How does Germany treat its veterans? - Page 3 - U.S. Politics Online: A Political Discussion Forum

anobsitar · #31 (**permalink**) 06-18-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by adaher

It should be noted that history, not for the first or last time, proved the US right. We warned the French and British to seek a just peace, not revenge, and they didn't listen.

Seems that us Yanks do know a little something about diplomacy, eh?

Otto von Habsburg said, that the plan from GB was it to give Austria to the Germans so Germany and Russia came in war. From this point of view it looks in another way to speak about "seek peace". This story is used to say kill the killers is the only way to peace. But someone who is killing killers is a killer ...

Frieda · #32 (**permalink**) 06-18-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gort

That may be true Frieda, but lets face it when the French and British allowed the Germans to essentially just take those territories, as well as the Rhine and Saar, without much in the way of complaints it almost told them they cold take more if they wanted, or at least gave them that impression. I am not sure it wold have taken a Hitler to decide if a little was good more would be even better.

Yes maybe but I think it took a Hitler to get into that configuration in 1939. Hitler wished that war from the very beginning; later he told eventually any other person (forgotten whom) that he tried to begin it in 1938 but it wasn't possible as France and Great Britain accepted everything. I think if he looked for peace (as he told in that time from 1933 to 1938 or 39) and only for vindication, and if he meant welfare for Germany he probably never would have dared to be that insolent, breaking treaties and laws just as he wished.

Did you once read the protocols of his briefings or his instructions? It's very clear, he (and his staff) didn't only betray other nations but his own nation, too. Ok many people adored him, they believed in him like in a god, and they followed him into the war deliberately. When they notices anything wrong they always said: "If the Führer were aware of this!" although the Führer himself gave the instruction.

Quote:

I am of the firm conviction that the French and German reaction was in large part responible for the war. Hitler and the Germans still are mainly responsible, but the reaction by the allies certainly did not help.

Really it did not help. But were their armies strong enough to stop Hitler in 1939? I don't think that the French are responsible for the war.

PS: @anobistar: Just like we inherited e. g. the economic miracel or Goethe and Schiller we inherited the responsibility for the war, too, I think. It's not the responsibility of single persons but of a nation.

Slartibartfas · #33 (**permalink**) 06-18-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gort

I disagree. After WWI the allied powers were stupid to impose the Treaty of Versailles and the accompanying reparrations. That was in my view one of the major reasons for the weakness of the Weinar. It was also clearly one of the major reasons of hyperinflation during the Weimar which in turn was part of the cause of the rise of communist parties in Germany at that time. Some nationalistic party was bound to develop, even had it not been the Nazi's. Not all of them would have been led by a paranoid, but they all would have had to contend with a population what wanted pride in Germany reestablished. Now given that, and the appeasement shown by the French and English, I believe that wold have encouraged aggressive behavior no matter who was in charge, even had it been the communists although then it would have been directed differently.

Now it is entirely true that my opinion is wrong, we will never know, but I think it is a valid opiniion based on the historical context.

You are right that the Treaty of Versailles layed itself the seed of tensions or even war right after WWI. It simply was a huge injustice, it was not like the entente would have been unhappy at the first place, so how could they legitimate to punish Germany and Austria up to the outmost. (Concerning Austria the let down their claims afterwards, although not before the Austrian state showed them that it actually has to state bankruptcy. That means in other words, the entente accepted to stop hitting the man after they brought him into the grave. In contrary, to Germany that looked not dead enough yet for letting it go)

But without such a deadly idiology and insane people at the power, I guess that more reasonable German "leaders" (not Führer) would have been allready delighted by getting the east possesions of pre WWI back and by annexing Austria and the Sudettenland, the only remaining part of crises would have been Straßburg, but they would not have risked a war against the whole continent for that after such a huge success.

But it came as it came, and after all, Austria remaind free and has not been annexed for a long time, as it came. (Allthough I would like the scenario where it still would if that would mean a holocaust less and perhaps 40 million people more alive)

Slartibartfas · #34 (**permalink**) 06-18-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by adaher

From what I've read, unlike in 1914, Germans didn't take to the streets in joy in 1939. German support for Hitler did increase as the victories piled up, but they were also unaware of what was going on in the occupied territories. And keep in mind that except for France and Britain, most of the regimes Hitler took down were no angels themselves. Especially Stalin's, which might have been worse.

I dont know how much WWII was supported by the large masses. From my family it allways had been a war that was simply a fact. My grandparents were definitely not glad that it happened, as none of my grandfathers was eager to loose his life. I think if there would have been a free anonyme referendum, the majority would have opposed any war, even the more after one could not win any "German" territory" anymore. So people most likely could also not see the gain such a war could bring.

Yes Hitler did not want to fight Britain, as the noridic Angelsachsen were just another Aryans themselves he from the very beginning on wanted to destroy the slavik peoples in the east for further expansion. That does not make it to me any more sympathetic, though.

PS:
Hitler did his outmost to be the most cruel and inhuman dictator ever, and in my eyes he suceeded with that. Stalin is however a honourable second on that list.

Slartibartfas · #35 (**permalink**) 06-18-2006

WRT the question of the thread:

War "veterans" are hard to find here in Austria. Febobo pointed it allready out. But not only because most of them are dead by now, allready 20 years ago, most were not especially keen to point out that they have been in the Wehrmacht.

Some had detested themselves for having fought in the Wehrmacht, some and the most saw it just as the invevitable, some did it with joy. All together will not bind it on foreign noses that they did so. You may hear the stories in your family. Although there are exceptions, eg a local from here that wrote a book about his Wehrmacht "career", but that "career" lasted in total a single day and was attached to 3 years gulag in Siberia, so the most part of the book takes place in the deepest Russia from 1945 to 1948.

Yes there nonetheless exist veteran organisations, but those who attend them, still have not got ridd completely of their Nazi idology or are as much Nazis as they always was. They are a small minority though.

I dont think there are/were many veterans that were proud of being in the Wehrmacht. At the front they saw the cruelty of war, they saw the reality of Hitlers ideology.

Gort · #36 (**permalink**) 06-18-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by anobsitar

If Gort say "still" then it means "still are all Germans responsible" or it means "a little later in the future the historical view will be that the resoponsibility changes, because the past ist changing the future." Both views I don't agree. I even don't know what responsibility my father had or my grandfather had for this stupid wars in a crazy world. I don't know what they could make in another way than they did.

Perhaps instead of assuming you know what I mean in a language that is my first language and perhaps your second language, don't you think you should ask me what I meant? Only an idiot of a fool would hold current day Germans responsible for what happened in the 1930's and 40's, just as only the same type of fool would hold Americans responsible for what the US government has historically done before current day Americans were even alive. I may be many things but I assure you I am no idiot or fool, now hopefully you can say the same. Finally my father was alive and was a German living in Germany at that time, he was 15 when the war ended but he still remembers. He agrees that Germans, and to make it clear to the oh so sentsitive but somehwat reading challenged anobsitar, OF THAT TIME were primnarily responsible for the war, in fact he accepts full responsibility becuase had Hitler not gained power it to him it would not have mattered what the French or British did, although he admits Germany was ripe for a nationalistic leader. Since he was there, and I know and respect him, I will take his word over yours.

Perhaps next time my dear anobsitar rather than jump to conclusions you will do one of two things. First read the entire message in context, not just focus on one word and take it out of context, or if you are still confused ask the author of the post what he meant. That would have been the intelligent thing to do.

Gort · #37 (**permalink**) 06-18-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by Slartibartfas

You are right that the Treaty of Versailles layed itself the seed of tensions or even war right after WWI. It simply was a huge injustice, it was not like the entente would have been unhappy at the first place, so how could they legitimate to punish Germany and Austria up to the outmost. (Concerning Austria the let down their claims afterwards, although not before the Austrian state showed them that it actually has to state bankruptcy. That means in other words, the entente accepted to stop hitting the man after they brought him into the grave. In contrary, to Germany that looked not dead enough yet for letting it go)

But without such a deadly idiology and insane people at the power, I guess that more reasonable German "leaders" (not Führer) would have been allready delighted by getting the east possesions of pre WWI back and by annexing Austria and the Sudettenland, the only remaining part of crises would have been Straßburg, but they would not have risked a war against the whole continent for that after such a huge success.
But it came as it came, and after all, Austria remaind free and has not been annexed for a long time, as it came. (Allthough I would like the scenario where it still would if that would mean a holocaust less and perhaps 40 million people more alive)

Slarti that was my point though those two successes and theway they were achieved without even a peep from the allies would have led any leader, not just the meglomaniac Hitler, to believe they were not prepared to go to war over territory as long as it was not theirs.

Slartibartfas · #38 (**permalink**) 06-18-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gort

Slarti that was my point though those two successes and theway they were achieved without even a peep from the allies would have led any leader, not just the meglomaniac Hitler, to believe they were not prepared to go to war over territory as long as it was not theirs.

If it would have been a nationalist German government, what sense would lie in starting a war against whole Europe just about a foreign territory, or a small territory like the Elsaß, and to risk the whole successes that reunited the Reich completely now with Austria and the Sudeten. Germany gained suddenly 10 million inhabitants. In their perception, Germans. Where would have been the sense in occupying Polish regions with Poles eg? If you had no ethnic cleansing in mind, and why should a non Nazi regime think about insane stuff like ethnic cleansing of millions of people?

Gort · #39 (**permalink**) 06-18-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by Slartibartfas

If it would have been a nationalist German government, what sense would lie in starting a war against whole Europe just about a foreign territory, or a small territory like the Elsaß, and to risk the whole successes that reunited the Reich completely now with Austria and the Sudeten. Germany gained suddenly 10 million inhabitants. In their perception, Germans. Where would have been the sense in occupying Polish regions with Poles eg? If you had no ethnic cleansing in mind, and why should a non Nazi regime think about insane stuff like ethnic cleansing of millions of people?

Slarti I did say as long as it wasn't their territory. Corect me if I am wrong but the allies eventually said enough was enough over Poland, Alsace did not play a role in that. I believe any nationalist German government given the responce of the British and French up to this time would still have gone after Poland for even more lebensraum thinking that they had gotten away with it so far why not more, especially had they had an agreememtn with the USSR and such an agreement would have been just as likely under any other governmentthan Hitlers, even more.

Slartibartfas · #40 (**permalink**) 06-18-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gort

Slarti I did say as long as it wasn't their territory. Corect me if I am wrong but the allies eventually said enough was enough over Poland, Alsace did not play a role in that. I believe any nationalist German government given the responce of the British and French up to this time would still have gone after Poland for even more lebensraum thinking that they had gotten away with it so far why not more, especially had they had an agreememtn with the USSR and such an agreement would have been just as likely under any other governmentthan Hitlers, even more.

Lebensraum was a Nazi concept. It based unseperatably on the concepts of social darwinism and the race theory.

I dont think any other than the Nazis would have proposed the concept of gaining Lebensraum. As there was not really a lack of space for Germans, especially in the east of the German Reich the land was settled not very dense. Quite some place for growing.

And not to forget, Poland did not offer Lebensraum unless you would have got ridd of the people who lifed there, which is only possible with ethnic cleansing.

WRT Elsaß, well I know it did not play a role in history at the start of WWII, but its the sole region I could imagine another regime would have had interest in, after annexing the land of the Austrians and Sudeten, and the temporary lost regions of east prussia again. But Alsaß was not only small but it would have needed a direct attack on France, which would have lead in any way to another world war for sure.

PS:
I dont know how much the Lebensraum concept worked out for the Nazis at all. For example my grandparents would have also be "targets" for the concept, as they belonged to the poorer people who ownd just a few small fields. They would have also relocated to the Ukraine or so, to become Herrenbauern. But as this never left the preliminary state only those who were eager to do so, got to those places in reallity. My family was everything else than enthusiastic to go to the Ukraine. I mean who cares about getting a large farm, if there the people that have to work for you hate you, you are taken away from your Heimat and put into a complete foreign and hostile world. If the program would have continued further however, it would have soon entered a stage were the people would not have been asked if they want to become Herrenbauern or not...

anobsitar · #41 (**permalink**) 06-18-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gort

Perhaps instead of assuming you know what I mean in a language that is my first language and perhaps your second language, don't you think you should ask me what I meant?

Should I?

Quote:

Only an idiot of a fool would hold current day Germans responsible for what happened in the 1930's and 40's,

It's not my fault that lots of idiots are existing.

Quote:

just as only the same type of fool would hold Americans responsible for what the US government has historically done before current day

Depends. The USA has a war every year since centuries just for fun. But seems this frequency is going down a little in the last years and I'm not unhappy about.

Quote:

Americans were even alive.

In World War II? No wonder - because a lot of german soldiers did not shoot to american soldiers as good as they could really shoot.

Quote:

I may be many things but I assure you I am no idiot or fool, now hopefully you can say the same.

No - I can not. I'm an idiot. Wether I'm a fool I'm just doing an experiment. If it is succcessful we all will have a lot of fun.

Quote:

Finally my father was alive and was a German living in Germany at that time, he was 15 when the war ended but he still remembers. He agrees that Germans, and to make it clear to the oh so sentsitive but somehwat reading challenged anobsitar, OF THAT TIME were primnarily responsible for the war,

I think, we were "responsible" that we lost control about our government. That was really a very big problem. I think nearly no one had any idea what was going on in the heads of this leaders. But "nearly none" from millions of people are unfortunately more than enough criminals. The greatest tragedy: german soldiers fought for Hitler against Stalin - and russian soldiers fought for Stalin against Hitler. Hilter lost - Stalin won. That was not a good result in the end but it was a better result then the results after World War I that created a crazy world in which a crazy man became "The Leader" of Germany.

Quote:

in fact he accepts full responsibility

He's not responsible if he was 15 years as this war ended. He was a poor child - lost his youth, that was robbed by Hitler. Most Germans thought (specially if they were children) Hitler is a Hero on a white horse. But your father was a poor child that had to life within a complete crazy world without any possibilty to escape. He had fun - for sure - but he never could know what he missed, becasuse teh Nazis destryoed within one year nearly all structures of the old Germany. No - your father for sure is not responsible - even if he believed everything what Hitler said. If he would believ today in this - that would be an other thing.

Quote:

becuase had Hitler not gained power it to him it would not have mattered what the French or British did, although he admits Germany was ripe for a nationalistic leader. Since he was there, and I know and respect him, I will take his word over yours.

For sure - what your father says is more important than anything else in the world. The complete perverted system you can see in the person of Goebbels. Thsi stupid idiot killed his whole family. Six or eight innocent children. Unbelievable. Do you think anyone of this misty ignorants and criminals in the leadership of Germany thought only a little of Germany? This idiots hated even their children.

Quote:

Perhaps next time my dear anobsitar rather than jump to conclusions you will do one of two things. First read the entire message in context, not just focus on one word and take it out of context, or if you are still confused ask the author of the post what he meant. That would have been the intelligent thing to do.

Intelligent? I'm not intelligent. If I would be intelligent I had to think about problems - and I don't like to think about problems.

Gort · #42 (**permalink**) 06-18-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by anobsitar

Should I?

It's not my fault that lots of idiots are existing.

Depends. The USA has a war every year since centuries just for fun. But seems this frequency is going down a little in the last years and I'm not unhappy about.

In World War II? No wonder - because a lot of german soldiers did not shoot to american soldiers as good as they could really shoot.

No - I can not. I'm an idiot. Wether I'm a fool I'm just doing an experiment. If it is succcessful we all will have a lot of fun.

I think, we were "responsible" that we lost control about our government. That was really a very big problem. I think nearly no one had any idea what was going on in the heads of this leaders. But "nearly none" from millions of people are unfortunately more than enough criminals. The greatest tragedy: german soldiers fought for Hitler against Stalin - and russian soldiers fought for Stalin against Hitler. Hilter lost - Stalin won. That was not a good result in the end but it was a better result then the results after World War I that created a crazy world in which a crazy man became "The Leader" of Germany.

He's not responsible if he was 15 years as this war ended. He was a poor child - lost his youth, that was robbed by Hitler. Most Germans thought (specially if they were children) Hitler is a Hero on a white horse. But your father was a poor child that had to life within a complete crazy world without any possibilty to escape. He had fun - for sure - but he never could know what he missed, becasuse teh Nazis destryoed within one year nearly all structures of the old Germany. No - your father for sure is not responsible - even if he believed everything what Hitler said. If he would believ today in this - that would be an other thing.

For sure - what your father says is more important than anything else in the world. The complete perverted system you can see in the person of Goebbels. Thsi stupid idiot killed his whole family. Six or eight innocent children. Unbelievable. Do you think anyone of this misty ignorants and criminals in the leadership of Germany thought only a little of Germany? This idiots hated even their children.

Intelligent? I'm not intelligent. If I would be intelligent I had to think about problems - and I don't like to think about problems.

Well at least your honest I will give you that.

Febobo · #43 (**permalink**) 06-19-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by adaher

It should be noted that history, not for the first or last time, proved the US right. We warned the French and British to seek a just peace, not revenge, and they didn't listen.

Seems that us Yanks do know a little something about diplomacy, eh?

Yeah exactly that is why the US did not ratify the Versailles treaty, a serious blow to the entire system and which did a lot to the rise of Hitler Germany because there was simply no major power which was willing to back it up. And in the end the US were again forced into the war, yep indeed brilliant

Ductor Remigium · #44 (**permalink**) 06-19-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by Febobo

Some "revisionist" groups try to present the battles of the Wehrmacht as the heroic war of civilisation against evil communism that threatened to overrun Europe. But there is absolutely no evidence for this thesis and it has been denounced by most leading historians many times.

Not to defend any act of Hitler's, but I'm quite sure that even without Hitler starting the war with Stalin (Molotov-Ribbentrop pact), the Soviet Union with Stalin in the lead would have tried to advance into Europe at some time 1940s-1950s. Stalin did make the comment after the war that "czar Alexander got into Paris" when he was asked was he happy with the way the war ended. Also the Red Army was in attack positions along the German border in 1941. And finally it is said by some historians here that Stalin was poisoned in 1953 because he had the idea that the time was right to attack the West, Russia having aquired the nuclear bomb. So in my opinion Stalin would have started WW2 even without Hitler in place, or at least he would have tried to advance into smaller neighbouring countries, and onward, had the western allies been passive.

AdrienXII · #45 (**permalink**) 06-20-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by adaher

It should be noted that history, not for the first or last time, proved the US right. We warned the French and British to seek a just peace, not revenge, and they didn't listen.

Seems that us Yanks do know a little something about diplomacy, eh?

Easy to say from half a world away. Did you look at pictures of the northeast of France in 1918? The Treaty of Versailles was an attempt to prevent another invasion of France by Germany after 1870 and then 1914. Granted, it didn't work, but it was not altogether unreasonable, after two successive invasions.