Is it just me ?

No Ron it's not just you. I will stand shoulder to shoulder on this one with you. Thank God a vet is answering back.

I saw this posting on the entry date. People keep all manner of tributes because they are proud of what they represent. When I saw that this former SS kept his badges that told me without a doubt he was proud of himself and of the SS, as are the family, otherwise they would have been thrown into the fire.

Unfortunately the nazi mentality was not stamped out in 1945 and is alive and well. I think the war crime trials were closed too quickly which didn't help things.

The comments of all service people committing atrocities floored me because my father was an upstanding person. How does someone make a statement like this ?? I never criticize anyone on forum but I think the vets need to be supported. People can be armchair theorists but until you have been in the boots of the veterans these opinions are worthless.

best wishes
Chrissie
Chrissie, in relation to the above you have made the assertion that Pollux was proud of his Gandpa's service because otherwise "they would have been thrown into the fire".

Yet in post 11 of this very thread you have written thus:

Are we distinguishing between one fondly remembered ex SS grandpa and the SS in it's entirety?



Given the disparity between the 2 posts I'd be inclined to think that perhaps you've either changed your mind about Pollux's intentions or that you are being slightly inconsistent in your views on this matter?

 

Almost all of those criteria [i.e., for joining the Reich SS] were put aside at some point during the war (some were laughable or impossible even before that) to the extent that many units eventually consisted largely of conscripted men, or those 'volunteered' en masse from more conventional units or recruit pools.
One of the reasons I have a problem with the so often universally applied 'elite' status given to SS formations in combat terms - No matter what Himmler's intentions, many were no better in military ability & motivation than their Heer counterparts, some were worse.
Adam, you are quite right there. Here is an unpleasant 'incident' I was unaware of until very recently:Of the approximately 25,000 ethnic Germans from Croatia liable for military service around 17,000 were serving in the Waffen-SS after the existing militias, task forces, and Croatian-German territorials had been integrated into the 'Prince Eugene' division. A mass mutiny which occurred in the summer of 1943 sheds some light on conditions in the division. As a result 173 members of the division, all of them ethnic Germans, were arrested and sent to Dachau concentration camp. On 17 October Himmler wrote to the divisional commander, Arthur Phleps, in exceptionally moderate terms; evidently he was well aware of conditions in the division, in which many were serving by no means voluntarily. According to Himmler, what was decisive about the case was the fact that the ethnic Germans were being continually insulted by their superiors. In particular, the 'nice Balkan habit' had spread of 'cursing the mother of the person concerned'. Himmler ordered drastic counter-measures. He instructed that 'in every such case in which NCOs or men curse a comrade's mother, they are to be shot on the spot'. In particularly serious cases the person should be hanged. He had nevertheless, so he informed Phleps, 'consigned the 173 ethnic Germans to a camp so that they could be trained 'to be good volunteers of the Waffen-SS' and improve their knowledge of German.
Heinrich Himmler, page 674
Dachau! Some language school!

 

I gave this young man support at the start not knowing where it was going to go.

No one except another veteran can truly understand the hell on earth that Ron felt living the experiences he has. He has thanked people who support him. Ron is fragile right now as he is preparing for an emotional pilgrimage to visit his deceased brother's grave for the first time.

History is a report of facts. It is on a different level than where Ron is coming from. While others found the posts interesting, did these same persons stop to wonder how this was affecting the WWII vets?

Then they had to endure the badges post. That is not the behavior of someone who is ashamed. Following that, someone expressed how great it must be to have the badges.

It went from bad to worse with the post that most military persons have committed atrocities then and now. Well isn't that a slap across the face for all vets on this forum? Ron said this is what "disturbes" him the most and posed the question "Is it just me”? He is not posing a historical question he is posing an emotional question - he lived it. This is why historians opinions don't concern me unless like I said they have walked in Ron's boots.

If some are defensive and find these fighting words take a step back and ask yourself what is confrontational about preferring and supporting the feelings and opinion of Ron, an honourable, elderly veteran?

peaceful

 

People can be armchair theorists but until you have been in the boots of the veterans these opinions are worthless


Going to be a bit difficult writing about Waterloo, don't you think?

 

Ron is fragile right now ...
Actually he's a tough old nut.

Speak up, that man!

 

Ah Waterloo - now we are talking,the Defence of Hougoumont farm. If it were not for the Guards holding the farm all would have been lost - he said that with his wellies on, The Duke of Wellington. Good old 'Woodentops!'

 

Oh yea, I know Ron's tough - that's what keeps him ticking. Emotionally going through a lot at the time. I care about him very much. Has a gem of a wife too he says.

Chrissie

P.S. Oh gosh I'm running for cover Peter if the Battle of Waterloo is raised. The cannon balls will be flying between the British and the French !!!!

 

I gave this young man support at the start not knowing where it was going to go.

No one except another veteran can truly understand the hell on earth that Ron felt living the experiences he has. He has thanked people who support him. Ron is fragile right now as he is preparing for an emotional pilgrimage to visit his deceased brother's grave for the first time.

History is a report of facts. It is on a different level than where Ron is coming from. While others found the posts interesting, did these same persons stop to wonder how this was affecting the WWII vets?

Then they had to endure the badges post. That is not the behavior of someone who is ashamed. Following that, someone expressed how great it must be to have the badges.

It went from bad to worse with the post that most military persons have committed atrocities then and now. Well isn't that a slap across the face for all vets on this forum? Ron said this is what "disturbes" him the most and posed the question "Is it just me”? He is not posing a historical question he is posing an emotional question - he lived it. This is why historians opinions don't concern me unless like I said they have walked in Ron's boots.

If some are defensive and find these fighting words take a step back and ask yourself what is confrontational about preferring and supporting the feelings and opinion of Ron, an honourable, elderly veteran?

peaceful
You do realise that this thread was started not because of Pollux's material posted but because of another member's comments?

Here is a post of Ron's regarding the reason why he started the thread:

One of the lesser joys of trying to be objective when posting is that one is continually arguing with oneself.
To explain:
When I first spotted the thread started by Pollux5
http://www.ww2talk.com/forum/axis-units/42269-discovering-my-family-history.html I asked myself whether or not this was the way the forum was heading and, if so, did I really want to be part of it?

Then, I argued with myself, why should this young man not post an article on the forum telling of his recent discovery and displaying his memorabilia for all to see.

I can’t remember ever seeing a charter that set forth the aims or the guiding rules of ww2talk but as I understand it the forum was set up to deals with WW2 matters and to allow discussion on all topics.

I also think it has become accepted that there is a proviso that articles are not allowed that would attempt to be discriminatory against any race or creed or attempt to promote glorification of the Third Reich.

I couldn’t see where Pollux had contravened any of the rules and so I decided not to make any comment on the thread itself but rather to open another one to discuss the matter and this is where we are at the moment.

It was at that point when I saw the response by 591 Research, and this, I contend, is a completely different kettle of fish.

Had 591 Research stated some soldiers I could have forgiven him.

Had he said many soldiers I would have not even bothered to make a reply.

591 Research , I would remind you, said “most soldiers” and this I find completely reprehensible and a personal insult to all those who fought and died in the war against evil.

Finally, I feel that nothing he has said since apologises for his original comment.

By contrast, I am heartened to receive support from other members in response to my thread title of “Is it only me?”

It appears not !

Ron
So now can we agree that Ron is not talking about Pollux, his memorabilia, or anything else to do with that, and that it was more about another comment on that original thread? He says himself that Pollux had not contravened any of the rules, in fact you seem to be one of the few who are taking issue with Pollux, and to be fair, if anyone has cause to object it would be Ron. But he hasnt.

No one except another veteran can truly understand the hell on earth that Ron felt living the experiences he has.
I'm very aware of this and I'm also aware that Ron understands the nature of this forum which you dont seem to, that the forum was set up to deals with WW2 matters and to allow discussion on all topics. Not just the British/Commonwealth, or even the Allies, but the whole war. Its about all the subjects and that includes the Holocaust, the POWs, the Evil that perpetrated the regimes that were the Axis forces.
Ron is fragile right now as he is preparing for an emotional pilgrimage to visit his deceased brother's grave for the first time.
I'm sure you mean this in a nice way but I dont think Ron needs a spokesperson to tell us how he is feeling. Ron is one of the most lucid and succinct posters on the forum. If he thinks that people are trampling on his emotions and feelings, believe me he'll let them know. Until then I'll assume he's ok and continue with the discussion. I know him well enough and I think he has enough respect for me to do that.

History is a report of facts. It is on a different level than where Ron is coming from. While others found the posts interesting, did these same persons stop to wonder how this was affecting the WWII vets?
Again I say, you are on a History Website, and again even though you keep speaking on Rons behalf I say Read his post above! He gets that this is a History Website and that publishing of pictures such as this is done for the benefit of knowledge, not promoting rascism or evil views. And again, if Ron has an objection he'll let the moderators know.
This is why historians opinions don't concern me unless like I said they have walked in Ron's boots.
Well thats your opinion and you are entitled to it - I have a different opinion. You feel that History can only be gleaned by the people who lived it, I think that History should be studied by as many sources as possible, only then is it possible to get a complete picture.

Then they had to endure the badges post. That is not the behavior of someone who is ashamed.
Again I say, Pollux should be applauded for the manner in which he went about putting details about his relatives online. He never once showed any hint of arrogance, rascism or indeed tried to defend the actions of his ancestor. He is guilty of nothing. And if you dont believe me look up at my posting of Rons words. He has not contravened any rule breaking. And again if Ron had an issue with it he would have complained. He hasnt, to my knowledge. This forum is a wonderful place where people can discuss all aspects of the war in a respectful, neutral way. There is nothing disrespectful in Pollux's posts, and the Grandson should not be tried for the sins and beliefs of the Grandfather.

I have Studied Hitler's Germany and its wars for as long as I care to remember. I will admit to having more than a sneaking curiousity as to how something so insidious, so morally corrupt as Nazism can pervade and influence a society and persuade it to commit atrocities in the name of the nation.
Its hard enough to get German members to be as open as Pollux has been and if you think that his posts are disrespectful then you are truly in for an eyeopener on some of the other "history" sites where candid support for Nazism is rife. Having read your post, I could fully understand if Pollux decided not to post anymore.

Maybe you think my words are disrespectful towards Ron and other Veterans. They most certainly are not. They are in defense of someone who is being accused unfairly of being "unashamed" about their family's past and the accuser is purporting to speak on behalf of a Veteran.

 

Actually he's a tough old nut.

Speak up, that man!
Hear Hear!!

 

Ah Waterloo - now we are talking,the Defence of Hougoumont farm. If it were not for the Guards holding the farm all would have been lost - he said that with his wellies on, The Duke of Wellington. Good old 'Woodentops!'




View attachment 74719
Takes a stubborn Irishman to sort out a rowdy Frenchman!!!

 

Its quite ironic that you choose to question Pollux's motives when I had the priveledge to work with/for him on one of the forums best threads.

The Murder of Five Captured RAF Officers.

 

The comments of all service people committing atrocities floored me because my father was an upstanding person. How does someone make a statement like this ?? I never criticize anyone on forum but I think the vets need to be supported. People can be armchair theorists but until you have been in the boots of the veterans these opinions are worthless.

best wishes
Chrissie

Dear Chrissie,

may I suggest you don't waste your time further on here then, seeking for advice and help from people whose opinions are worthless, as you so peacefully claim.
By the way, your selective reading is really annoying, to say the very least.

Best wishes
Heimbrent

 

Will someone just let me know when it's safe to come out ? ...............

Goodnight !

Ron

 

Brilliant!

 

Thank you for all your kind comments for my benefit that I will take under review.

peaceful

 

Originally Posted by Wills
Ah Waterloo - now we are talking,the Defence of Hougoumont farm. If it were not for the Guards holding the farm all would have been lost - he said that with his wellies on, The Duke of Wellington. Good old 'Woodentops!'




Attachment 74719



Takes a stubborn Irishman to sort out a rowdy Frenchman!!!


Indeed, The Duke of 'Boots' was a Mick!

 

My apology to Polluck who I have misjudged

peaceful

 

?

That's better !

Now that normal service has been resumed, may I return to the matter in hand ?

I would remind you that although I may be occasionally given to flippancy I was being completely serious when I posed the question "Is it only me ?"

It was, of course, good to have my initial reaction endorsed by various members and I am happy to reiterate that my "beef" was not with the original poster but purely another member's scant regard to what are considered normal courtesies on this forum.

I also, for the record, have never suscribed to the theory that only those that lived in "those" times are qualified to write about it and Peter G's comment about writing about Waterloo is well taken however by the same token I do not take kindly to those who would question a veteran's firmly held convictions that were molded by his actual experience of warfare.

Having said that, I have to admit that being a "Vet" on this (and other) sites is not without it's advantages

On the rare occasion when someone is tempted to slag you off for an intemperate remark that you may have made, you can usually rely on instant support from the "Don't let's be beastly to the oldies" brigade

In addition, when you do make postings, your comments appear to have been studied and, if you are lucky, are sometimes even accepted as being honest and factual.

On the down side, our very age means that we have to be constantly vigilant if we are to hold the fort for those who are no longer here and, trite as that may sound, I believe that to be completely true.

Ron

 

Thank you Ron

peaceful

 

Takes a stubborn Irishman to sort out a rowdy Frenchman!!!
Indeed, The Duke of 'Boots' was a Mick!

Cough cough!

Being born in a stable does not make one a horse.
Second before last quote.

Sorry