WWII Atrocities - Was The Wehrmact Innocent (1 Viewer)

[Phantom Warrior]

The simple answer is No - they were not innocent. The Wehrmacht was as guilty as the SS.

A new PBS episode of Secrets Of The Dead sheds light on who did what. The episode is called "Bugging Hitlers Soldiers" and can be seen on PBS, although it can be difficult to get in to see it on line.

http://video.pbs.org/program/secrets-of-the-dead/

MI-19 set up 3 very large estate homes to house as many as 4,000 German POW's including generals. POW's suspected of having important intelligence were selected to be housed in luxury in these palatial POW Estates and allowed to roam the house and grounds unsupervised. Unknown to the POW's, every location inside the house and grounds was bugged with listening devices which recorded the unguarded conversations of the POW's. A lot of important intelligence was gained in this way, but the conversations also revealed knowledge of atrocities and who took part. Many of the conversations which spoke of specific atrocity events were recordings of the person who took part in the atrocities.

The British government kept these recordings and files secret even after the war to keep their methods and techniques secret for use in the Cold War.

I watched this program and found it to be amazing.

Terry

 

[Poppo]

Wehrmacht was innocent....No, it wasn't, and I would add that it is hard to find an " innocent" army, as all made crimes.
Sure, the german army made a lot of them, but I wouldn' t put the Wehrmacht on the level of einsatzgruppen, or some waffen ss units like Totenkopf or Leibstandarte.
Young germans were trained to violence since their young age by the nazi regime. The nazi totally changed the human rules: murder, violence, racism, hate, became positive values while forgiveness, love, tolerance were considered negative, weak attitudes, and often sanctioned by the law.
When Russia was attacked, the german soldiers were trained to kill and give no mercy to the slavic "undermen", and often criminal orders were given by generals like Von Meinstein, Von Reichenau, Von Rundsted. Orders like make no prisoners during 3 days when sabotage acts were made by russian partisans.
In short, some german soldiers committed crimes, others didn' t, for sure the unhuman war in the east made men worst than the beasts on both sides, for examples, the russians used to crucify to the trees the german soldiers taken in patrols.
I read many books on this subject, and I can state than the sovietic army committed more crimes than the germans.
In the east, the germans burned villages suspected to help the partisans, executed suspects, and very often killed the political commissaries, but they didn't reach the level of inhumanity the red army did against innocent civilians in Prussia, Poland, Germany:all the women old and young, were sistematically raped in front of their children,husbands, fathers and often to death by hundreds of men; the german men killed or deported to Siberia, houses destroyed and burned. The sovietic officiers did absolutely nothing to stop this, and after war everything was hidden with the usual communist hypocrisy, denial and deformation of reality. As an example, the slaughter of 4000 polish officiers killed by the NKVD was admitted by Russia in 1990!!!

 

[Mitch]

Terry...

It is interesting though some have heavily cast doubt on the validity of the recordings as it has been shown by survivors of these prisons that many knew they were being recorded or at least spied upon. Many proclaim to be anti Nazi anti Hitler etc contrary to what they were doing through the war years. so, some very ardent Nazi's and supporters were able to use this and subsequent interrogations as a means to evade criminal proceedings. They are a relatively good source of information in to the German psyche at that time especially the one's when the war was still on going and looked favourable for a German victory.

I have read a few where the opinions radically changed from during the war to late war and when it was over. Though I would think that is rather expected and natural when war crimes trials were common place. Nobody wanted the rope around the neck and denying this or that and blaming the SS was the easy and accepted version at that time and for many years after WWII

There is simply no doubt that huge numbers knew of what was going on and, without Heer support very few of the actions would have actually been able to be undertaken.

Its quite a complex issue as guilt of the Heer etc was displaced on to the easy scapegoat of anyone who was in the SS from the soldier on the ground to the high ranking surviving Generals and Field marshals who went into captivity.



Poppo....

This subject is not about the Russians and the need to bring up what they did or did not do in WWII It seems that if Germany is accused of X you want to bring up another countries atrocities to either obfuscate the issue or, somehow lesson German actions because others were equally or were worse.

Open a thread about Russian brit and American et al atrocities and we can discuss them
Mitch

 

[Phantom Warrior]

Terry...

It is interesting though some have heavily cast doubt on the validity of the recordings as it has been shown by survivors of these prisons that many knew they were being recorded or at least spied upon. Many proclaim to be anti Nazi anti Hitler etc contrary to what they were doing through the war years. so, some very ardent Nazi's and supporters were able to use this and subsequent interrogations as a means to evade criminal proceedings. They are a relatively good source of information in to the German psyche at that time especially the one's when the war was still on going and looked favourable for a German victory.

Mitch

Possibly, but it does not invalidate the ones who admitted to war crimes on the recordings. And as these recordings were not used in war crimes enquiries, they wouldn't have helped anyone posing as anti-Nazi, which would be hard to do while living in close quarters with fellow officers and men for many months.

Terry

 

[jazzeum]

A few years ago I did a bit of reading on this. Have you ever read Wolfram Wette's The Wehrmacht: History, Myth, Reality? I recommend it and think I've previously mentioned it on the Forum. It shows the Wehrmacht's complicity with the regime's crimes.

 

[PanzerAce1944]

Just because some members of an organization commit crimes does not make the whole lot guilty.it would be like saying the LAPD beats up African Americans or U.S. troops in Vietnam kill children and women. Just about every armed or military organization throughout history has good and bad examples within their ranks.

 

[RPZ]

The average German soldier was no more predisposed to commit crimes than those of ours.

There is plenty of testimony recounted and recorded. Those that might be ascribed to the organizational level have been clearly exposed and can be attributed to both sides. In my opinion, after about 45 years of reading on the subject, personal testimony, the Germans on the whole showed remarkable restraint.

 

[Mitch]

RPZ...

Firstly, If you could answer me In what way did German troops show remarkable restraint?

I agree that nation X is no more predisposed to commit crimes than nation Y and, that allied atrocities are in there many and well documented (just nobody really on the winning side likes to talk about them) the difference is that the actions taken by the Germans was sanctioned by their leaders and through the chain of command down to the foot slogger who, on the whole did what he was ordered to do.

Allied atrocities with a small exception were done by troops and officers at a lower level on the whole. I would say that looking at the issue in total the Germans through their psychological make up were predisposed to commit these acts.

The German race was brought up to not question authority and accept a command from whoever gave it. The parent, teacher, minister, policeman, officer. You just did what you were told and, to a point they accepted that. The ''I was following orders'' so incomprehensible to some was exactly what they were doing. Most military regimes demand such obedience. Add to that a belief that the German race was superior to all others and that everyone else was ''untermensch'' and its really easy to see how the Germans did what they did in that period.
Mitch

The average German soldier was no more predisposed to commit crimes than those of ours.

There is plenty of testimony recounted and recorded. Those that might be ascribed to the organizational level have been clearly exposed and can be attributed to both sides. In my opinion, after about 45 years of reading on the subject, personal testimony, the Germans on the whole showed remarkable restraint.

 

[RPZ]

Mitch,

Restraint, considering the ruthlessness of the party hierarchy's attitudes. And let's be clear, the National Socialists were a political party - not German military culture, and certainly not German national and moral culture in general.

Restraint considering some, not all, of the allied conduct of the war.

I think the notion that Germans were somehow more unquestioning and compliant obeying authority than others misplaced. German culture was, and still is, more disciplined and orderly. If the examine those greater atrocities against Germans by any of the allied forces you will not find much evidence, if any, of protest, much less defiance, by any of the participants.

The untermensch issue falls under my remark concerning the party. On the military front in the field there is little of the dehumanizing propaganda, and in documentary interviews with allied captives some have remarked especially as to how they were treated contrary to how anti-german war propaganda had led them to expect.

 

[Rob]

RPZ...

Firstly, If you could answer me In what way did German troops show remarkable restraint?

I agree that nation X is no more predisposed to commit crimes than nation Y and, that allied atrocities are in there many and well documented (just nobody really on the winning side likes to talk about them) the difference is that the actions taken by the Germans was sanctioned by their leaders and through the chain of command down to the foot slogger who, on the whole did what he was ordered to do.

Allied atrocities with a small exception were done by troops and officers at a lower level on the whole. I would say that looking at the issue in total the Germans through their psychological make up were predisposed to commit these acts.

The German race was brought up to not question authority and accept a command from whoever gave it. The parent, teacher, minister, policeman, officer. You just did what you were told and, to a point they accepted that. The ''I was following orders'' so incomprehensible to some was exactly what they were doing. Most military regimes demand such obedience. Add to that a belief that the German race was superior to all others and that everyone else was ''untermensch'' and its really easy to see how the Germans did what they did in that period.
Mitch


Myself and Mitch may disagree on some issues, I do believe some folk are more evil than others which cannot always be down to indoctrination , but I do agree with this post almost entirely. The idea that German troops showed great restraint is very odd to me indeed^&confuse. All atrocities be they German,Russian, British,Japanese or American are all shameful and to be deplored.

I guess the German atrocities were more frequent, larger scale, and often carried out in countries they occupied thus ensuring the outrage is worse. Also and however unfair this is on the average German soldier, people (mostly ordinary Joe public who have not studied the period) lump the German army and the Hitler regime together. Therefore the German army, atrocities, the Holocaust often all get lumped together to produce a toxic view of all things German. We all know many many Germans including soldiers loathed the high command and the architects of the 'final solution' , the stain of horror, murder and hatred soaked through to the whole of Germany in those years, we can argue whether this is fair or not and no doubt many totally innocent Germans suffered awfully for what their country started, but as someone once said ' War is hell ' , and Germany and the reputation of its soldiers paid dearly for this.

Rob

 

[RPZ]

Mitch,

Restraint, considering the ruthlessness of the party hierarchy's attitudes. And let's be clear, the National Socialists were a political party - not German military culture, and certainly not German national and moral culture in general.

Restraint considering some, not all, of the allied conduct of the war.

I think the notion that Germans were somehow more unquestioning and compliant obeying authority than others is misplaced. German culture was, and still is, more disciplined and orderly. If you examine those greater atrocities against Germans by any of the allied forces you will not find much evidence, if any, of protest, much less defiance, by any of the participants.

The untermensch issue falls under my remark concerning the party. On the military front in the field there is little of the dehumanizing propaganda, and in documentary interviews with allied captives some have remarked especially as to how they were treated contrary to how anti-german war propaganda had led them to expect.

 

[RPZ]

Double post, second edited for typos and omissions wrestling with a (so-called) smartphone. The typing window tends to move and indexing to make corrections can be tricky.

 

[larso]

"The German race was brought up to not question authority and accept a command from whoever gave it. The parent, teacher, minister, policeman, officer. You just did what you were told and, to a point they accepted that. The ''I was following orders'' so incomprehensible to some was exactly what they were doing. Most military regimes demand such obedience. Add to that a belief that the German race was superior to all others and that everyone else was ''untermensch'' and its really easy to see how the Germans did what they did in that period."

The fact that a prompt execution awaited any German soldier who failed to follow an order probably accounts for a good part of their determination. With a large number of WW2 memoirs under my belt, I have been struck by the fact that almost every account by an Allied soldier mentions the shooting of German POWs, usually witnessed first hand. There are fewer accounts available by German veterans but I can't think of one where a similar confession is given. Clearly it happened (for instance the many examples at the start of the Bulge) but all the examples I can think of were by the SS. Again, not saying the Wehrmact didn't but it was clearly on a different scale. Being on the defensive most of the time would also have limited 'opportunities' a bit.

 

[RPZ]

Rob,

Most of what I replied to Mitch applies to points you raised. I would add though that many, most(?), Germans would not consider the atrocities by allied forces to be less in any regards.

Additionally I would add that, the average German citizen had about as much control (or even accurate knowledge) over what their government was doing as you or I have over ours today.

And today, just off the radar of those immersed in popular entertainment and other distraction there are plenty of things I could cite that are as serious as anything that happened 75 or so years ago. No one is going on trial, let alone prison or the gallows for that.

 

[Mitch]

RPZ...

I am not sure there is such a distinction. A government especially one based on a militaristic rule will tell its army what it wants doing. Now, Hitler really flattered the Heer when he came to power enlarging and equipping them hugely and, they at that time often had more resources and money than they actually could use. He also cleverly made the Army swear their oath to him in person thus trapping them because of the power the oath had over them.

They acted out the wishes of the political body just as it is in any other system. There was little disagreement from the High command when they were taking back borders stolen by over zealous allies nor, really much disagreement when the attack on Poland was originated and executed. so, I am not sure any restraint was really showed or could have been.

German military culture was obedience. The culture that I think you allude to is the Prussian aristocracy type of older commanders. Very quickly on at officer training schools these were not abandoned but were overtaken lets say with modern military training and command ethics for a new war. If you look at officer training in Germany it was almost revolutionised during this period. The Heer acted out quite willingly overall the wishes of its leaders and, far from restraint they were actually on board after the victories of the early war especially, the western front (as I agree there was doubts but, only in terms of the high command wanting to be in a position of readiness and strength to take on forces like the French!)

There was complaints in small number about the assistance ordered for the early transports which, in fact were deportations and, the material assistance in terms of vehicles and men for the Einsatzgruppen actions but, on the whole again, no restraint. I would think because we know German culture was refined we see some obfuscation between that and moral culture. at the point the Heer was involved in the actions of its government moral culture (in terms of saying this is wrong I will have no part) was gone in the terms I think you use. Even if there was some, obedience again became more important than ones own morality. There certainly was Germans in the Heer and the SS who refused to do what we say are war crimes and were not punished. There were very few as Larso stated executed for these refusals. I think, he may be confusing the latter war where people were executed as an act of showing the leadership was still strong more than what they actually did. Rob recently posted a small article showing some Germans from Waffen and Heer forces were not punished which just adds to this.

I am not sure what restraint the Germans showed in the face of allied atrocities?? That will need you to elaborate on what you meant.
Mitch

Mitch,

Restraint, considering the ruthlessness of the party hierarchy's attitudes. And let's be clear, the National Socialists were a political party - not German military culture, and certainly not German national and moral culture in general.

Restraint considering some, not all, of the allied conduct of the war.

I think the notion that Germans were somehow more unquestioning and compliant obeying authority than others misplaced. German culture was, and still is, more disciplined and orderly. If the examine those greater atrocities against Germans by any of the allied forces you will not find much evidence, if any, of protest, much less defiance, by any of the participants.

The untermensch issue falls under my remark concerning the party. On the military front in the field there is little of the dehumanizing propaganda, and in documentary interviews with allied captives some have remarked especially as to how they were treated contrary to how anti-german war propaganda had led them to expect.

 

[Al Fisher]

IMHO, every army has commited atrocities given the brutality of combat. I think it's unreasonable to expect that any troops . . . from commander to the lowest dog face . . . can remain entirely rational after prolonged time in combat.
Bosun Al

 

[RPZ]

Mitch,

In regards to allied atrocities, many are well documented. Others are contraversial in that they are not regarded as such in some history books. Those depend on your point of view, and there is no point in arguing them here.

The party removed, incarcerated or murdered any military opposition to what was going on. Dissenters along the way were similarly dealt with.

This kind of thing is norm when there is a radical shift in the direction of any government.

After the war was underway those that remained on the operational level in the field put their noses to the fight. Like most soldiers in any war, for them it was the fight for their own survival on the battlefield, and their country.

 

[Mitch]

I know of the allied war crimes both admitted and those not. The comment that interested me was that German troops showed restraint in relation to these. I was just wondering how, when and obviously where these occurred

Don't think its an argument just an enquiry into your comment
Mitch

Mitch,

In regards to allied atrocities, many are well documented. Others are contraversial in that they are not regarded as such in some history books. Those depend on your point of view, and there is no point in arguing them here.

The party removed, incarcerated or murdered any military opposition to what was going on. Dissenters along the way were similarly dealt with.

This kind of thing is norm when there is a radical shift in the direction of any government.

After the war was underway those that remained on the operational level in the field put their noses to the fight. Like most soldiers in any war, for them it was the fight for their own survival on the battlefield, and their country.

 

[RPZ]

Mitch,

It is just my general impression from accounts on both sides.