Hi All I have this guy in Liverpool swearing blind that all German soldiers knew about the final solution? I find that utter rubbish and doubt it is true. Anyone able to tell me I am correct please. cheers Ant "If two men agree on a subject too quick, one of them didn't think about it enough". I'd say, your approach to this man is the only good one there is. I could write a long essay saying that some knew and others didn't. Or that the general atmosphere in europe was rather against jews or at least indifferent to their fate. But I when i get confronted with an attitude like the one you have been confronted with respond this way: Did you know that almost all allied frontline soldiers witnessed warcrimes against german prisoners during WW2, and almost none was charged Read the details about the bombing on Dresden to find out how maybe.... that was a warcrime as well? Why are we shocked when germans kill prisoners in a movie but when allies kill german prisoners we feel like they deserves it? Did you know that most of the arrests of jews in Holland were done by local police itself In the whole of southern france there were no more than 3000 german secret police and the rest were french themselves that were in control The Dutch had a brigade at the allied side of about 1800 men, of which 900 were forced to join (conscripted). But they had 50.000 volunteers in the german army of which 25000 in the Waffen-ss. How come we only knew about that after the fall of the USSR (they captured the personel files of the waffen-ss after the war). Why did the government know about that but we, the people didn't? Why do we know about Srebrenica in Bosnia, but we know nothing about the fate of 110000 croatian serbs that were kicked out of Croatia in 1995 What happened to the Serbs in Kosovo? What happened to the kurds in Turkye Did you know that all allied soldiers at the frontline witnessed warcrimes beeing done by allies? And so on...... As a Dutch professional soldier and officer with three missions I can only say that the line between beeing a hero or a criminal is very, very thin, and is in the eye of the beholder. As for beeing responsible I can say in my opinion there are three categories: People who know and participate or actively collaborate(10 to 20%) People who know (or suspect) but are apathic (70 to 90 %) People who don't know and therefore can't act (10 to 20%) The first group is most of the time in control and will keep as many in the second group or third group as possible (controlling media etc...That was so in in the 1940's and is still so at present day). After the war we (the allies) said ok, the first group must have been 50 % because the germans actively chose Hitler as their leader. Then the second group knew, so they should have acted, which they did't so they are guilty. the third group should have known, so they are dumb and ignorent so they are guilty as well. A big reply.... for a very big subject because what i am trying to stress here is that you need to think about what is the truth or what isn't. And if you are really interested in a certain subject, you need to investigate all sides. cheers, Rob
[...] Did you know that almost all allied frontline soldiers witnessed warcrimes against german prisoners during WW2, and almost none was charged Read the details about the bombing on Dresden to find out how maybe.... that was a warcrime as well? Why are we shocked when germans kill prisoners in a movie but when allies kill german prisoners we feel like they deserves it? [...] Did you know that all allied soldiers at the frontline witnessed warcrimes beeing done by allies? [...] (Sorry for cutting your post to pieces; I didn't consider the rest irrelevant or wrong, I just merely wanted to reply to the points above only) You're on very thin ice with what you state above - mainly for the very sloppy use of the term 'war crime'. Too quickly a crime committed in war is called 'war crime' even though in many cases it isn't. You cannot throw crimes like the Holocaust or the killing of Soviet soldiers (e.g. executions of commissars/politruks but also letting thousands of Soviet prisoners starve to death) and infrequent killings of POWs into the same pot, calling all 'war crimes'. While the first undoubtedly are war crimes, killings of prisoners is illegal (in most cases) but in most cases not a war crime. It all very much depends on the intentions, the scale and the situation whether an action can be considered a crime or even a war crime (mind, we're talking about war here - unlike in a society at peace killing someone at war isn't usually considered murder). Many, but certainly not all Allied soldiers witnessed the killings of German soldiers, but taking those out of context and claiming they're war crimes is disproportionate to say the least. As for the different perception of prisoner killing in films, well, this is Hollywood's approach of explaining history to its audience, I s'pose. You are right about it (and it's something that I find annoying, too), but it's a different aspect which deals with the cultural accounting for the past and with historiography rather than history itself. Either way, all mentioned above doesn't have anything to do with what German soldiers knew of the Holocaust; there is no correlation, and neither does the fact that others were involved in crimes justify anything so in my opinion it doesn't serve so well as an answer to the statement that German soldiers didn't know about the Holocaust (or other crimes).
I wonder how many people know what goes on within the Penal System of their own country. In WWII many who ended up in the KZs - many of them gentile servicemen from Air Forces, SOE, Commandos etc were classed as terrorists by the Germans - rather like Al Quada today - we know some of what goes inside Guantanamo or the Afghan prisons and were able to curb excesses - however in the Police State that Germany was under the Nazi regime the voices of protest were muted. Though to their credit the Luftwaffe demanded the SS release Allied airmen to them and made sure they ended up in the POW system. I think in war - crimes are committed by all sides though it is the Victors that pursue the worst excesses of the defeated while 'hushing-up' matters relating to their own troops
"I think in war - crimes are committed by all sides..." Yes but. On one side we see criminal behaviour condoned and encouraged by the State because it's all very well and as it should be, and on the other side criminal behaviour gets by until the wrong person hears of it and decides to take action for one or more reasons. That's your difference.
One thing I'm uncomfortable with in such discussion, is the not-uncommon striking of some sort of balance from atrocity to atrocity, as if there were a virtual scale and moral equivalency can be worked out. An atrocity is an atrocity, whether committed in the millions, or a relative handful of events. Each individual event has to stand on it's own horrible 'merits'. "I think in war - crimes are committed by all sides..." Yes but. On one side we see criminal behaviour condoned and encouraged by the State because it's all very well and as it should be, and on the other side criminal behaviour gets by until the wrong person hears of it and decides to take action for one or more reasons. That's your difference. But that is indeed a major point to my eye. There's a world of difference between an institutionalised programme of crime, condoned and encouraged by a state, and the hardly surprising incidences that will inevitably occur in any massed army. Or any mass population for that matter. And doubtless the circumstances of wars & conscript armies make for greater opportunity for the criminally inclined. There is also (purely in my mind maybe) a case for some understanding of 'Counter-atrocity', carried out by troops that may have witnessed what horrors the other side were doing as part of those state-sanctioned programmes, while pumped up with the heat of the moment and their recent history of conflict & loss, and responded in an understandably emotive way. Those that summarily killed KL guards etc. are still entirely understandable in my book. Potentially a dangerous line of thinking, but a personal view. So we're perhaps drifting into the rather difficult territory of all subjects under a totalitarian regime, and whether their very existence under that regime may imply some sort of complicity in it's most extreme acts. There's a grey area there, a difficulty of the individual in the face of totalitarianism. If the average German squaddie knew; just how much was he personally able to really affect things - not everyone's a Stauffenburg or a Scholl.
One thing I'm uncomfortable with in such discussion, is the not-uncommon striking of some sort of balance from atrocity to atrocity, as if there were a virtual scale and moral equality can be worked out. An atrocity is an atrocity, whether committed in the millions, or a relative handful of events. Each individual event has to stand on it's own horrible 'merits'. [...] So we're perhaps drifting into the rather difficult territory of all subjects under a totalitarian regime, and whether their very existence under that regime may imply some sort of complicity in it's most extreme acts. There's a grey area there, a difficulty of the individual in the face of totalitarianism. If the average German squaddie knew; just how much was he personally able to really affect things - not everyone's a Stauffenburg or a Scholl. Just in case you thought I was downplaying atrocities that weren't "committed in the millions" - I wasn't. All I said is that the term "war crime" can't be applied to every action that is against the laws of war, e.g. shooting a prisoner. I didn't say shooting a POW was anywhere legal or okay, I just said that you have to consider scale, situation and intention - like you do, when you say that you understand very well why KZ guards were murdered. As for the "average German soldier": Knowledge of the Holocaust and being able to affect things are two different aspects which aren't necessarily connected. Certainly not everyone has the guts to stand up against a total regime. But then again it's not like the average German soldier would have wanted to stand up against it and simply couldn't because he didn't have the balls. There was a widespread consent about Jews and so-called "Jewish bolshevism"; so even if the scale of mass executions and how they were carried out was indeed a shock to many they would still agree with the basic idea.
Just in case you thought I was downplaying atrocities that weren't "committed in the millions" Not at all K. Just a general comment about the delicacy of such comparisons, and how often such discussions can turn into a "yeah, well both sides did it", cos they didn't in any truly comparative way, really. As for the "average German soldier": Knowledge of the Holocaust and being able to affect things are two different aspects which aren't necessarily connected. Certainly not everyone has the guts to stand up against a total regime. But then again it's not like the average German soldier would have wanted to stand up against it and simply couldn't because he didn't have the balls. There was a widespread consent about Jews and so-called "Jewish bolshevism"; so even if the scale of mass executions and how they were carried out was indeed a shock to many they would still agree with the basic idea. Pretty much agree there, sadly. I think the oft-restated perception that the allied soldier was fighting in some sort of personal crusade against evil is incorrect too. There was obviously a just war going on, they were on the right side for sure to my mind, but they weren't all subscribed to a holy war, and could be said to have had as many complex and varied political or prejudiced viewpoints as any other human being. Owen's (I think it was Owen, maybe Drew) posted some nasty anti-semitic stuff from contemporary allied officers before. 100 shades of grey again really when attempting to assess individuals and their feelings, or how they fit into 'the fight' as a whole - the personal private view on specific subjects and the mass/political do not necessarily chime together, never have really.
German troops in the east and their commanders were expected to offer assistance to the SS and "Order Police in the rounding up of "Jews, communists and enemies of the State" - as far as I can recall this was one of the charges levelled to Von Manstein in his post war trial and certainly the recorded conversations between captured Generals and high ranking officers confirmed that they knew. In recent TV histories German soldiers have given accounts of what they saw and what they learnt was happening - the "war of annihilation" which Hitler had demanded. As Browning described in his book "Ordinary Men" it was something of an open secret one which had to be tied up, film footage does exist which shows Luftwaffe and Wehrmacht troops assisting to round up the unfortunates who would be handed over to the SS and their "security services" and many could not change what took place but had to deal with the guilt of knowing.
This is a true story and the reason she was working against Hitler was her brother in the German Army in Russia told her of the terrible crimes being committed. Sophie's brother was a German Soldier and saw the terrible crimes committed against the Jews and Russians. If he witnessed for sure others did as well. This a GREAT movie about Germans trying to stop the killing of innocents. Sophie Scholl: The Final Days (Sophie Scholl - Die letzten Tage)2005NR 117 minutes Arrested for participating in the White Rose resistance movement, anti-Nazi activist Sophie Scholl (Julia Jentsch) is subjected to a highly charged interrogation by the Gestapo, testing her loyalty to her cause, her family and her convictions. Based on true events, director Marc Rothemund's absorbing Oscar-nominated drama explores maintaining human resolve in the face of intense pressure from a system determined to silence whistle-blowers. Cast:Julia Jentsch, Fabian Hinrichs, Gerald Alexander Held, Johanna Gastdorf, André Hennicke, Florian Stetter, Maximilian Brückner, Johannes Suhm, Lilli Jung, Jorg HubeDirector:Marc RothemundGenres:Dramas, Foreign Movies, Dramas based on real life, Foreign Dramas, Political Dramas, German MoviesLanguage:GermanThis movie is:Emotional, DarkAvailability:Streaming and DVD
Gregg In forum etiquette the use of larger font combined with bold does indeed look like shouting, so not just the use of capital letters. Highlighting, by use of bold, should be used judiciously to emphasise, not make readers back off from the screen. Please check the post, before submitting - by using the preview button in advanced posting mode.
To the original question: whether "all German soldiers knew about the final solution," I firmly believe that not all of them knew. I am presently re-reading Guy Sajers's The Forgotten Soldier, a fascinating memoir by a German soldier who served on the Russian front. Sajer does not mention the extermination of Jews in his book, and I may be reaching here, but his occasional philosophical commentaries here and there in the book would have lent themselves to condemnation of the "final solution," and I think he would have done so had he known. Barring some mandate that all soldiers be made aware, which wasn't the case, it seems likely that many soldiers remained ignorant of the mass murders. In Sajer's case (and it takes just one exception to refute the argument, right?) I think he and his comrades knew very little about what was going on behind their front.
diane i used it for one word not the entire statement, if i had used it for the entire statement maybe that would be called screaming. however how someone gets a screaming out of one word for great is beyond me. then of course i know some of us have thinner skins and skulls then others. i have been on the internet since 1995, i know most of the rules and i have never ever taken a single word interpreted as a person screaming, nor have i seen anyone else until now, however we all live and learn. i won't argue with you diane, you are the authority on this site and i will abide by the rules because i respect what you are trying to accomplish here and i respect you. what you have to do is not a easy thing for anyone and you do it so well.
To the original question: whether "all German soldiers knew about the final solution," I firmly believe that not all of them knew. I am presently re-reading Guy Sajers's The Forgotten Soldier, a fascinating memoir by a German soldier who served on the Russian front. Sajer does not mention the extermination of Jews in his book, and I may be reaching here, but his occasional philosophical commentaries here and there in the book would have lent themselves to condemnation of the "final solution," and I think he would have done so had he known. Barring some mandate that all soldiers be made aware, which wasn't the case, it seems likely that many soldiers remained ignorant of the mass murders. In Sajer's case (and it takes just one exception to refute the argument, right?) I think he and his comrades knew very little about what was going on behind their front. Sajer's book is not a memoir. It is a work of fiction based on fact. Lots of posts about his book on the forum & various websites about him & his book.
diane i used it for one word not the entire statement, if i had used it for the entire statement maybe that would be called screaming. It wasn't about the underlined word it was when you copy & pasted the type from that article it came out in large bold font. That's why Kate mentioned the screaming. Anyway, nothing to see here, move along now, please.
This german pow was a lt.in the german army signal corp spoke at our seniors world war two round-table meeting last fall. lt. gerhard jennes told us every single german pow was required to see the films of the nazi death camps before being returned to germany after the war. gerhard told us every pow at every camp in the usa was made to sit and watch every foot of the films of all the death camps. he was locked up with his own father a german pow and lutheran pastor and he was made to watch them also. if a german soldier said he did not know gerhard said he would find that very hard to believe and he was a german lt. p.s. i forgot lt. gerhard mentioned while he was waiting for his papers for north africa he was stationed at a pow camp for russians. he said they were dying daily and by some amount. he mentioned this to his superior and the officer told him to forget what he saw or he would be on the eastern front by the end of the month. lt. gerhard said it was terrible the russians were dying from starvation and no one cared because they were considered subhuman. finally he said at one camp a german guard disappeared and it wasn't proven but it was believed the russians ate him. WWII Weekend: “WWII POWs: Forgiving the Past” Contact: Lehigh Valley Historical Society Description: Meet Gerhard Hennes, a former German soldier who was imprisoned by the Allies, and Wendall Phillips, an American soldier imprisoned first by the Germans, from whom he escaped, and later by the Japanese. Hear their stories of wartime horrors and witness these former enemies Start Date: Jun 03, 2011 End Date: Jun 03, 2011 Time: 7:00pm - 8:30pm Address: 432 W. Walnut St., Allentown Philly and the Countryside, PA Map: View Map Region: Philly and the Countryside Phone: 610-435-1074 Admission: Free to Lehigh County Historical Society members, $6.00 for non member adults & $4 .00children. Website: www.discoverlehighvalley.com To the original question: whether "all German soldiers knew about the final solution," I firmly believe that not all of them knew. I am presently re-reading Guy Sajers's The Forgotten Soldier, a fascinating memoir by a German soldier who served on the Russian front. Sajer does not mention the extermination of Jews in his book, and I may be reaching here, but his occasional philosophical commentaries here and there in the book would have lent themselves to condemnation of the "final solution," and I think he would have done so had he known. Barring some mandate that all soldiers be made aware, which wasn't the case, it seems likely that many soldiers remained ignorant of the mass murders. In Sajer's case (and it takes just one exception to refute the argument, right?) I think he and his comrades knew very little about what was going on behind their front.
Sajer's book is not a memoir. It is a work of fiction based on fact. Lots of posts about his book on the forum & various websites about him & his book. I'm familiar with the controversy about Sajer's book. Division historian for the Grossdeutschland Division, Helmuth Spaeter, once possibly Sajer's greatest doubter, has had a change of heart. I think Sajer's work is as imperfect and blemished as a foot soldier's story should be. During research and writing my own book, which I am sure has its own imperfections, I discovered many instances where firmly held and sincere beliefs by individual soldiers were in fact mistaken, sometimes incredibly at variance with what really happened. Had they written their own memoirs, I am sure doubters would have been quick to point out their mistakes. So maybe we can agree to disagree, and consider whether every German soldier knew about the final solution.
Obviously not everyone knew (jn a force of that size there would have been one) but I think the idea is did the majority or vast majority. Certainly in the 70's when I first began researching the war it was common to hear that the Army, Civilians etc did not know. I don't think you can use memoirs as proof. Most do not mention what they don't want too. How many really mention say executing civilians, rape, visiting the brothel or other crimes. You may see the odd reference but always of other people. Picture this scene, the lucky hero after many scrapes gets home to his family, his mother says was it awful son ? to which he replies yes mother but there was this day when we shot a couple of hundred civilians on an anti partisan sweep. burnt down their village and finished off by a visit to the field brothel where I had sex with an under age half starving girl . Not likely, I have watched hundreds of hours of documentary interviews and only remember one where a man admitted that he pulled the trigger during a mass execution of civilians and he was an auxillary Russian trooper.
Picture this scene, the lucky hero after many scrapes gets home to his family, his mother says was it awful son ? to which he replies yes mother but there was this day when we shot a couple of hundred civilians on an anti partisan sweep. burnt down their village and finished off by a visit to the field brothel where I had sex with an under age half starving girl . Not likely, I have watched hundreds of hours of documentary interviews and only remember one where a man admitted that he pulled the trigger during a mass execution of civilians and he was an auxillary Russian trooper. That pretty much sums it up.
