-  [WT]  [PS]  [Home] [Manage]

[Return]
Posting mode: Reply
  1.   (reply to 14218)
  2.   Help
  3. (for post and file deletion)
/hi/ - History and Culture
  • Supported file types are: JPG, PNG
  • Maximum file size allowed is 1000 KB.
  • Images greater than 200x200 pixels will be thumbnailed.
  • Currently 480 unique user posts. View catalog

  • Blotter updated: 2018-08-24 Show/Hide Show All

We are in the process of fixing long-standing bugs with the thread reader. This will probably cause more bugs for a short period of time. Buckle up.

There's a new /777/ up, it's /Moldy Memes/ Check it out. Suggest new /777/s here.

Movies & TV 24/7 via Channel7: Web Player, .m3u file. Music via Radio7: Web Player, .m3u file.

WebM is now available sitewide! Please check this thread for more info.

Historian 14/03/25(Tue)05:57 No. 14218
14218

File 139572344064.jpg - (41.35KB , 450x290 , 004-0207071013-nazi.jpg )

Hello everyone. I've been wondering, how did the German and Western Allied troops treat one another? More importantly, how did they treat the civilians during their respective occupations of Western Europe? Of course there were crimes committed in relatively small numbers, but on the whole. Where there any major events that showed camaraderie between the troops or civilians?


>>
Historian 14/03/27(Thu)19:15 No. 14228

draw a circle


>>
Historian 14/03/27(Thu)19:33 No. 14229

>Were there any major events that showed camaraderie between the troops?
The Christmas Truce of WW1 would is a good example.

It's one thing for soldiers to ceasefire, it's another thing for them to cross no-mans land, exchange gifts, sing songs and have a good old game of football. It's an even more spectacular feat when you consider it was an unofficial act condemned by the higher ups and that it even happened the following year (on a smaller scale) despite orders explicitly expressing not to under the punishment of treason (death).


>>
Historian 14/04/20(Sun)04:35 No. 14270

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_for_Castle_Itter

The battle for Castle Itter is a strange example of Wehrmacht troops interacting with political prisoners and American troops with both sides defending against an attacking SS formation. A number of prisoners had been held at Castle Itter in Austria, including a famous tennis star, until their guards departed and they assumed control - eventually seeking assistance from nearby allied forces. US forces would pair up with anti-nazi Wehrmacht Heer forces to defend the castle and rescue the prisoners. They fought against an attacking SS group from the 13th SS division until they were relieved by a stronger American tank force.

Its sometimes called "The Strangest Battle of World War II"


>>
Historian 14/04/20(Sun)06:43 No. 14273

For the most part, Allied prisoners who surrendered to the Germans were treated in accordance with the Geneva Accords. The reverse was trues as well; Germans would go far out of their way to surrender to British or American forces rather than the Russians.

The common perception in Britain and America is that the average German in WWII was a foaming mad, demonic Nazi. This could not be further from the truth, especially in the Army; der Heers was descended from the old German Imperial Army, which was itself descended from the Prussian Army of Frederick II, the same army that crushed Bonaparte at Waterloo. The Nazis were generally loathed by the professionals of der Heers, especially the long service officers and troopers who had served in the Reichswehr, quite possibly the finest army in modern history.


>>
Historian 14/05/09(Fri)06:26 No. 14283

>>14273
The Allies treated the German POWs well until the armistice. After that there was no reason to (as they couldn't retaliate) so they let hundreds of thousands of them to to starve to death in the prison camps.


>>
Historian 14/05/10(Sat)22:56 No. 14292

>>14273
>>For the most part, Allied prisoners who surrendered to the Germans were treated in accordance with the Geneva Accords.

The ghosts of those 3-4 million dead Soviet Soldiers would like to have a word with you

>>This could not be further from the truth, especially in the Army; der Heers was descended from the old German Imperial Army, which was itself descended from the Prussian Army of Frederick II, the same army that crushed Bonaparte at Waterloo. The Nazis were generally loathed by the professionals of der Heers, especially the long service officers and troopers who had served in the Reichswehr, quite possibly the finest army in modern history.

Uh huh, I guess that's why Von Manstein wrote shit like "this is a struggle against Judeo-Bolshevism"


>>
Historian 14/05/11(Sun)10:02 No. 14293

I did hear an interesting take on it that >>14273
seems to be echoing, which Dan Carlin delved into a bit in the latest installment of his Blueprint for Armageddon series http://www.dancarlin.com/disp.php/hharchive. Badly summarized by me, as the sides started tallying up their escalating grievances regarding ethical warfare, their own adherence to their ethics started crumbling, and ultimately everything descended into a crazy shitstorm like likes of which no one had ever imagined before. So really, it depends on when & where you were & what you were doing & who you were doing it with & to & for & how & why & & &...

Having read several thousand firsthand reports of countless battles in WWII, there appears to be nothing consistent, universal or predictable about hardly any of it. Shit gets so out of control, WWI doesn't even seem like a World War by comparison, to the total and complete meltdown of WWII.

OP, I'm afraid any answer to your Q is obscured by the murky depths in the bottomless pit of subjectivity, and yet floating further downward each passing year.


>>
Historian 14/05/11(Sun)18:31 No. 14294

>>14292
Manstein was correct; he just happened to be on the losing side, and the winners get to write the history books. Besides, everybody in the OKW had to pay lip-service to the loopy ethos of the Nazis...just like all those American generals and admirals had to smile and pretend to worship a president they absolutely loathed. Politics trumps reason and honesty every time.


>>
Historian 14/05/20(Tue)19:01 No. 14308

>>14294
>Manstein was correct; he just happened to be on the losing side, and the winners get to write the history books.

I guess that's why Stalin's purges ended up cutting down on the number of Jews in the Soviet government to the point of shit of firing most of the Jews in the foreign service so that Hitler won't have an excuse to not negotiate Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact?


>>
Historian 14/06/09(Mon)15:45 No. 14320

>>14218
Western Allies were treated fairly well by the Nazi's and vice versa. Food was in short supply in Nazi camps towards the end of the war, but not through malice of the Nazi's. Both sides took a dim view of escapee's, with the Nazi's being more unpleasant to those they caught again.

An exception were British Commando's, who trolled Hitler to the point he ordered them not to be taken prisoner. Though this was ignored by a fair chunk of the Wehrmacht.

You were fucked if you were captured on the Eastern Front though.



[Return] [Entire Thread] [Last 50 posts]



Delete post []
Password  
Report post
Reason