Von Stauffenberg and the putch generals (1 Viewer)

[Poppo]

In films like " Valkirie" and in german politic celebrations, Von Stauffenberg is considered an almost ethic, moral figure against Hitler' s crimes. Actually , it is not really like this....Stauffenberg is a typical example, like Rommel and many other generals of the Whermacht military "caste". These people had been so glad when Hitler rearmed germany from the mid 30ies and promised them honours and power; glad also when Hitler killed Rhom and all the SA chiefs ( SA were strong enemies of german generals). They were also excited at the start of the war and finally most of them collaborated without the slight moral problem with SS and "einsatz gruppen" who exterminated a large part of civil population in the east..The problems started with war against Russia and especially when the war was going to be lost. Stauffenberg and other generals then wanted to kill Hitler, and give the power to....Themselves! Make peace and save the most conquerred lands they had got. They did this in 1944!! We can t speak of ethic or moral values...We can only speak of braveness, yes, Stauffenbeg was very brave! But the real ethic heros in Germany were surely not the generals who killed civils, russian prisoners, agreed with deportations and so on !!!!

The real ethic heros of Germany were some young univeristy students :Hans and Sophie Scholl and the group of " the white rose" a non violent catholic movement in Munich who atttack the nazis violence by preparing and distributing six leaflets( 1942-43), and were beheaded for this...

Also the brave bishop of Munster ,Graf von Galen,who protested from his church against the nazi crimes of gestapo and the program " eutanasia".

Let' s remember these civil heros like an example for the human race of tolerance, peace, and civil rebellion againt brutality, and let' s leave the german generals to historic and politic considerations.

 

[Scott]

In films like " Valkirie" and in german politic celebrations, Von Stauffenberg is considered an almost ethic, moral figure against Hitler' s crimes. Actually , it is not really like this....Stauffenberg is a typical example, like Rommel and many other generals of the Whermacht military "caste". These people had been so glad when Hitler rearmed germany from the mid 30ies and promised them honours and power; glad also when Hitler killed Rhom and all the SA chiefs ( SA were strong enemies of german generals). They were also excited at the start of the war and finally most of them collaborated without the slight moral problem with SS and "einsatz gruppen" who exterminated a large part of civil population in the east..The problems started with war against Russia and especially when the war was going to be lost. Stauffenberg and other generals then wanted to kill Hitler, and give the power to....Themselves! Make peace and save the most conquerred lands they had got. They did this in 1944!! We can t speak of ethic or moral values...We can only speak of braveness, yes, Stauffenbeg was very brave! But the real ethic heros in Germany were surely not the generals who killed civils, russian prisoners, agreed with deportations and so on !!!!

The real ethic heros of Germany were some young univeristy students :Hans and Sophie Scholl and the group of " the white rose" a non violent catholic movement in Munich who atttack the nazis violence by preparing and distributing six leaflets( 1942-43), and were beheaded for this...

Also the brave bishop of Munster ,Graf von Galen,who protested from his church against the nazi crimes of gestapo and the program " eutanasia".

Let' s remember these civil heros like an example for the human race of tolerance, peace, and civil rebellion againt brutality, and let' s leave the german generals to historic and politic considerations.

Curt Jurgens is gone. We should find other "good guy" Germans.

 

[Larry Allen]

I vote for Colonel Klink and Sgt Schultz!

If any one asks me if I read this post I will say .... "I saw N-O-T-H-I-N-G; I heard N-O-T-H-I-N-G; I know N-O-T-H-I-N-G"
OH YES I really think Fräulein Helga is a real GOOD German ... :tongue: ^&grin
Larry

 

[Jack]

I have often wondered why they were beheaded rather than hung or shot. Was it a means of capital punishment in Europe in the twentieth century or was it reserved for special prisoners?

 

[waynepoo]

I vote for Colonel Klink and Sgt Schultz!

If any one asks me if I read this post I will say .... "I saw N-O-T-H-I-N-G; I heard N-O-T-H-I-N-G; I know N-O-T-H-I-N-G"
OH YES I really think Fräulein Helga is a real GOOD German ... :tongue: ^&grin
Larry

Larry,
With you there.......{sm3}
Wayne.

 

[waynepoo]

I have often wondered why they were beheaded rather than hung or shot. Was it a means of capital punishment in Europe in the twentieth century or was it reserved for special prisoners?

Was it because it was a deliberately nasty and cruel way of execution as was hanging with piano wire from meat hooks? Another example of how brutal and foul Hitlers regime was.
Wayne.

 

[Mitch]

with France having been at the forefront of the use of the guillotine we need to be wary of saying how foul a regime is because it uses capital punishment or other means to either exact confessions or revenge. Many countries used beheading as a means of a simple efficient way to execute individuals. Berlin 1930's piano wire and hooks today electric shock and waterboarding to name a few are all means states exact their pound of flesh from enemies or other such groups. History in recent years is littered with non foul states who use horrific means against lets say subversives. The Nazi party may have been a foul regime but, not just because it used such techniques as that would simply mean many allied states at that time were foul as they used similar or equally nasty means to deal with individuals both nationals and foreigners.

The germans have always used this method though in many parts of germany at that time the guillotine was preferred. The vampire of dusseldorf was beheaded in cologne as were about 35,000 or more individuals found guilty in courts around those times. Not all was down to the Nazi party. In Berlin the axe and block were the only means of execution until it was changed in 1938 to the guillotine.

I don't know if beheading is seen as a worse form of execution than say hanging it certainly is more of a spectacle and possibly a deterrent to others. In Saudi in 2004 they beheaded four men for armed robbery and then crucified them openly as a warning to others.
Mitch

 

[Jack]

with France having been at the forefront of the use of the guillotine we need to be wary of saying how foul a regime is because it uses capital punishment or other means to either exact confessions or revenge. Many countries used beheading as a means of a simple efficient way to execute individuals. Berlin 1930's piano wire and hooks today electric shock and waterboarding to name a few are all means states exact their pound of flesh from enemies or other such groups. History in recent years is littered with non foul states who use horrific means against lets say subversives. The Nazi party may have been a foul regime but, not just because it used such techniques as that would simply mean many allied states at that time were foul as they used similar or equally nasty means to deal with individuals both nationals and foreigners.

The germans have always used this method though in many parts of germany at that time the guillotine was preferred. The vampire of dusseldorf was beheaded in cologne as were about 35,000 or more individuals found guilty in courts around those times. Not all was down to the Nazi party. In Berlin the axe and block were the only means of execution until it was changed in 1938 to the guillotine.

I don't know if beheading is seen as a worse form of execution than say hanging it certainly is more of a spectacle and possibly a deterrent to others. In Saudi in 2004 they beheaded four men for armed robbery and then crucified them openly as a warning to others.
Mitch

Mitch

Thanks for the reply. I never knew that the Germans used the guillotine. I just assumed that hanging would have been used. Apart from the obviously horrible thought that your head was going to go its separate way, the guillotine was probably less painful than hanging, though I would find that scant comfort. From the distant land of my Year 10 schooling, I have a memory that Guillotine was actually driven to invent the machine that now bears his name because of his revulsion at the axe.

As for the Saudi executions a few years back a touring Australian soccer team got heavily criticised for going to an execution as though it was a tourist attraction. Australia's last execution was in the late sixties and though there is a bit of comment now and then is no longer seriously considered by any mainstream group.

Jack

 

[waynepoo]

Mitch

Thanks for the reply. I never knew that the Germans used the guillotine. I just assumed that hanging would have been used. Apart from the obviously horrible thought that your head was going to go its separate way, the guillotine was probably less painful than hanging, though I would find that scant comfort. From the distant land of my Year 10 schooling, I have a memory that Guillotine was actually driven to invent the machine that now bears his name because of his revulsion at the axe.

As for the Saudi executions a few years back a touring Australian soccer team got heavily criticised for going to an execution as though it was a tourist attraction. Australia's last execution was in the late sixties and though there is a bit of comment now and then is no longer seriously considered by any mainstream group.

Jack

I seem to recall that the nasi way was to have the victim lay face up so as to see the blade fall, now that is nasty.
Wayne.

 

[Combat]

Stauffenberg and his type had no real problem with Hitler when the Nazis were winning. However, they suddenly saw the light in defeat. He's no hero in my book. The likes of Johann Georg Elser might qualify. He spent a month placing a bomb to killer Hitler in 1939 and came within minutes of pulling it off. He was executed in 1945 just before the end of the war. Imagine how much history might have changed.

 

[Mitch]

I have to agree about Stauffenburg and a number of the other conspirators including Rommel. Always seems they jump ship for rather selfish personal reasons first and devote their actions to their country as an after thought. His actions seemed to be a case of his despondancy at the military situation not, the other actions of the regime. If you look at his early career not a fervant nazi he was not against the regime in any shape and took his oath extremaly seriously as most german soldiers did.
Mitch

Stauffenberg and his type had no real problem with Hitler when the Nazis were winning. However, they suddenly saw the light in defeat. He's no hero in my book. The likes of Johann Georg Elser might qualify. He spent a month placing a bomb to killer Hitler in 1939 and came within minutes of pulling it off. He was executed in 1945 just before the end of the war. Imagine how much history might have changed.

 

[Scott]

I took college classes in South and Central American history in the 70s. The professor, a German who had lived in Argentina taught us that some countries' military are inward looking rather than focused on external defence. They are usually not obligated to a civilian constitution. They see that it is their honor to protect their nation from "bad" leaders or internal forces hence so many coups etc.. This can be a cover for overthrowing a leader who is incompetent, or not favorable to the military, or a class or group that threatens the leadership.

An isolated military class can be dangerous but in the case of Von Stauffenberg and staff, their enemy was everyone else's enemy.

Their "El Guapo" happened to be the real "El Guapo!"

I have to agree about Stauffenburg and a number of the other conspirators including Rommel. Always seems they jump ship for rather selfish personal reasons first and devote their actions to their country as an after thought. His actions seemed to be a case of his despondancy at the military situation not, the other actions of the regime. If you look at his early career not a fervant nazi he was not against the regime in any shape and took his oath extremaly seriously as most german soldiers did.
Mitch

 

[Scott]

Just thinking while the presses are running. Did Von St. and company think that if they, the leadership class killed Hitler, the act would have legitimacy with the rest of Germany rather than if a "regular" person or group did it?

 

[larso]

"Thanks for the reply. I never knew that the Germans used the guillotine."

As others have said, it was very common, certainly in dealing with German citizens. Sophie Scholl and the others in her group were executed in this manner. There was even a mobile one.

 

[Poppo]

"Thanks for the reply. I never knew that the Germans used the guillotine."

As others have said, it was very common, certainly in dealing with German citizens. Sophie Scholl and the others in her group were executed in this manner. There was even a mobile one.

Well, the nazi used all kind of executions I guess.....In that period in Germany and Soviet Union the law was a very, very flexible thing....Or better say it didn' t existe at all....

 

[Mitch]

I would say that the law in germany at that time was anything but flexible in fact I would say it was rather harseh and exacting. The Nazi party usurped german law when they needed to but, then the fuhrer principle was that his word was greater than any law.

Germany was a mass of laws, rules, regulations and the like I would say they were far more legalistic in process than the russians ever were.
Mitch

Well, the nazi used all kind of executions I guess.....In that period in Germany and Soviet Union the law was a very, very flexible thing....Or better say it didn' t existe at all....

 

[waynepoo]

I don't think it would have mattered if the assassination had of succeeded as the Allies, especially the Soviets, wouldn't have accepted anything short of unconditional surrender.
Wayne.

 

[Poppo]

I would say that the law in germany at that time was anything but flexible in fact I would say it was rather harseh and exacting. The Nazi party usurped german law when they needed to but, then the fuhrer principle was that his word was greater than any law.

Germany was a mass of laws, rules, regulations and the like I would say they were far more legalistic in process than the russians ever were.
Mitch

I mean that in the facts, soviets and nazi acted exactly in the same way, apart from very little differences: fake trials, deportations, death camps, summary executions, tortures, no defense for suspected persons, secret police who had a right of life and death.

 

[Scott]

I mean that in the facts, soviets and nazi acted exactly in the same way, apart from very little differences: fake trials, deportations, death camps, summary executions, tortures, no defense for suspected persons, secret police who had a right of life and death.

Plus both had an ideology that could convict you of "thought crimes." You could survive by going along but with these two places you could get in trouble for not being enthusiastic about going along.

 

[Jack]

Plus both had an ideology that could convict you of "thought crimes." You could survive by going along but with these two places you could get in trouble for not being enthusiastic about going along.

I attended a lecture some time ago given by a war crimes investigator and he made an interesting observation about how both regimes viewed opposition. The Germans might jail you for disagreeing because only a criminal would do such a thing, whereas the Russians might send you to an asylum because you'd have to be a lunatic to disagree. Obviously a comment made by the investigator as a means of starting a discussion rather than a clear cut policy, but an interesting view nevertheless.