Hummel & Flakpanzer Question (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter erich
- Start date
Wraith
Major
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2006
- Messages
- 6,777
LOL Pandagen.
At least it's a tanker not a merchant banker
God we Brits can be juvenile in our humour.
It's what makes us so endearing.
panda1gen
Lieutenant Colonel
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2005
- Messages
- 7,164
panda1gen
Lieutenant Colonel
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2005
- Messages
- 7,164
Louis Badolato
Lieutenant General
- Joined
- Apr 25, 2005
- Messages
- 18,124
That's not a real argument. Argument is the exposition of ideas. You can just say no it isn't to everything I say! Besides, that was never an hour!
Louis Badolato
Lieutenant General
- Joined
- Apr 25, 2005
- Messages
- 18,124
Aha! You fell for it! You weren't expecting my clever retort, but then, nobody ever expects the Inquisition!
panda1gen
Lieutenant Colonel
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2005
- Messages
- 7,164
Wraith
Major
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2006
- Messages
- 6,777
Whatever you've been drinking Panda i'll have some of that.
It'll be that Dorset Scrumpy. Does wonders for cohesive arguements.
OzDigger
Colonel
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2006
- Messages
- 8,515
That was close, we nearly kept to the thread there for a while
I'll refer you guys to the following extracts from the link Panzer (Rick) supplied:
In summary, it can be said that there is no evidence to support the idea of a premeditated massacre--particularly in view of the fact that over half the Americans in the field survived both the main shooting and the administration of coup de grâce shots by the Germans who entered the field.
I guess I started this thread off track when I suggested that it wasn't a massacre because it wasn't premeditated and so many people survived. And if you refer to the post by Andy his definition of a masscare is that no one survives, which is a common definition you will find.
So how do we explain the shootings at the Baugnez crossroads on December 17, 1944? There seem to be only two reasonable explanations. The first is that it started in response to a specific escape attempt. Someone saw two or three Americans make the break described in a sworn statement made to Lieutenant Schumacker in October 1945; that person then opened fire and this in turn caused a commotion in the field as some of the prisoners tried to push through their comrades to the west. But this movement, and the fact that at least one and probably two Americans had by then escaped from the field, only exacerbated the situation, and other Germans in the vicinity then fired. Even if this theory is accepted, however, it in no way excuses the deliberate killing of wounded prisoners by those Germans who then entered the field.
If we want to play the blame game after all these years I feel we should blame those few American soldiers that tried to escape causing the tragic over reaction by the Germans.
Some individuals on all sides did some terrible and stupid things during WWII and we should all acknowledge that so that we can learn and move on. Such deeds are made worse when a leader, government and or regime encourages them. If we don't learn we will no doubt be forced to revisit the same issues - over and over again.
I'll refer you guys to the following extracts from the link Panzer (Rick) supplied:
In summary, it can be said that there is no evidence to support the idea of a premeditated massacre--particularly in view of the fact that over half the Americans in the field survived both the main shooting and the administration of coup de grâce shots by the Germans who entered the field.
I guess I started this thread off track when I suggested that it wasn't a massacre because it wasn't premeditated and so many people survived. And if you refer to the post by Andy his definition of a masscare is that no one survives, which is a common definition you will find.
So how do we explain the shootings at the Baugnez crossroads on December 17, 1944? There seem to be only two reasonable explanations. The first is that it started in response to a specific escape attempt. Someone saw two or three Americans make the break described in a sworn statement made to Lieutenant Schumacker in October 1945; that person then opened fire and this in turn caused a commotion in the field as some of the prisoners tried to push through their comrades to the west. But this movement, and the fact that at least one and probably two Americans had by then escaped from the field, only exacerbated the situation, and other Germans in the vicinity then fired. Even if this theory is accepted, however, it in no way excuses the deliberate killing of wounded prisoners by those Germans who then entered the field.
If we want to play the blame game after all these years I feel we should blame those few American soldiers that tried to escape causing the tragic over reaction by the Germans.
Some individuals on all sides did some terrible and stupid things during WWII and we should all acknowledge that so that we can learn and move on. Such deeds are made worse when a leader, government and or regime encourages them. If we don't learn we will no doubt be forced to revisit the same issues - over and over again.