The Coup (of thinking I could stay away from this game for even three days)

[Montenegro]

June '43:

Hitler nervously ponders the "salient" on the map of the Kursk-Orel sector at OKH spotting with tense glee the northern and southern perimeters. With much fanfare, he declares "here is the Red Army's Waterloo!" Model, Manstein, and Deitrich all take turns sizing up this decisive moment. Who will be the Brutus of this taxed cadre? With singular bravado, Deitrich declares "Mein Fuhrer, sie sind kaputt."

At that moment, Guderian enters staff quarters and announces that by decree of the Wermacht and the German people, the Fuher is under arrest for treason against the Reich. Forthwith, he will be taken to Smolensk and placed under house arrest in a former dacha of Beria. And in a brief moment of pleasure, he adds "Your friends are dead."

Guderian joins the others and announces that he will be taking command of 4th Army and has devised a way to knock Ivan good and hard. In a matter of one day, he draws out the plan for the greatest mobile defense and grinding advance of the struggle in the East. He assures his partners that matters in the West have been taken care of and all parties are privvy and in full consent.

Just won the '43 scenario (Dec '44) capturing Stalingrad, Moscow, and Lenningrad in order from last to first. Of course, this Stalin AI does no more for me, but I will endure another winter and work on my retreat and defense. I look forward to being schooled either way by human competition.


Regards and think of all who have served, including my Grandfather Harry Selin who was an arty man at the Buldge,

Montenegro

[Mark_BookGuy]

Dream on that a souless coward like Guderian would ever doing anything like this. He was as good a Nazi as anyone, actively went along with the Fuhrer, and didn't have the hair on his balls to actually do anything to help get Germany out of the war. He was as morally bankrupt as the rest of the army and was happy to trod all over Europe.

The only officer I can think of that consistently opposed Hitler from the start was Beck. It was a tragedy that the military promoted a "no politics" policy from the 1920s. Perhaps Germany needed to get the militarism beat out of themselves once and for all. Fortunately, men like Guderian can no longer be a part of the post-war German army.

[Preuss]

Such strong words from someone who wasn't there and can therefor understand nothing of why Guderian, or any other German general behaved as they did. I'm waitning for the same words to be said of Rommel or many other Axis officers who didn't act against Hitler, but were viewed as 'stand up' men by their opponents.

[Mark_BookGuy]

Originally posted by Preuss
Such strong words from someone who wasn't there and can therefor understand nothing of why Guderian, or any other German general behaved as they did. I'm waitning for the same words to be said of Rommel or many other Axis officers who didn't act against Hitler, but were viewed as 'stand up' men by their opponents.

Are you kidding? I suppose you've had a few cups of coffee with Guderian and Rommel to discuss this with them?? Maybe a good therapy session together?

The Nuremburg trials showed up these men for what they were. They were professional officers who willingly sided with the Nazis from the beginning. They sold their souls for personal gain and willingly participated in the greatest assaults on Europe since the Middle Ages. They were cowards because they should have known better and should have acted. No one forced them to take the oath to Hitler. How many quit rather than take out Poland, Belgium, Norway, France, Yugoslavia, Greece, the Netherlands, and let alone the Soviet Union or ethnic minorities and Jews? Their hands were thoroughly bloody with civilian massacres and the Holocaust. How many refused their marshal's batons? These men fought to make Nazi success even more palable. Millions died -- including their own countrymen -- because they were lackeys. They whored themselves to Hitler. The camps were full of Germans who dared opposed Hitler. How many were officers? I'm sorry if you don't recognize real courage.

[Preuss]

Although we now see imperialism as a bad thing, how many other's took the same road before them? How many heroes of the American West? The British Empire? All the empires before that? Who whored themselves to divest the native American of their lands so you could live there?
Joining a party...even the Nazi party...didn't automatically make them killers. Many people have joined parties long before the evil became apparent. And many for some personal gain...some for purely ideological reasons.
Many German generals of the time were monarchists. The Weimar republic...or republic in general was an unpreferred form of government. It's easy to see why one strong character suited their needs. And most had a strong sense of duty. The American concept of 'the right to bear arms' and the American affinity for anybody revolting against the powers-that-be wasn't something they did.
Calling anybody that wages a war of aggression for their country a coward just doesn't make any sense.
I'm sure that many of them found the Nazi party they joined...or didn't...to grow into a huge monster none of them ever expected.
Churchill was planning to use the antrax virus against non-industrial targets in Germany. The whole RAF bomber command offensive was waged against civilians. I'm not saying all were innocent...but to brand them cowards...is just wrong.
If you're going to tar and feather...you should use a broader brush.
Why the vitriol against only German generals? What would you do if you found yourself in a totalitarian state? Move? Become an assassin? And, if you took the assassin's road...would you be willing to let your family suffer the consequences?
You don't understand their psyches, their histories, or their circumstances....the early decisions and later ramifications.

[Mark_BookGuy]

The generals knew exactly what they were getting with Hitler. And in their arrogance, they hoped to control him to their ends.

I guess Nuremberg means nothing to you. How many millions more needed to die before someone accepted the blame? No one doubts that many of these men were excellent generals with outstanding combat capabilities. But not only did they willingly go along with full-scale war, they went along with the mass murder of millions. Professional soldiers like Manstein not only knew what was going on, they signed orders permitting or promoting it.

Tens of thousands of German died opposing Hitler. Before July 20, 1944, how many were officers?

They were cowards because they knew what Nazism stood for and did nothing.

[czerpak]

Originally posted by Mark_BookGuy


The Nuremburg trials showed up these men for what they were.

Be honest - Nuremburg trials should be also held against some allied officers, but nobody was willing to trial winners.....

[Montenegro]

I was originally just documenting a bit of fantasy into the '43 game I was playing. Let us all know what the truths are/were and move on. Personally, I see no need to call out more people over this.

Czerpak---where am I sending my first turn to you??

Regards,

Montenegro

[Von Cone-on]

Guys sounds like things are getting a bit heated I'd have to be honest that mark_bookguy's your views on the culpability of german generals seem a bit simplistic I'm sure many thought they could do there best to win & end the war, some would have been motivated by glory, a lot would have been products of old school prussian militarism doing thier duty to the fatherland, some would have been cold blue eyed fanatics, some like "papa" Hausser directly disobeyed orders to save the lives of thier soldiers. you can't make sweeping statements about the intentions of them all. No sane person would deny the evil of nazism but does it necessarily mean all german generals were willing accomplices, fear of imprisonment, camps, execution, & fear of the tragedy at the end of the road hitler was leading them down must have played a part. Mark you come from a culture that splits every thing into B&W good vs evil when everything is really shades of grey. America has declared a lot of wars against countries for purely selfish aims & innocent people die in all wars Don't be so judgemental plenty of countries of the supposed good guys commited atrocities at othe times on an albiet smaller scale but where do you draw the line on what becomes a forgettable incident and what becomes a crime against humanity
Cheers Von Cone-on

[Ed Cogburn]

Originally posted by Von Cone-on
Guys sounds like things are getting a bit heated I'd have to be honest that mark_bookguy's your views on the culpability of german generals seem a bit simplistic I'm sure many thought they could do there best to win & end the war, some would have been motivated by glory, a lot would have been products of old school prussian militarism doing thier duty to the fatherland, some would have been cold blue eyed fanatics, some like "papa" Hausser directly disobeyed orders to save the lives of thier soldiers. you can't make sweeping statements about the intentions of them all. No sane person would deny the evil of nazism but does it necessarily mean all german generals were willing accomplices, fear of imprisonment, camps, execution, & fear of the tragedy at the end of the road hitler was leading them down must have played a part.

Absolutely. Agreed. Not all generals are as guilty as the executioners at the camps.

Mark you come from a culture that splits every thing into B&W good vs evil when everything is really shades of grey. America has declared a lot of wars against countries for purely selfish aims & innocent people die in all wars Don't be so judgemental plenty of countries of the supposed good guys commited atrocities at othe times on an albiet smaller scale but where do you draw the line on what becomes a forgettable incident and what becomes a crime against humanity?

Now what exactly is this for? Mark is close to right I think, a lot of high ranking German generals were culpable to one degree or another. They knew about the Holocaust, or they knew the war was lost by '43 but kept sending boys and old men to the front on Hitler's orders, or they knew of the brutality and mistreatment of conquered populations. Most were in a positon where they couldn't *avoid* knowing many of these things. Sure, the Allies did some bad things too, especially Stalin, who probably had more people killed directly or indirectly than Hitler. But you seem to imply here that Mark is "wrong" because of the country he comes from. What's worse, you're indirectly equating the horrible things the Alllies did with the horrible things the Germans did.


Well guess what, in my book the Holocaust dwarfs the incendiary bombings of Dresden or Tokyo, or the unrestricted submarine warfare applied to all Japanese shipping, military or civilian, or the horrific treatment of German POWs by the Soviets. The Holocaust was an industrial scale, well planned, highly efficient, highly organized, and horrifically executed mass murder machine. The large organization and substantial infrastructure the Germans set up for the killing of Jews was incredible. They even thought to collect the clothes for reuse and even to remove gold fillings before incineration. Stalin may have killed more, but nothing like the Holocaust has been seen on this Earth since maybe Ghengis Khan (but I don't think his mass murders were so efficiently organized). That does stand out above all the other ugly things that happened, and those that knew but did nothing about it are more culpable in my book precisely because of just how incomprehensible the Holocaust was.

Now if we want to have a debate about which German generals were or were not culpable, that's ok, but there should be 2 conditions. First, a person's country does not and should not matter in this argument. Just stick to the facts we know of about these generals and don't make simplistic assumptions about the logic or reasoning a person uses to come to his opinions. Yes, our culture has a tendency towards simplicity, aggravated by the media, but don't assume as you are that we're all idiots over here. A few of us may surprise you. Second, I hope no one here wants to claim any act by anyone in the war (or even combinations of acts for that matter) was just as bad as the Holocaust, because if you are putting these other atrocities at the same level as the Holocaust, then we sure as hell will have an argument over that.

[Mark_BookGuy]

Originally posted by Von Cone-on
Mark you come from a culture that splits every thing into B&W good vs evil when everything is really shades of grey. America has declared a lot of wars against countries for purely selfish aims & innocent people die in all wars Don't be so judgemental plenty of countries of the supposed good guys commited atrocities at othe times on an albiet smaller scale but where do you draw the line on what becomes a forgettable incident and what becomes a crime against humanity
Cheers Von Cone-on

On the contrary. At least we have the gumption to be able to face up to our mistakes and recognize we have more than enough blood on our hands. The world is sometimes gray, sometimes B&W.

Technically, we have declared war only against the Brits (1812), Mexico (1848), Spain (1898), Germany et al (1917), and Germany, Japan et al (1941). I guess impressment, the Lusitania, and the WTC were our fault too!

I think the policies established or clarified at Nuremberg are a good place to start. Some of the readers on this thread might want to actually read some of the transcripts. Telford Taylor's accounts are a very good place to start as well.

If you can't connect nazism and crimes against humanity, well.... no more needs be said.

Oh and by the way, what is the Aussie policy towards Abos?

[Muzrub]

They knew about the Holocaust, or they knew the war was lost by '43 but kept sending boys and old men to the front on Hitler's orders

The unconditional surrender conditions left Germany with little hope, but alot to fight for! The war had to be continued, how many more German soldiers would have entered into Soviet capativity, how many more German civilians would have been abondoned to the Soviets- not to mention other refugees from Eastern Europe.
After the unconditional surrender terms there was always going to be little hope for a peaceful conclusion to the war, it then become necessary for the war to be fought until the bitter end.
Nor does any of this take into the account the feeling of the front line soldier who believed he was doing his duty, who still believed that somehow Hitler would find a way out the mire. They still had faith, if not in National Socialism but Hitler himself.

[Mark_BookGuy]

Originally posted by Von Cone-on
Guys sounds like things are getting a bit heated I'd have to be honest that mark_bookguy's your views on the culpability of german generals seem a bit simplistic I'm sure many thought they could do there best to win & end the war, some would have been motivated by glory, a lot would have been products of old school prussian militarism doing thier duty to the fatherland, some would have been cold blue eyed fanatics, some like "papa" Hausser directly disobeyed orders to save the lives of thier soldiers. you can't make sweeping statements about the intentions of them all. No sane person would deny the evil of nazism but does it necessarily mean all german generals were willing accomplices, fear of imprisonment, camps, execution, & fear of the tragedy at the end of the road hitler was leading them down must have played a part. Cheers Von Cone-on

Many were more than willing accomplises, that's my point. In addition to the Nuremberg convictions, large numbers of German officers were found guilty of strictly military war crimes. I forget exactly how many were executed for war crimes, but I'm pretty sure it was in the thousands. (I'll have to look up the figures.) Many others, like Manstein, went to jail for a number of years. Some no doubt were sentenced out of victor's justice (Telford Taylor [US prosecutor] believes Doenitz got a raw deal) but most deserved their fate. How many need to be guilty before a pattern is established? Obviously not all general officers were guilty of crimes, and many fought for the reasons you describe. But large numbers of German civilians died fighting Nazism. Do we write off their sacrifice, and excuse those unwilling to match their courage?

[Muzrub]

Many were more than willing accomplises, that's my point. In addition to the Nuremberg convictions, large numbers of German officers were found guilty of strictly military war crimes.

Only 2,442 were convicted of any crimes out of at least 10 million serving officers + soldiers in Germany- thats .024%.

[Montenegro]

All

Well, I never intended to start anything here, although I am personally happy so many people on this board are in the know about history and some of the truly important finer points that are left out in good old 101. Funny how much we don't get until we read and dig, huh?

I'll go out on a limb and say this: I see blood on EVERYONES's hands for WW 2. I think what France and England did in the 30's with Hitler, when it was so clear and obvious what he was doing was a flagrant military build up, is beyond tragic. I think what the good old US did to boatloads of Jewish refugees, not immigrants, fleeing Germany in the latter 30's is a shame. I think that Stalin was and is the true embodiment of the theory of the lesser of two evils. The man killed more people than Pol Pot and Hitler combined, yet he was an ally out of necessity.

I also see how history always repeats itself and is fashioned by fanatics and lunatics who need validation or vindication of their twisted scope. Here's a fun little fact. The whole Eugenics movement that Nazi Germany was striving for was actually a semi-obscure movement in the US in the early part of the century, pre dating their truly dispicable actions. The Henry Ford's of the world were a plenty in this country until Japan bombed us. There was a sizeable, pro-German faction in this country pre 1941.

The greatest lie I think that was ever told was on the issue of the concentration camps. I find it terrribly insulting that in a world of espionage and intelligence throughout Europe from the 30's thr the war, on a scale that is probably only rivaled by 50's Cold War years and the present day, we are constantly given the prospect that no one knew. This I think is an insult and shame to all who had to indure those dark years of death and misery.

Well, I rant no more. I will say this, however. The US does step up to the plate so to speak when it counts. We have our skeletons, but when it comes right down to it, we are willing to talk the talk and walk the walk. Just ask the French, the English for starters. I find it amazing how much this country gets the grift in the world, yet the pundits keep cashing the checks.

Montenegro

[Mark_BookGuy]

Okay, I give:

what's a "52 oz can of whoop arse"?

[Montenegro]

Originally posted by Mark_BookGuy
Okay, I give:

what's a "52 oz can of whoop arse"?

Mark,

Some quasi urban reference to speaking or acting with intent. Plus, 6 extra ounces more than the normal 46. I usually use *** in lew of arse.

Montenegro

[Mark_BookGuy]

Originally posted by Muzrub


Only 2,442 were convicted of any crimes out of at least 10 million serving officers + soldiers in Germany- thats .024%.

Muzrub, do you have a citation for this info?

The National Archives 1999 Interim Report to Congress on the Nazi War Crimes Disclosure Act states that the Allies tried 21 Germans at Nuremberg. The Americans alone tried another 177 at Nuremberg, and over 1,700 at Dachau. The report does not give the numbers tried by the other Allies or actual convictions. The German courts found 3,600 guilty as "major offenders."
Denazification tribunals sentenced 600,000 to various punishments of whom 130,000 eventually got their jobs back.
Another source I found states that in the three Western zones 5,025 persons were convicted of war crimes of whom 806 were sentenced to death. 486 were actually executed or committed suicide.

Anyone have data on how many the Brits, French, or Russians convicted? As I recall the Brits and French were pretty heavy on the death sentences.

FYI, we hanged 720 Japanese as well.

A sad subject, is it not?:(

[davewolf]

There's a current exhibition about the crimes of the Wehrmacht 1941-1944 (http://www.verbrechen-der-wehrmacht.de/) in Germany. No exact overall figures online, but many other interesting exemplary individual treatments and very up-to-date.
Unfortunately only... Oooooops.... They have an english version too.

[Mark_BookGuy]

Originally posted by davewolf
There's a current exhibition about the crimes of the Wehrmacht 1941-1944 (http://www.verbrechen-der-wehrmacht.de/) in Germany. No exact overall figures online, but many other interesting exemplary individual treatments and very up-to-date.
Unfortunately only in german. But if you're interested in translation of any certain text, I'll do the best I can. At least I could translate the TOC first, if you want to see what's there.

There is an English version of the web exhibit. Look under "Publikationen" then "Katalog" then the link to English. (I always go looking for the bibliography first!) Hannes Heer of the Hamburg Institute of Social Research (sponsors of the exhibit) edited War of Extermination (New York: Berghahn Books, 2000) and he was a major player in revealing the army's involvement in the crimes of the Third Reich. It's a horrific read.

If I'm not mistaken, the exhibit came down once and is now back up. Thanks for the info on the web link!