat surprising, Neo Leonstein and Laerod, that you've completely forgotten NMG's posting history (under his previous name which was a very close variant on this one) as one of the classic NSG trolls. His harsh views on immigrants and foreigners, his attempts to show that "non-whites" are more criminal by nature, his Islamophobic angle. All of which could be (and of course has been) categorized as 'nazi-like' and certainly bigoted.

What? NMG is my first and only nick.

I'm rather reluctant to entertain the concept of "This shows that the Soviets were just as evil as the Nazis!" I think a few million rapes are not as evil as a few million imprisonment and executions. The Soviets and the Nazis both engaged in genocide on a vast scale, and that's what shows they were each as evil as the other. Though I'm also reluctant to entertain the concept of a rating system of evilness, so whatever.

I think one important difference is that despite the brutality of the GULAG system and the mass executions of the purges, there were no death camps in the USSR. They never had a system built solely to kill people on the basis of their religion or ethnicity (of course, this is debatable on some issues like the Holodomor), and the GULAG system never even came close to some of the things that happened in Nazi death camps.

Plus, there's the simple fact that the Soviets were invaded by Germany in a war of aggression whose primary aim was the extermination of the Slavs and the creation of a new German land in the east.

http://www.palgrave-usa.com/catalog/product.aspx?isbn=023050647X

Sociologist and criminologist Professor Bob Lilly makes unprecedented use of military records and trial transcripts to throw light on one of the overlooked consequences of the US Army’s presence in Western Europe between 1942 and 1945: the rape of an estimated 14,000 civilian women in the United Kingdom, France and Germany.

I'm not singling out the US. I bet Canadian soldiers, UK soldiers, Australians, and soldiers from every other male army in the history of warfare have done it.

This is why I think we need female armies.

Finally a film is done about the Red Army atrocities,and before you think that the rapes were a kind of revenge against the Germans you should know that mass rapes happened to all of eastern Europe (Poland,Baltic States,Hungary) by Red Army soldiers,the fact that they even raped ethnic Russian women that lived there removes any morality from their actions.

Women raped in war? In other news, men are shot, gassed, burned, blown up, mutilated, starved and killed in war.

Is any of this surprising to anyone?

Women raped in war? In other news, men are shot, gassed, burned, blown up, mutilated, starved and killed in war.

Is any of this surprising to anyone?

Yes, when the upwards estimate is 2 FUCKING MILLION.

I dont understand why so many people dont understand the concept of magnitude.

Clearly a war like Slovenia's independence is different than WW2 due to huge difference in loss of life altho u can simplify both by saying "men died".

well, let's count

If we're doing an eye for an eye, the Germans killed how many millions?

How many Germans were killed, and how many were raped?

I think that the Germans got off light.

If we're doing an eye for an eye, the Germans killed how many millions

Easily over 30 million in Eastern Europe, including approximately 6.5 million soldiers and other military personnel. The rest were civilians executed for no other reason than being Slavic. The Eastern Front was a war of extermination and nothing more...the very fact that the Soviets didn't institute genocidal policies in retaliation says a lot about the moral differences between the two systems.

Fact is, the worst mortality rates in the GULAG system were still only 17% at the height of WWII, when resources were in short supply. In all of the other years it was only around 5% on average. That certainly doesn't excuse the use of prison camps and mass executions for political crimes, but they are simply 100% incomparable to the Nazi concentration camps. And, as I've said before, there were no death camps in the USSR...they never built a facility solely to execute innocent people on the basis of race or religion.

The Germans were brutal bullies and nothing more, but like the Japanese made the mistake of picking on someone stronger than them.

Is this really the first such film? I know I saw a melodramatic chick flick few years ago on dish about two German sisters that go through a rough life during and after the war; it was either German or in the language, subtitled in English. Also, it's always been widely known that the allies bombed some German cities heavily to deliberately kill civilians.

And btw, the nazis did plenty of raping themselves of their "own", although it was far more organized and with the excuse of breeding. I don't know if it was 2 million but it was significant.

(and you just know these guys signed up for that program) :

http://i35.tinypic.com/25zp9u9.jpg

And btw, the nazis did plenty of raping themselves of their "own", although it was far more organized and with the excuse of breeding. I don't know if it was 2 million but it was significant.

I don't know the extent of the Lebensborn program, although there were likely far more than two million rapes on the Eastern Front alone. Of course, in most cases they simply murdered entire families instead...

I don't know the extent of the Lebensborn program
I do...the Lebensborn program wasn't about rape, though.....It just set up SS officers to marry 'aryan' women in order to artificially direct the evolution of the 'aryan race'...notably with SS officers marrying Norwegian women.

I do...the Lebensborn program wasn't about rape, though.....It just set up SS officers to marry 'aryan' women in order to artificially direct the evolution of the 'aryan race'...notably with SS officers marrying Norwegian women.

For real?

When you look in the mirror, do you find yourself thinking of the 'Evian' brand?


Lebensborn wasn't restricted to SS officers - indeed, they were less than half of the membership. And 'marrying' wasn't an essential component, either (although the lebensborn program deemed 'family' grouping preferable) just the production of 'racially pure' children.

For real?

When you look in the mirror, do you find yourself thinking of the 'Evian' brand?
Nope. I see a good looking, young, intelligent, confident ambitious person looking back. Why do you ask?


Lebensborn wasn't restricted to SS officers - indeed, they were less than half of the membership. And 'marrying' wasn't an essential component, either (although the lebensborn program deemed 'family' grouping preferable) just the production of 'racially pure' children.

Lebensborn (Fount of Life, in Old German) was a Nazi organization set up by SS leader Heinrich Himmler, which provided maternity homes and financial assistance to the wives of SS members and to unmarried mothers, and which also ran orphanages and relocation programmes for children. Initially set up in Germany in 1935, Lebensborn expanded into occupied countries in western and northern Europe during the Second World War. In line with the racial and eugenic policies of Nazi Germany, the Lebensborn programme was restricted to individuals who were deemed to be "biologically fit" and "racially pure" "Aryans", and to SS members. In occupied countries, thousands of women facing social ostracism because they were in relationships with German soldiers and had become pregnant, had few alternatives other than applying for help with Lebensborn.

After World War II it was falsely reported that Lebenborn was a breeding programme. This was not true because individuals were not forced to have sex with selected partners.[1] However, the programme did aim to promote the growth of "superior" Aryan populations through providing excellent health care and by restricting access to the programme with medical selections that applied eugenic and "race" criteria. Although Lebensborn did process the adoptions by German families of a small number of orphan children from northern and eastern Europe, it was not involved in the kidnapping of thousands of Polish children who were subjected to "Germanisation" by sending them to re-education camps and fostering them out to German families. This project, also directed by Himmler, was carried out by other segments of the Nazi bureaucracy.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/3c/Lebensborn-image.jpg

I would just like to point out that it was not just German women that were raped, Poles, liberated concentration camp victims, and even liberated Russian woman were all raped.

It seems that the whole raping thing had more to do with pent-up sexual problems among Red Army soldiers. Stalin's Soviet Union in the 1930's came down pretty hard on the subject. Freud's work were a banned item, for example.

It is also interesting to note that, although the frontline troops(called Frontoviki[i]) did their fair share of raping, it was mostly the follow-on troops who did the worst of it. It also appears to have occurred in spates. Whenever a unit was moved into an area, it would engage in a initial orgy of looting and raping. Such activity would rather quickly subside until the old unit moved on and a new one moved in, then the process began again.

Finally, while it is undeniable that Soviet Officers took no steps to stop the raping, this did not [i]cause the problem, it merely made it worst.

Nope. I see a good looking, young, intelligent, confident ambitious person looking back. Why do you ask?

I have all kinds of confidence in you. Think about it.

I don't believe you thought wiki was a fitting response... but, what the hell - look what a closer inspection reveals:

...founded on December 12, 1935, in part as a response to declining birth rates in Germany, in order to promote the policies of Nazi eugenics. The purpose of the programme was to provide incentives to encourage Germans, especially SS members, to have more children.

So - designed to promote eugenics, and not limited to SS officers.

...In 1939, membership stood at 8,000 , of which 3,500 were SS leaders with mandatory membership...

So - neither specific to the SS in theory, nor in practise.

...the programme accepted unmarried women who were either pregnant or had already given birth and were in need of aid, provided that both the woman and the father of the child were racially valuable. Later such facilities also served as temporary homes, orphanages and as an adoption service. When dealing with non-SS members, parents and children were usually examined by SS doctors before admittance.

So - marriage was ultimately irrelevent, so long as the child was of the right 'race'. And non-SS members could be admitted - based on racial purity.

If you'd actually known what you were talking about... or even just read to the end of the article, you'd have seen it pretty much ends with the conclusion:

...Many Lebensborn children were born to unwed mothers...


You are confusing the Nazi party propaganda about Aryan families, with the realities of what Lebensborn actually did. Aryan soldiers were encouraged to reproduce on acceptable women. Marriage, family, stability... even 'consent' - none of those things are implicit in the reality.

*snip*
You just spent all that finger-energy arguing semantics. My point was it had nothing to do with the rapes being discussed as part of the war between Nazi and Soviet soldiers.

Doesnt surprise me...and it needs to be said...is this going to be released in America?

Afterall, I think Stalin's just as bad, if not worse than Hitler...

I don't know the extent of the Lebensborn program, although there were likely far more than two million rapes on the Eastern Front alone. Of course, in most cases they simply murdered entire families instead...

Source?

I think that is unlikely. German army was quite disciplined and the german army had certain racist attitudes against slavs which prohibited mixing.

Bear in mind tho, the US army had also racist policies then which prohibited mixing of whites and blacks...

Bear in mind tho, the US army had also racist policies then which prohibited mixing of whites and blacks...
Indeed, sometimes to ridiculous extremes. During the occupation of Japan, the Japanese set up comfort stations for American troops to, ah, relax (yes, they were almost exactly the same as the comfort stations used by the Imperial Japanese troops and run by the same folks). These stations, filled with Japanese women who had been told that they were volunteering to sacrifice their bodies to keep their married sisters from being raped by US troops, was overlooked with a wink and a nod by SCAP, until someone noticed that Blacks and Whites were screwing together in the same area and a directive to segregate the brothels went out.

Before that, BTW, segregation by race had been unknown in Japan.

Source?

I think that is unlikely. German army was quite disciplined and the german army had certain racist attitudes against slavs which prohibited mixing.


I must have missed the part were rape is about breeding.

Besides, the german army didnt universally have these racist attitudes. Individual troops and officers may not have had any issues with slavs (aside from viewing them as fun to rape).


So it is likely.

Before that, BTW, segregation by race had been unknown in Japan.

This is somewhat ridiculous to say. If there wasn't segregation in Japan it's because there was no different races. Even today half of the people there are highly racially biased, now that foreigners actually exist there.

You just spent all that finger-energy arguing semantics.


If, by 'arguing semantics' you mean 'showing that your statement was ridiculous naive bullshit from start to finish', then yes - I spent my energy 'arguing semantics'.

;)


My point was it had nothing to do with the rapes being discussed as part of the war between Nazi and Soviet soldiers.

Which isn't what you said, and neither is it true.

It doesn't figure strongly in why Russian soldiers raped German women, but it does figure in why German soldiers raped women of other nationalities.

I do...the Lebensborn program wasn't about rape

It might have been called statutory rape today. Also, it's doubtful the bulk of those women went in on their own accord.

And yes, it was generally not about marriage whatsoever.

This is somewhat ridiculous to say. If there wasn't segregation in Japan it's because there was no different races. Even today half of the people there are highly racially biased, now that foreigners actually exist there.
Er... No. No, you are very mistaken in that regard.

There have been different races in Japan for quite some time now. Try from pre-recorded history on.

Throughout their history, the Japanese had (kinda) segregated by class, and after opening back up to the West, it segregate by nationality, but any venue that catered to foreigners did not segregate by race.

Thanks to the SCAP directive though, many of the bars and other play places started to segregate.

Not knowing anything about the subject really, even after reading the article (which seemed vague on a few points), I think it would be interesting. Unsurprising that little attention has been paid to it. A good-bad dichotomy is much easier for many people to understand and accept than the idea that there are very few true heroes or villains, that morality is subjective and circumstantial, and that ordinarily decent people do bad things, and vice-versa.

I remember getting into an argument with a Jewish classmate in junior high about the war. I dared to make the claim that not all--not even the majority--of Germans during the war were evil Jew-haters. My great uncle was a German soldier (which too many people interpret as "Nazi"). He fought because his country was at war. He didn't hate Jews (in fact, he married one later). This was apparently too much for my classmate, who blew up, yelled all the facts I already knew about the Holocaust, and wouldn't speak to me for days.

Hm, well my great uncle was nearly dead when the Russians liberated Auchwitz... In all honesty, I feel little sympathy for the Germans because Hitler would never have come to power if the German people didn't support him, directly or indirectly... Only after the Allies defeated the Nazis did they show any visable "guilt." Do you honestly think the Holocaust was the first mass slaughter of Jews in Europe? Forgive us for not having a very favorable disposition towards people who have traditionally treated us like dirt.

I, personally, bare no ill will against the German people today (Just to clarify for all you Germans out there)... But tyranny feeds of silence and the German people were as silent as lambs, save a few like Dietrich Bonhoffer.

But just to make a note, the Holocaust is just something you do not bring up in the company of a lot of Jews. (Notice, I said "a lot," not all... I don't like to speak for everyone.) It's like Roman Catholics talking about the Crusades with Muslims, it's an extremely touchy subject... It's worse than talking about economics, politics, or religion at a formal dinner.

Er... No. No, you are very mistaken in that regard.

No, I'm quite correct.

There have been different races in Japan for quite some time now.

Which ones?

Thanks to the SCAP directive though, many of the bars and other play places started to segregate.

Ok... The real point, I wasn't talking specifically about institutionalized segregation. I have no idea where you're getting this stuff that different races have lived there "for some time now"; I was speaking historically, esp. in proportion to the age of the country, in which case your statement is clearly false. It's a commonly known historical fact that Japan was highly isolationist until it was forced to open to trade around the 19th century virtually by force. And there was no need for institutionalized segregation in Japan because it's been just Japanese people for the longest time, but the attitudes are present.

I missed this one

[story that went along with pic]
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/3c/Lebensborn-image.jpg


I guess History Channel was lying and this wikiwhatever is right.

*SNIP*
You didn't prove anything. Lebensborn has zero to do with the rapes of World War II. Prove it does.
It might have been called statutory rape today. Also, it's doubtful the bulk of those women went in on their own accord.

And yes, it was generally not about marriage whatsoever.
The Lebensborn program had nothing to do with statutory rape.
I missed this one


I guess History Channel was lying and this wikiwhatever is right.
I don't know about lying...it's just that many sources were incorrect on the nature of the Lebensborn program. It has zero to do with rape, that must be noted. There is enough factual evil in the Nazi Regime to not need to make up more:

The purpose of the programme was to provide incentives to encourage Germans, especially SS members, to have more children.

On September 13, 1936, Himmler wrote the following to members of SS[2]:

The organization "Lebensborn e. V." serves the SS leaders in the selection and adoption of qualified children. The organisation "Lebensborn e. V." is under my personal direction, is part of the race and settlement central bureau of the SS, and has the following obligations:

(1) aid for racially and biologically-hereditarily valuable families
(2) the accommodation of racially and biologically-hereditarily valuable mothers in appropriate homes, etc.
(3) care of the children of such families
(4) care of the mothers
It is the honourable duty of all leaders of the central bureau to become members of the organisation "Lebensborn e. V.". The application for admission must be filed prior to 23/9/1936.
Himmler's effort to secure a racially pure Greater Germany, the fact that Lebensborn was one of Himmler's race programmes and sloppy journalism on the subject in the early years after the war led to false assumptions about the programme. The main misconception was that the programme involved supervised or even coercive selective breeding. This was not the case. Yet the programme did aim to promote the growth of Aryan populations, though encouraging relationships between German soldiers and "Nordic" women in occupied countries, and access to Lebensborn was restricted in line with the eugenic and racial policies of Nazism, which could logically be referred to as supervised and/or coercive selective breeding. Until the last days of the war, the mothers and the children at maternity homes got the best treatment available, including food, even though many others in the area were starving. Because of this, once the war ended many townspeople turned on the women, beating them, cutting off their hair, and running them out of the community.

The first stories reporting that Lebensborn was a coercive breeding programme can be found in the German magazine Revue, which ran a series on the subject in the 1950s. On January 13, 1961, the German film Der Lebensborn (also known as Ordered to Love (US) and Fountain of Life (International)), produced by Artur Brauner, was released, later to gain worldwide circulation. The film purported that young girls were forced to mate in Nazi camps.[6] In 1986, a CBS drama series made the less exaggerated but nonetheless incorrect claim that Lebensborn involved supervised selective mating:

CBS Drama Explores Nazis' Plan For A `Master Race, The Seattle Times - October 19, 1986
Of all the many terrible aspects of the Nazi regime, one of the least familiar was the party's plan to create a Master Race through lebensborn. This was a programme intended to mate the most Aryan of German girls with the most Aryan of S.S. members.

No, I'm quite correct.
No, you are very wrong.

Which ones?
Ainu, who were present on the islands when the Japanese first showed up in Japan. You also had, in various pockets depending on the location, Korean and Chinese settlers along with (possible, it's still be argued about a lot) Russian settlers up in the northern islands around Hokkaido.

Ok... The real point, I wasn't talking specifically about institutionalized segregation. I have no idea where you're getting this stuff that different races have lived there "for some time now"; I was speaking historically, esp. in proportion to the age of the country, in which case your statement is clearly false. It's a commonly known historical fact that Japan was highly isolationist until it was forced to open to trade around the 19th century virtually by force.
Common knowledge fails a lot. Japan has been open at various points in time in its long history with missions being traded back and forth between China and the Korean kingdoms for centuries. It also had, during the Sengoku period, English, Dutch, Spanish, Portuguese, and other visitors. In fact, it had healthy trade with Europeans for almost a century. What you are speaking of happened during the Edo Era, the sakoku edits. However, it should be noted that sakoku applied ONLY to the Western world and the Japanese themselves. There was still a large amount of trade and visiting between China, the Koreans, and Japan. And, even with the bulk of the Europeans excluded, the Dutch were STILL allowed in, though they were confined to an enclave in Nagasaki except for a "processional" up to Edo Castle every so often.

So, yes, there have been other races in Japan for their history.

And there was no need for institutionalized segregation in Japan because it's been just Japanese people for the longest time, but the attitudes are present.
Well, I've just shown you that you are very wrong about it just being the Japanese, and the attitudes were a gift of the occupation.

Actually, it's rather hard to say that Japan has racial attitudes because what it does have is some xenophobia (lumping every foreigner together) [kinda] along with some stereotypes that have been acquired through consumption of mass media from other countries. My fellow gaijin in Japan have reported a wide range of experiences depending on their race, but a lot of it comes from simple ignorance in most cases. It's rare to find actual racial hatred in Japan.

You didn't prove anything. Lebensborn has zero to do with the rapes of World War II. Prove it does.

Circular logic. Some random pastings without a single contemporary reference of authority don't prove anything either.

The evidence I've read about very clearly points to at the very least talk about breeding ground plans without regard to the wish of the participants, and to any alleged victims generally never talking about it afterward. Lebensborn is nothing but a name in retrospect, even you imply this yourself. What you're not implying or trying to ignore is the fact that German people weren't necessarily in agreement with the nazis; of course not, that's the definition of fasicm. Lebensborn doesn't encompass the whole phenomenon, but in the end we probably can never know the actual truth. I said the numbers can't be known at my first post here, but if you think you're certain of the truth just because you are and some random text, that's mere belief. I never said I was certain, that would be absurd. But the evidence is there.

The Lebensborn program had nothing to do with statutory rape.

Then forget about Lebensborn. I wasn't the one who brought it up. What we would consider underage today were girls used, if not in Lebensborn then similar circumstances. But of course, it was a different time and place and it's likely nobody really cared about the age thing as much.

I don't know about lying...it's just that many sources were incorrect on the nature of the Lebensborn program. It has zero to do with rape, that must be noted. There is enough factual evil in the Nazi Regime to not need to make up more:

Incorrect and the truth based on what? Seems like from more of the same as what's incorrect, and that's if you assume I'm asserting some kind of certainty of numbers here. Like I said, the evidence is there, written records show nazi leaders seemingly planning it at least, and even within Lebensborn there is no clear evidence of what actually happened, just retrospect. By your logic not even the death camps could be proven, and many argue they never happened.

No, you are very wrong.


Ainu, who were present on the islands when the Japanese first showed up in Japan. You also had, in various pockets depending on the location, Korean and Chinese settlers

All Asian. Nobody with common sense would argue that that is on the same vein as racial tensions between something like black and white.

along with (possible, it's still be argued about a lot) Russian

Argued a lot? You don't say.

Common knowledge fails a lot.

Sure, and cherry picked revisionism succeeds?

Japan has been open at various points in time in its long history with missions being traded back and forth between China and the Korean kingdoms for centuries.

All Asian, and the trade was rudimentary.

It also had, during the Sengoku period, English, Dutch, Spanish, Portuguese, and other visitors.

Fringe trade doesn't mean intermingling by a long shot. And throwing around historical terms in the face of the well-known fact that Japan imposed isolationism on itself until the 19th century doesn't mean anything to me and is beside the point I'm making.

In fact, it had healthy trade with Europeans for almost a century. What you are speaking of happened during the Edo Era, the sakoku edits.

No, the end of the Edo era, the Meiji Restoration, when the outside world inched in virtually by force. And throwing around things like "sakoku edits" like it means something here is very random, borderline trolling. I'm not stupid, you know, and all this stuff can be looked up. None of what you try to present as reasons why my actual point is wrong are even in the same zipcode of hitting their mark.

So, yes, there have been other races in Japan for their history.

We have concluded that it was really just other Asians mixing in (never mind trying to equate this with "trade"), with even today other races like white and black being rare, and actually introduced very recently in the slightest significance and the larger history. It is only natural that a racially isolated society would have certain attitudes. Your denials and strange apologizing don't hold much water. I have no idea who you're trying to convince. I doubt anyone is even listening, to be honest.

Well, I've just shown you that you are very wrong about it just being the Japanese, and the attitudes were a gift of the occupation.

You've done nothing of the sort, and blaming the occupation could be a valid argument, but to completely blame the social attitude on it is as ridiculous as they come, from my perspective, and I'm sure there's many others who would agree. Keep in mind I'm not picking on Japan, I'm making a point about human nature and refuting that ridiculous implied point that Japanese are superior in racial harmony just because they are.

Actually, it's rather hard to say that Japan has racial attitudes because what it does have is some xenophobia

Duh. This is basically all I'm saying. They're xenophobic towards other Asians, and they're certainly not going to miss non-Asians from a crowd.

Lastly, blaming the media is circular logic. Even the media anywhere are made of people and reflect their attitudes.

All Asian. Nobody with common sense would argue that that is on the same vein as racial tensions between something like black and white.
You REALLY don't know Japanese history or culture at all, do you? Not to mention that saying "Asian" means nothing as I can point out a such a wide range of Asians that you would be hard pressed to call them of the same race.

BTW, the Ainu look a whole hell of a lot different from the Japanese. Just mentioning that.

Argued a lot? You don't say.
Yes, there is a lot of historical debate about just how much intermingling went on between Japanese settlers and Russian settlers in the Northern Territories and just how much this has had a genetic influence within Hokkaido.

Sure, and cherry picked revisionism succeeds?
Cherry picked my ass. Try from studies conducted by the best men in the field.

All Asian, and the trade was rudimentary.
Bull, that trade was rather spectacular in scope. So many new ideas flooded Japan during some of those times that the whole of the culture changed. Again, you obviously know not about what you speak.

Fringe trade doesn't mean intermingling by a long shot. And throwing around historical terms in the face of the well-known fact that Japan imposed isolationism on itself until the 19th century doesn't mean anything to me and is beside the point I'm making.
The "well known fact" is wrong. Japan isolated itself from the WEST. And the WEST is not the REST of the world, sorry, but it is not. Nor was the trade a fringe trade. The Dutch did very well for the first few centuries after the isolation was imposed. But, in any case, yes, there was intermingling going on through that time period. The Koreans were there, so were the Chinese. Both of them are not the same as the Japanese. Until the closure, large trading ports had been opened and called upon by western ships, a number of them.

No, the end of the Edo era, the Meiji Restoration, when the outside world inched in virtually by force. And throwing around things like "sakoku edits" like it means something here is very random, borderline trolling. I'm not stupid, you know, and all this stuff can be looked up. None of what you try to present as reasons why my actual point is wrong are even in the same zipcode of hitting their mark.
Then look up http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanban_trade_period then. Opps, looks like there was some brisk stuff going on. And no, using the proper terms is not borderline trolling. Standing there and going "Nu-uh! Nu-uh! We ALL know this to be wrong" however...

The point is, that no, Japan has never been a homogeneous society, no matter HOW many times it tries to tell itself that it has been.

We have concluded that it was really just other Asians mixing in (never mind trying to equate this with "trade"),
Oh, so just other Asians. So, the Norman invasion of England had no impact because it was just other Europeans. :rolleyes:

with even today other races like white and black being rare, and actually introduced very recently in the slightest significance and the larger history. It is only natural that a racially isolated society would have certain attitudes. Your denials and strange apologizing don't hold much water. I have no idea who you're trying to convince. I doubt anyone is even listening, to be honest.
And you really don't know what you're talking about.

You've done nothing of the sort, and blaming the occupation could be a valid argument, but to completely blame the social attitude on it is as ridiculous as they come, from my perspective, and I'm sure there's many others who would agree. Keep in mind I'm not picking on Japan, I'm making a point about human nature and refuting that ridiculous implied point that Japanese are superior in racial harmony just because they are.
Oh? Did I make that point? How odd, I do not remember saying that. Perhaps you can address my actual words and not put them in my mouth. I said nothing about how the Japanese are somehow better, I just noted that until the post WWII occupation, there was no racial segregation in Japan. The fact that it came around was a direct, traceable action, of SCAP.

Lastly, blaming the media is circular logic. Even the media anywhere are made of people and reflect their attitudes.
Of course! That's why the American media reflects the views of the Japanese! How foolish of me not to realize this at all! Hollywood JUST wants to cater to the Japanese! That's why all those attitudes in FOREIGN media here in Japan are EXACTLY what is already in Japan. :rolleyes:

You didn't prove anything. Lebensborn has zero to do with the rapes of World War II. Prove it does.


Read your own sources. I had assumed we were down to the point where you were either just incredibly naive, or really knew fuck-all about the subject.

Thanks for ruling out naive.

Doesnt surprise me...and it needs to be said...is this going to be released in America?

Afterall, I think Stalin's just as bad, if not worse than Hitler...
You and me too!

I must have missed the part were rape is about breeding.

Besides, the german army didnt universally have these racist attitudes. Individual troops and officers may not have had any issues with slavs (aside from viewing them as fun to rape).


So it is likely.
My country was occupied by the axis powers for years,in all that time no rapes took place and the official explanation was (by translators) that the german army abided by their military code and was not allowed to 'dilute' the aryan race.On the other hand communist 'liberation' troops far north had their fun with villages they occupied,in Yugoslavia it was much worse,with the communist leader Tito issuing a complaint to Stalin about the behavior of communist troops.Stalin's response was 'What is the problem if a soldier who has survived thousands of miles of war,blood and iron has some fun?'

Hm, well my great uncle was nearly dead when the Russians liberated Auchwitz... In all honesty, I feel little sympathy for the Germans because Hitler would never have come to power if the German people didn't support him, directly or indirectly... Only after the Allies defeated the Nazis did they show any visable "guilt." Do you honestly think the Holocaust was the first mass slaughter of Jews in Europe? Forgive us for not having a very favorable disposition towards people who have traditionally treated us like dirt.

I, personally, bare no ill will against the German people today (Just to clarify for all you Germans out there)... But tyranny feeds of silence and the German people were as silent as lambs, save a few like Dietrich Bonhoffer.

But just to make a note, the Holocaust is just something you do not bring up in the company of a lot of Jews. (Notice, I said "a lot," not all... I don't like to speak for everyone.) It's like Roman Catholics talking about the Crusades with Muslims, it's an extremely touchy subject... It's worse than talking about economics, politics, or religion at a formal dinner.
You're right that persecution of Jews in Europe did not start with SS death camps,both tsarist and communist Russia (among other countries) carried out systematic pogroms,but Germany is the easy target to pick,many allied countries did nothing to facilitate the exodus of the Jews or stop Hitler and Stalin from assuming control.
PS Muslims have some nerve if they dare refer to the Crusades still,muslim atrocities on their occupied countries surpass any else!

Source?

I think that is unlikely. German army was quite disciplined and the german army had certain racist attitudes against slavs which prohibited mixing.So much for your The Wehrmacht was quite disciplined argument. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_crimes_of_the_Wehrmacht#Mass_rapes) Do note the various numbers indicating independent sources before crying foul for using wikipedia.

Read your own sources. I had assumed we were down to the point where you were either just incredibly naive, or really knew fuck-all about the subject.

Thanks for ruling out naive.
You didn't prove anything. Lebensborn has zero to do with the rapes of World War II. Prove it does.
But the evidence is there.
That the Lebensborn program had to do with rape? Where? Show me.


Then forget about Lebensborn.
Fine. I'm not claiming the Wehrmacht soldiers didn't rape anyone..but I'm saying the Lebensborn program had nothing to do with rape...there is a difference.


Incorrect and the truth based on what? Seems like from more of the same as what's incorrect, and that's if you assume I'm asserting some kind of certainty of numbers here. Like I said, the evidence is there, written records show nazi leaders seemingly planning it at least, and even within Lebensborn there is no clear evidence of what actually happened, just retrospect. By your logic not even the death camps could be proven, and many argue they never happened.
Written records showing what? That the Nazis called for the rape in the Lebensborn program? There is clear logic about what happend..it wasn't a secret, Lebensborn. This has nothing to do with the holocaust....the death camps are proven...as is the Lebensborn program...what I'm saying is that the rapes of WWII had nothing to do with the Lebensborn.

You didn't prove anything.


You said that Lebensborn was a marriage club for SS officers. I showed you - using your own source, mind, that's the best bit - that that argument was horseshit. And not just horseshit, but blindingly obvious horseshit, that was extensively refuted even in the source you presented - but clearly didn't read.


That the Lebensborn program had to do with rape? Where? Show me.


Which part of 'encouraging fathering children' of German soldiers, whilst not actually necessitating that the mothers be married to the soldiers, living with the soldiers, or even consenting to the act, is it that confuses you?

So much for your The Wehrmacht was quite disciplined argument. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_crimes_of_the_Wehrmacht#Mass_rapes) Do note the various numbers indicating independent sources before crying foul for using wikipedia.

Thanks, I was looking for that. And, of course, it's also true that the STAVKA did impose discipline on their troops ending the mass rapes, something the OKW never did because it either was kept ignorant by the Nazi party or tacitly condoned it. That being said, the Soviet troops that committed those crimes deserve to be punished for them as much as any German soldier.

My country was occupied by the axis powers for years,in all that time no rapes took place and the official explanation was (by translators) that the german army abided by their military code and was not allowed to 'dilute' the aryan race.On the other hand communist 'liberation' troops far north had their fun with villages they occupied,in Yugoslavia it was much worse,with the communist leader Tito issuing a complaint to Stalin about the behavior of communist troops.Stalin's response was 'What is the problem if a soldier who has survived thousands of miles of war,blood and iron has some fun?'

So if Nazi officers said it, it must be true.

And no rapes took place? Really? Want to back that up? Because there is vas evidence that shows your full of shit.

So much for your The Wehrmacht was quite disciplined argument. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_crimes_of_the_Wehrmacht#Mass_rapes) Do note the various numbers indicating independent sources before crying foul for using wikipedia.

Oh I'm sure there were rapist German soldiers. But what I was wondering if it had been as extensive as the Soviet rapes. Or was it even close? When I google it (German/Wehrmacht rapes), not much is coming up. When I google soviet/red army rapes, things like this comes up:

"'They raped every German female from eight to 80'"
http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2002/may/01/news.features11

My country was occupied by the axis powers for years,in all that time no rapes took place and the official explanation was (by translators) that the german army abided by their military code and was not allowed to 'dilute' the aryan race.On the other hand communist 'liberation' troops far north had their fun with villages they occupied,in Yugoslavia it was much worse,with the communist leader Tito issuing a complaint to Stalin about the behavior of communist troops.Stalin's response was 'What is the problem if a soldier who has survived thousands of miles of war,blood and iron has some fun?'

Where u from? From your nick, I see that you are a Dune (the book) fan btw. Cool :P

Oh I'm sure there were rapist German soldiers. But what I was wondering if it had been as extensive as the Soviet rapes. Or was it even close? When I google it (German/Wehrmacht rapes), not much is coming up. When I google soviet/red army rapes, things like this comes up:

"'They raped every German female from eight to 80'"
http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2002/may/01/news.features11


I can tell you why.

We still demonize the Russians. We stopped demonizing the Germans.

While the Germans were never given exclusive orders to "go nuts", what they did to the Soviets as they rolled through is unforgivable, rape or no rape. There are other atrocities that can be committed, after all.

I can tell you why.

We still demonize the Russians. We stopped demonizing the Germans.

While the Germans were never given exclusive orders to "go nuts", what they did to the Soviets as they rolled through is unforgivable, rape or no rape. There are other atrocities that can be committed, after all.

Oh I think Germans are still demonized. And yes, Germans did many atrocities but they apologized & admitted their mistakes, paid reperations, etc while Russians still got mad when that Baltic country removed their Soviet soldier monument. And they are still very proud with their mass rapist Soviet army. Let alone any kinda apology or reperations. I think they didnt even say sorry to Ukraine for starving millions.

Thats the injustice, IMHO.

And another differece, Soviets were the victors after WW2. Germany got fucked througly tho:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Germany_since_1945

['you really don't know what you're talking about']
['you really don't know what you're talking about']
['you really don't know what you're talking about']
['you really don't know what you're talking about']
['you really don't know what you're talking about']


Great, thanks for playing.

Fine. I'm not claiming the Wehrmacht soldiers didn't rape anyone..but I'm saying the Lebensborn program had nothing to do with rape...there is a difference.

And the difference is negligible to me. If people were forced or pressured to do things, in this context I could call it rape. You can call it whatever you want.

Written records showing what?

That some nazi leaders were calling for breeding grounds. And it was implied many participants wouldn't be asked for their opinion, as was typical with the regime. And again, you focus on Lebensborn, I am speaking more broadly.

Oh I'm sure there were rapist German soldiers. But what I was wondering if it had been as extensive as the Soviet rapes. Or was it even close? When I google it (German/Wehrmacht rapes), not much is coming up. When I google soviet/red army rapes, things like this comes up:

"'They raped every German female from eight to 80'"
http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2002/may/01/news.features11
It's hard to tell with the Germans, seeing as it was common practice to shoot the women they raped as well. Prevented the disliked "mixing of races" in a cynical manner.
Where u from? From your nick, I see that you are a Dune (the book) fan btw. Cool :POr they're copying Moderator/Admin usernames.

On the German invasion marching through the Soviet lands they did some pretty bad things themselves. However that is one of the problems with war, while old men sit aound and quarrel about it, the citizens and innocent people are the ones getting hurt. The Russians and Polish raped the German women but the Germans destroyed everything the Russians had. These things are just one big act of revenge against another. Although after I heard what the Russians and Poles did I lost my pride in my Polish ancestry.