Eisenhower's "Death Camps"/US Teatment of German POWs

Holocaust denial and related subjects.
User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5852
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Eisenhower's "Death Camps"/US Teatment of German POWs

Postby Jeffk 1970 » Mon Sep 12, 2016 12:44 am

There is a subset of Holocaust denial that claims that the German POW camps set up in the Rhineland were "death camps" where, allegedly, a million German soldiers died.

You can read more about that here:

http://www.rense.com/general46/germ.htm

http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v10/v10p161_brech.html

Basically the story goes that Eisenhower hated Germans so much he set out to murder a large portion of the German POWs under his control after the war. He subjected these German POWs to terrible conditions including lack of shelter and starvation rations. There is some implication that Eisenhower was a Jew or had Jewish ancestory.

These claims seem to center around a book called "Other Losses," a book written by James Bacque. Full disclosure, I have not read this book and, based upon what I've read about it, I will not ever read this book.

What Bacque says, essentially, is that in the Rhinelind POW Camps German POWs perished because of mistreatment, disease and starvation. The US refused to allow the Red Cross to feed or treat these men, they also refused to allow the local population to feed them. This despite the fact there were rations to feed these men, collected in Italy. Also, the US servicemen mistreated these POWs, even committing murder. There was no shelter built for these POWs and the camps even contained women.


As far as I can tell, James Bacque is not a Holocaust denier. He wrote fiction before researching this book.

Now, author and historian Stephen Ambrose reviewed the book and convened a panel to discuss the book.

You can see his review here:

http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/b/bac ... e-001.html

One of the first things Ambrose did was to praise Bacque about actually writing about a difficult subject, on that hadn't been researched before.
The second thing Ambrose did was to dismiss Bacque's findings.

Bacque believed that there was not a food shortage in Europe in 1945, that the allies had warehouses full of food, that the US turned away the assistance of the Red Cross and that the German POWs were on starvation rations.

Ambrose corrects these assumptions. There was a severe food shortage in Europe in 1945. As early as February of 1945 Eisenhower wrote that the food situation was dire and was requesting additional food shipments to feed both the civilian and military population of Europe. Ambrose noted that the official ration for the German POWs, 1550 calories, was the same ration for Paris (granted this ration was sometimes not met for the prisoners but this was the same everywhere). The official ration in the USSR was lower while this was just a little higher in Britain. Yes, there were warehouses full of food but this was a stockpile, the allies feared a severe food shortage and were preparing for it.
Yes, the US turned away the Red Cross but this was to feed Dispaced Persons.

So, in essence, this subset of denial is based upon false conclusions. An example is over 600,000 Volksturm simply released, apparently Bacque included these numbers in the dead, the reality is these members of the Volksturm (young boys and old men) were released because they weren't a threat. Instead of one million deaths the number is, officially, around 56,000 out of around five million POWs.

This should not cloud the fact that these men (and women) were housed in terrible conditions and some were mistreated. Ambrose does praise this aspect of Bacque's book.

There is a lot more but the information is contained in the links I provided.
Last edited by Jeffk 1970 on Sun Sep 18, 2016 5:17 pm, edited 3 times in total.

User avatar
Denying-History
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1651
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2016 3:01 pm

Re: Eisenhower's "Death Camps"

Postby Denying-History » Mon Sep 12, 2016 2:20 am

Image

Image
(Taken from Eisenhower and the German POWs)

I personally believe this one document shuts down Bacques argument as a whole.
« Oral history is a complex field. After all, memory can be a distorting mirror, as anyone who has ever worked with memoir literature knows very well...They may be imperfect, and, at times, inaccurate as the narrator tries to cast himself in the most favorable light, but all sources are imperfect. Even an archival document reflects how the person who drafted it understood something and remains something less than the unvarnished truth. »
- James Mace

User avatar
Cerdic
Poster
Posts: 366
Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2014 3:55 pm
Location: United Kingdom
Contact:

Re: Eisenhower's "Death Camps"

Postby Cerdic » Mon Sep 12, 2016 1:46 pm

IIRC no other historian has backed up Bacque's findings re: the death toll in the Rhineland POW camps. Historians agree a great number of German POWs died, but all others place the great bulk of this in the Soviet Union. There have been a number of Axis History discussions about Other Losses over the years, check here: https://www.google.co.uk/webhp?sourceid ... istory.com
„(...) Wenn wir irgendetwas beim Nationalsozialismus anerkennen, dann ist es die Anerkennung, daß ihm zum ersten Mal in der deutschen Politik die restlose Mobilisierung der menschlichen Dummheit gelungen ist.“ Kurt Schumacher 23. Februar 1932

Vote Your Conscience.

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5852
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: Eisenhower's "Death Camps"

Postby Jeffk 1970 » Mon Sep 12, 2016 6:45 pm

Cerdic wrote:IIRC no other historian has backed up Bacque's findings re: the death toll in the Rhineland POW camps. Historians agree a great number of German POWs died, but all others place the great bulk of this in the Soviet Union. There have been a number of Axis History discussions about Other Losses over the years, check here: https://www.google.co.uk/webhp?sourceid ... istory.com


Thanks for the link.

I do think that Ambrose is right, the condition of the German POWs in the Rhineland Camps is something that needs to be researched.
However the idea that this was deliberate is ludicrous. One of things I want to add is that the conditions in the camps improved and, even more important, there was an enormous effort to release these POWs as quickly as possible. By the Fall of 1945 most of the camps were empty.
Now, depending on who the POWs were released to went a long way towards determining their survival. The French used German POWs to clear mine fields, which isn't exactly conducive to long term survival. I understand why the French did it but I can hardly condone it.

User avatar
Denying-History
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1651
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2016 3:01 pm

Re: Eisenhower's "Death Camps"

Postby Denying-History » Mon Sep 12, 2016 6:49 pm

I can tell you that his book which I quoted the document from does cover the pow camps quite well.
« Oral history is a complex field. After all, memory can be a distorting mirror, as anyone who has ever worked with memoir literature knows very well...They may be imperfect, and, at times, inaccurate as the narrator tries to cast himself in the most favorable light, but all sources are imperfect. Even an archival document reflects how the person who drafted it understood something and remains something less than the unvarnished truth. »
- James Mace

User avatar
Balsamo
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1470
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 9:29 pm

Re: Eisenhower's "Death Camps"

Postby Balsamo » Mon Sep 12, 2016 10:05 pm

Well, i have read both Bacque's...a long time ago. I cannot remember Other Losses whic is very old, but "crimes and mercies"m despite the usual critics that can be addressed to research made by dilettantes, has its merits, at least to point out to some post war hypocrisies, or in some cases, like those western camps for Pow's (oups forgot, those hordes of millions were no longer Pow's but DEF's) - how a small change in a definition allows to dismiss legal obligations ( bye bye Geneva convention, we have no Pows, but Def's) - of clear "loss of memory"... hence the quite tiny bibliography on this very subject.

I could re-read those books if necessary, but i remember some funny conclusions i made then, basically that the Soviet PoW's camps were almost as deadly as the Nazi's ones DURING THE WAR, but did improved dramatically AFTER the WAR, while German pow's were quite nicely treated by the Western Allies DURING the war, but then suddenly ceased to be PoW's after the war and were treated like lost dogs.

The issue should here not be if Braque did exaggerate its numbers (he certainly did, but sources are lacking) but that it is obvious that the official numbers - like the death rate of 0.3 to 1% for the infamous camp of Remagen is almost an insult not only to basic intelligence, but also to every comparable data available to even just a curious mind.

Because we are all to believe that this kind of shithole here
Image

holding almost 1 million PoW or DEF's during 6 long months, had the same stats as a usual camp, that is with barracks, sanitary installation, etc...0.3% to 1%...

Now, sorry to be provocative here, but it is the example of historical events where Deniers are not on the side one would expect.

Don't even let me on the "Free French camps", or the use of Pow's to clear of mines the country, to rebuild outside any international conventions, Bloody France had a awfull track record when it comes to how it treated prisoners...from "the Bagne" in Guyana (you might remember the movie papillon with Steve Macqueen, but it is also where Dreyfus was sent) to the first Concentration camps established by the third republic to keep the "undesirable foreigners at check" - with a death toll that even before the war was insanely high. Forgotten also the arrest of Belgian soldiers in France by the dying third republic in 1940, a coup'le of thousands died in those camps, before being sent to Germany or even released, it is not a secret here to remind the death rate of those Jews held by Vichy, well things did not improve after liberation.

Any extensive bibliography on those issues? Not much either, i am afraid.

But by 1946, the New fourth republic of France was already killing Vietnamese - that would last 8 years - will then commit a clear Genocide in Cameroon in the 50's, then will come the Algeria issue... but for the last issue, the bibliography is improving.

PS: I am trying to quit smoking, so be indulgent when it comes for my tone... :evil:

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5852
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: Eisenhower's "Death Camps"

Postby Jeffk 1970 » Mon Sep 12, 2016 10:44 pm

Balsamo wrote:Well, i have read both Bacque's...a long time ago. I cannot remember Other Losses whic is very old, but "crimes and mercies"m despite the usual critics that can be addressed to research made by dilettantes, has its merits, at least to point out to some post war hypocrisies, or in some cases, like those western camps for Pow's (oups forgot, those hordes of millions were no longer Pow's but DEF's) - how a small change in a definition allows to dismiss legal obligations ( bye bye Geneva convention, we have no Pows, but Def's) - of clear "loss of memory"... hence the quite tiny bibliography on this very subject.

I could re-read those books if necessary, but i remember some funny conclusions i made then, basically that the Soviet PoW's camps were almost as deadly as the Nazi's ones DURING THE WAR, but did improved dramatically AFTER the WAR, while German pow's were quite nicely treated by the Western Allies DURING the war, but then suddenly ceased to be PoW's after the war and were treated like lost dogs.

The issue should here not be if Braque did exaggerate its numbers (he certainly did, but sources are lacking) but that it is obvious that the official numbers - like the death rate of 0.3 to 1% for the infamous camp of Remagen is almost an insult not only to basic intelligence, but also to every comparable data available to even just a curious mind.

Because we are all to believe that this kind of shithole here
Image

holding almost 1 million PoW or DEF's during 6 long months, had the same stats as a usual camp, that is with barracks, sanitary installation, etc...0.3% to 1%...

Now, sorry to be provocative here, but it is the example of historical events where Deniers are not on the side one would expect.

Don't even let me on the "Free French camps", or the use of Pow's to clear of mines the country, to rebuild outside any international conventions, Bloody France had a awfull track record when it comes to how it treated prisoners...from "the Bagne" in Guyana (you might remember the movie papillon with Steve Macqueen, but it is also where Dreyfus was sent) to the first Concentration camps established by the third republic to keep the "undesirable foreigners at check" - with a death toll that even before the war was insanely high. Forgotten also the arrest of Belgian soldiers in France by the dying third republic in 1940, a coup'le of thousands died in those camps, before being sent to Germany or even released, it is not a secret here to remind the death rate of those Jews held by Vichy, well things did not improve after liberation.

Any extensive bibliography on those issues? Not much either, i am afraid.

But by 1946, the New fourth republic of France was already killing Vietnamese - that would last 8 years - will then commit a clear Genocide in Cameroon in the 50's, then will come the Algeria issue... but for the last issue, the bibliography is improving.

PS: I am trying to quit smoking, so be indulgent when it comes for my tone... :evil:


Good luck....congratulations on the attempt. I smoked decades ago in high school.

I quit because:
I didn't like it.
I really didn't look cool so I got no play from the ladies.
I was actively working out and it messed up my breathing.

I was miserable for about a week, even now I still get random urges. I also noticed that even after I quit alcohol made me lose my control so I still smoked on occasion long after I quit.

As for your points, Bacque's second book was very well received in contrast to his first. The second book might be worth a read.

As far as the American camps, conditions were initially very bad but they did improve. I think the camps being open in the Spring, Summer and Fall helped somewhat, there was less of a chance of dying of exposure.

Balsamo points out, correctly, that Spring weather does not equal hospitable weather. Rainy conditions and cool temperatures would also contribute to conditions that were life threatening.

I will be adding more to this thread, the book "Savage Continent, Europe in the Aftermath of World War II" by Keith Lowe talks about the camps. I'm going to pull it out of my library and have a look.

As far as the German POWs in the USSR, their lot actually improved in 1943 with the improvement in rations (Lend-Lease Spam) and with the Soviets realizing that the POWs made for useful labor.
Last edited by Jeffk 1970 on Fri Sep 16, 2016 6:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5852
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: Eisenhower's "Death Camps"

Postby Jeffk 1970 » Mon Sep 12, 2016 10:47 pm


User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Has No Life
Posts: 16177
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Eisenhower's "Death Camps"

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Mon Sep 12, 2016 10:58 pm

Balsamo wrote:. . . like those western camps for Pow's (oups forgot, those hordes of millions were no longer Pow's but DEF's) - how a small change in a definition allows to dismiss legal obligations ( bye bye Geneva convention, we have no Pows, but Def's) - of clear "loss of memory"...

This - I am going by what's been posted and linked to here - is highly problematic and characterized the Bush presidency's approach much later.
"World peace is certainly an ideal worth striving for; in Hitler's opinion it will be realizable only when one power, the racially best one, has attained complete and uncontested supremacy. That can then provide a sort of world police, seeing to it at the same time that the most valuable race is guaranteed the necessary living space. And if no other way is open to them, the lower races will have to restrict themselves accordingly."

- Rudolf Hess, letter, 1927

User avatar
Denying-History
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1651
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2016 3:01 pm

Re: Eisenhower's "Death Camps"

Postby Denying-History » Mon Sep 12, 2016 11:30 pm

Jeffk 1970 wrote:
Balsamo wrote:Well, i have read both Bacque's...a long time ago. I cannot remember Other Losses whic is very old, but "crimes and mercies"m despite the usual critics that can be addressed to research made by dilettantes, has its merits, at least to point out to some post war hypocrisies, or in some cases, like those western camps for Pow's (oups forgot, those hordes of millions were no longer Pow's but DEF's) - how a small change in a definition allows to dismiss legal obligations ( bye bye Geneva convention, we have no Pows, but Def's) - of clear "loss of memory"... hence the quite tiny bibliography on this very subject.

I could re-read those books if necessary, but i remember some funny conclusions i made then, basically that the Soviet PoW's camps were almost as deadly as the Nazi's ones DURING THE WAR, but did improved dramatically AFTER the WAR, while German pow's were quite nicely treated by the Western Allies DURING the war, but then suddenly ceased to be PoW's after the war and were treated like lost dogs.

The issue should here not be if Braque did exaggerate its numbers (he certainly did, but sources are lacking) but that it is obvious that the official numbers - like the death rate of 0.3 to 1% for the infamous camp of Remagen is almost an insult not only to basic intelligence, but also to every comparable data available to even just a curious mind.

Because we are all to believe that this kind of shithole here
Image

holding almost 1 million PoW or DEF's during 6 long months, had the same stats as a usual camp, that is with barracks, sanitary installation, etc...0.3% to 1%...

Now, sorry to be provocative here, but it is the example of historical events where Deniers are not on the side one would expect.

Don't even let me on the "Free French camps", or the use of Pow's to clear of mines the country, to rebuild outside any international conventions, Bloody France had a awfull track record when it comes to how it treated prisoners...from "the Bagne" in Guyana (you might remember the movie papillon with Steve Macqueen, but it is also where Dreyfus was sent) to the first Concentration camps established by the third republic to keep the "undesirable foreigners at check" - with a death toll that even before the war was insanely high. Forgotten also the arrest of Belgian soldiers in France by the dying third republic in 1940, a coup'le of thousands died in those camps, before being sent to Germany or even released, it is not a secret here to remind the death rate of those Jews held by Vichy, well things did not improve after liberation.

Any extensive bibliography on those issues? Not much either, i am afraid.

But by 1946, the New fourth republic of France was already killing Vietnamese - that would last 8 years - will then commit a clear Genocide in Cameroon in the 50's, then will come the Algeria issue... but for the last issue, the bibliography is improving.

PS: I am trying to quit smoking, so be indulgent when it comes for my tone... :evil:


Good luck....congratulations on the attempt. I smoked decades ago in high school.

I quit because:
I didn't like it.
I really didn't look cool so I got no play from the ladies.
I was actively working out and it messed up my breathing.

I was miserable for about a week, even now I still get random urges. I also noticed that even after I quit alcohol made me lose my control so I still smoked on occasion long after I quit.

As for your points, Bacque's second book was very well received in contrast to his first. The second book might be worth a read.

As far as the American camps, conditions were initially very bad but they did improve. I think the camps being open in the Spring, Summer and Fall helped somewhat, there was less of a chance of dying of exposure.

I will be adding more to this thread, the book "Savage Continent, Europe in the Aftermath of World War II" by Keith Lowe talks about the camps. I'm going to pull it out of my library and have a look.

As far as the German POWs in the USSR, their lot actually improved in 1943 with the improvement in rations (Lend-Lease Spam) and with the Soviets realizing that the POWs made for useful labor.


Bacques 2nd book is sort of pushing the boundaries of reality... He claims the Allies supposedly fabricated the worldwide food shortage, that the Genocide committed against the Germans was due to “Anglo-Saxon militarism” and that English speaking nations were filled with “warlike peoples”.

He gets numbers such as "9.3 million Germans" being deliberately starved by the Americans and uses the same botched logic that he used in Other Losses... He blames the entire thing on Eisenhower, saying that he continued the "Morgenthau Plan" and that he “assured the prolonged starvation of Germans.” Despite the fact Eisenhower didn't have the power to conduct such a genocide, and I believe he also expands blame for this "genocide" to the French.

I would highly recommend you read James Coons essay. I sent you it earlier though PM.
« Oral history is a complex field. After all, memory can be a distorting mirror, as anyone who has ever worked with memoir literature knows very well...They may be imperfect, and, at times, inaccurate as the narrator tries to cast himself in the most favorable light, but all sources are imperfect. Even an archival document reflects how the person who drafted it understood something and remains something less than the unvarnished truth. »
- James Mace

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5852
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: Eisenhower's "Death Camps"

Postby Jeffk 1970 » Mon Sep 12, 2016 11:45 pm

Denying-History wrote:
Jeffk 1970 wrote:
Balsamo wrote:Well, i have read both Bacque's...a long time ago. I cannot remember Other Losses whic is very old, but "crimes and mercies"m despite the usual critics that can be addressed to research made by dilettantes, has its merits, at least to point out to some post war hypocrisies, or in some cases, like those western camps for Pow's (oups forgot, those hordes of millions were no longer Pow's but DEF's) - how a small change in a definition allows to dismiss legal obligations ( bye bye Geneva convention, we have no Pows, but Def's) - of clear "loss of memory"... hence the quite tiny bibliography on this very subject.

I could re-read those books if necessary, but i remember some funny conclusions i made then, basically that the Soviet PoW's camps were almost as deadly as the Nazi's ones DURING THE WAR, but did improved dramatically AFTER the WAR, while German pow's were quite nicely treated by the Western Allies DURING the war, but then suddenly ceased to be PoW's after the war and were treated like lost dogs.

The issue should here not be if Braque did exaggerate its numbers (he certainly did, but sources are lacking) but that it is obvious that the official numbers - like the death rate of 0.3 to 1% for the infamous camp of Remagen is almost an insult not only to basic intelligence, but also to every comparable data available to even just a curious mind.

Because we are all to believe that this kind of shithole here
Image

holding almost 1 million PoW or DEF's during 6 long months, had the same stats as a usual camp, that is with barracks, sanitary installation, etc...0.3% to 1%...

Now, sorry to be provocative here, but it is the example of historical events where Deniers are not on the side one would expect.

Don't even let me on the "Free French camps", or the use of Pow's to clear of mines the country, to rebuild outside any international conventions, Bloody France had a awfull track record when it comes to how it treated prisoners...from "the Bagne" in Guyana (you might remember the movie papillon with Steve Macqueen, but it is also where Dreyfus was sent) to the first Concentration camps established by the third republic to keep the "undesirable foreigners at check" - with a death toll that even before the war was insanely high. Forgotten also the arrest of Belgian soldiers in France by the dying third republic in 1940, a coup'le of thousands died in those camps, before being sent to Germany or even released, it is not a secret here to remind the death rate of those Jews held by Vichy, well things did not improve after liberation.

Any extensive bibliography on those issues? Not much either, i am afraid.

But by 1946, the New fourth republic of France was already killing Vietnamese - that would last 8 years - will then commit a clear Genocide in Cameroon in the 50's, then will come the Algeria issue... but for the last issue, the bibliography is improving.

PS: I am trying to quit smoking, so be indulgent when it comes for my tone... :evil:


Good luck....congratulations on the attempt. I smoked decades ago in high school.

I quit because:
I didn't like it.
I really didn't look cool so I got no play from the ladies.
I was actively working out and it messed up my breathing.

I was miserable for about a week, even now I still get random urges. I also noticed that even after I quit alcohol made me lose my control so I still smoked on occasion long after I quit.

As for your points, Bacque's second book was very well received in contrast to his first. The second book might be worth a read.

As far as the American camps, conditions were initially very bad but they did improve. I think the camps being open in the Spring, Summer and Fall helped somewhat, there was less of a chance of dying of exposure.

I will be adding more to this thread, the book "Savage Continent, Europe in the Aftermath of World War II" by Keith Lowe talks about the camps. I'm going to pull it out of my library and have a look.

As far as the German POWs in the USSR, their lot actually improved in 1943 with the improvement in rations (Lend-Lease Spam) and with the Soviets realizing that the POWs made for useful labor.


Bacques 2nd book is sort of pushing the boundaries of reality... He claims the Allies supposedly fabricated the worldwide food shortage, that the Genocide committed against the Germans was due to “Anglo-Saxon militarism” and that English speaking nations were filled with “warlike peoples”.

He gets numbers such as "9.3 million Germans" being deliberately starved by the Americans and uses the same botched logic that he used in Other Losses... He blames the entire thing on Eisenhower, saying that he continued the "Morgenthau Plan" and that he “assured the prolonged starvation of Germans.” Despite the fact Eisenhower didn't have the power to conduct such a genocide, and I believe he also expands blame for this "genocide" to the French.

I would highly recommend you read James Coons essay. I sent you it earlier though PM.


Any idea that Eisenhower believed in or pushed for the Morgenthau Plan is ludicrous. Deniers love bringing up Morgenthau, conveniently forgetting that the plan was abandoned when public outcry forced its cancellation.

Food supplies were short everywhere in Europe. The British rationed meat and other food products until 1954. I'll grant you that rationing was harsh in Germany after the war, the Americans and British believed (justifiably, in my opinion) that DP's should have better rations to start with than Germans but I believed this policy ended in 1947 or 1948. There is a book called "Excorcising Hitler" that talks about this, this will be another one I'll be looking into in the next couple of days.

User avatar
Balsamo
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1470
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 9:29 pm

Re: Eisenhower's "Death Camps"

Postby Balsamo » Tue Sep 13, 2016 12:11 am

Jeffk 1970 wrote:https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=anwy2MPT5RE


:lol: :lol: :lol:
THOSE GUYS WERE THE BEST...JUST LOVE THEM

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5852
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: Eisenhower's "Death Camps"

Postby Jeffk 1970 » Tue Sep 13, 2016 12:13 am

Balsamo wrote:
Jeffk 1970 wrote:https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=anwy2MPT5RE


:lol: :lol: :lol:
THOSE GUYS WERE THE BEST...JUST LOVE THEM


I've always loved MP's complete randomness. Who else could make a sketch about Spam work so well?

User avatar
Jeff_36
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4492
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:45 pm
Location: At the hundredth meridian, where the great plains begin

Re: Eisenhower's "Death Camps"

Postby Jeff_36 » Tue Sep 13, 2016 1:13 am

Balsamo wrote: basically that the Soviet PoW's camps were almost as deadly as the Nazi's ones DURING THE WAR, but did improved dramatically AFTER the WAR,


The death rate for Russian POW's in German custody was 60-65%. The death rate for German in Russian custody was 38%. That is a difference of 22-27%, a fairly massive gap. The Russian camps were awful places, but the German treatment of the Soviet POW's was genocidal, massacres, deliberate starvation, daily rations that induced massive loss of life even after the genocidal phase had ended.

The issue should here not be if Braque did exaggerate its numbers (he certainly did, but sources are lacking) but that it is obvious that the official numbers - like the death rate of 0.3 to 1% for the infamous camp of Remagen is almost an insult not only to basic intelligence, but also to every comparable data available to even just a curious mind.


What figures do you have in mind then? Terms like "the official figures" is a sign of conspiracy-based thinking.

Because we are all to believe that this kind of shithole here
Image

holding almost 1 million PoW or DEF's during 6 long months, had the same stats as a usual camp, that is with barracks, sanitary installation, etc...0.3% to 1%...


Meh, the Americans were hardly the first in the war to herd millions into open pens if you know what I mean and understand where I'm coming from......


the use of Pow's to clear of mines the country


The Germans did that with Polish prisoners.

Bloody France had a awfull track record when it comes to how it treated prisoners


Could a former invader, occupier, and oppressor expect fair treatment form his former victims?


But by 1946, the New fourth republic of France was already killing Vietnamese - that would last 8 years - will then commit a clear Genocide in Cameroon in the 50's, then will come the Algeria issue... but for the last issue, the bibliography is improving.


I saw Le Battle D'Algiers a year ago, good flick that. But fundamentally we are discussing different wars, different circumstances.

PS: I am trying to quit smoking, so be indulgent when it comes for my tone... :evil:


Guzzle clamato juice, Don't ask why because I have no idea, but it worked for me.

User avatar
Jeff_36
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4492
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:45 pm
Location: At the hundredth meridian, where the great plains begin

Re: Eisenhower's "Death Camps"

Postby Jeff_36 » Tue Sep 13, 2016 1:13 am

Jeffk 1970 wrote:
Balsamo wrote:
Jeffk 1970 wrote:https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=anwy2MPT5RE


:lol: :lol: :lol:
THOSE GUYS WERE THE BEST...JUST LOVE THEM


I've always loved MP's complete randomness. Who else could make a sketch about Spam work so well?


Their best sketch, In my opinion. I don't know why but I murder myself laughing everytime I see this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wzK4kEkLzfs

User avatar
NathanC
Poster
Posts: 499
Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2015 9:19 am

Re: Eisenhower's "Death Camps"

Postby NathanC » Tue Sep 13, 2016 1:24 am

Ever since I developed an interest in the US' postwar policies vis a vis Germany and the Cold War, I've pretty much dismissed this whole Idea as BS. The official foreign policy docs of the US government make it clear that as of 1948, the US was well on the way to releasing most German POWs, in the interests of rebuilding Germany. BS like this would've made it hard for the likes of Allen Dulles to recruit Karl Wolff and other former SS men into their service.

This is just more of the Deniers unable to deal with the actual, ridiculously lenient policies of the victors, and completely misrepresenting them.

User avatar
Aaron Richards
Poster
Posts: 169
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2016 9:03 am

Re: Eisenhower's "Death Camps"

Postby Aaron Richards » Tue Sep 13, 2016 3:40 am

Someone mentioned Morgenthau Plan.

I remember reading the wiki article a few weeks back and thought it had been vandalized in that it read to me as if the plan was implemented after all, just more subtly.

I am citing today's version of the article, not sure if everything checks out:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morgentha ... ementation
"...we had the duty towards our Volk (the German people) to kill this Volk (the Jewish people) that wanted to kill us." - Himmler in his 1943 Posen speech reminding any future holocaust denier how absurd their beliefs really are.
I compile rebuttals to popular holocaust denier canards here: http://imgur.com/a/725A7

User avatar
Jeff_36
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4492
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:45 pm
Location: At the hundredth meridian, where the great plains begin

Re: Eisenhower's "Death Camps"

Postby Jeff_36 » Tue Sep 13, 2016 5:28 am

Aaron Richards wrote:Someone mentioned Morgenthau Plan.

I remember reading the wiki article a few weeks back and thought it had been vandalized in that it read to me as if the plan was implemented after all, just more subtly.

I am citing today's version of the article, not sure if everything checks out:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morgentha ... ementation


The plan was axed. That is an indisputable fact.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Has No Life
Posts: 16177
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Eisenhower's "Death Camps"

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Tue Sep 13, 2016 10:22 am

Jeff_36 wrote:
Balsamo wrote: basically that the Soviet PoW's camps were almost as deadly as the Nazi's ones DURING THE WAR, but did improved dramatically AFTER the WAR,


The death rate for Russian POW's in German custody was 60-65%. The death rate for German in Russian custody was 38%. That is a difference of 22-27%, a fairly massive gap. The Russian camps were awful places, but the German treatment of the Soviet POW's was genocidal, massacres, deliberate starvation, daily rations that induced massive loss of life even after the genocidal phase had ended.

Yep. This morning I forget the number (it does matter, actually!) but about half a million Soviet POWs held by the Germans were executed when the POW camps, which were otherwise death traps, were combed through by German units for political commissars (under the Commissar Order of 6 June 1941), "politically intolerable and suspicious elements," and Jews. Those selected in the camps were to be shot at once (recall that the Commissar Order stated about the political commissars that, "if taken while fighting or offering resistance they must, on principle, be shot immediately" and that otherwise, the commissars "are to be separated from the prisoners of war immediately, i.e. already on the battlefield. . . . These commissars are not to be recognized as soldiers; the protection due to prisoners of war under international law does not apply to them. When they have been separated, they are to be finished off"; also, the combing of the camps was implicit in the order, as it also stated that for those commissars not shot on the spot, the SKs were "to decide whether they are, or should be handed over to the 'Sonderkommandos'" and that the SKs should base their decisions about what to do with individual commissars on attitude and outlook, not facts).

By fall 1941 the SD were regularly shooting prisoners combed out from the mass of those held. Often trucks would come to the camps and haul selected prisoners to execution sites. By contrast, camp 4 of Dulag 131 (Bobruisk) is an example of mass killing by the German authorities in charge of a POW installation; in November 1941, because "the camps are overcrowded," and based on orders from the OKW in Berlin, the commandant of camp 4 ordered a special detachment of his men to force several 1000 prisoners into a barrack and set it on fire, incinerating the prisoners. A squad surrounded the barrack with machine guns to shoot anyone trying to flee the inferno. Also, in forced marches many prisoners were "shot while trying to escape."

These combing actions have to be taken into account in evaluating what happened to Soviet POWs in German custody and what the Germans' intentions were. There is nothing remotely similar to the German policy of shooting some POWs on the spot and having execution squads comb through those imprisoned that I've read in the links provided in this thread, even the most flamboyant of them.

By early 1942, about 2 million Soviet prisoners were dead, from both privation and execution.

There appears to be, judging by what's been presented here, no evidence like what we have for German camps for the so-called Eisenhower death camps; instead, there's exaggeration, hyperbole, and rhetoric. Of course, we can and should be critical of aspects of US policy - but without demonizing Eisenhower and without making false charges of genocide (and engendering such nonsense as this, "HE HATED THE GERMAN PEOPLE AS A RACE. It was his personal intent to destroy as many of them as he could, and one way was to wipe out as many prisoners of war as possible."). If Ambrose is right, from Bacque we get worse-than-dubious maths on casualties among German POWs, cherrypicking of quotations as well as policy and implementation details, falsification of the postwar food situation, and games with documents - to falsify a charge of mass murder. The reason exaggerated numbers do matter, sorry, is that some people use them to create false equivalencies and tart up phony charges about intention and scope.

The German war in the east was a war of conquest and annihilation - the Germans' "treatment" of Soviet POWs was part and parcel of the Reich's war aims and war conduct. Anyone trying to make a similar case for Allied aims and practices in Europe is going to have to do a lot better than what we have here.
"World peace is certainly an ideal worth striving for; in Hitler's opinion it will be realizable only when one power, the racially best one, has attained complete and uncontested supremacy. That can then provide a sort of world police, seeing to it at the same time that the most valuable race is guaranteed the necessary living space. And if no other way is open to them, the lower races will have to restrict themselves accordingly."

- Rudolf Hess, letter, 1927

User avatar
Aaron Richards
Poster
Posts: 169
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2016 9:03 am

Re: Eisenhower's "Death Camps"

Postby Aaron Richards » Tue Sep 13, 2016 2:33 pm

Where can I find documents online about the orders you mentioned in your initial paragraphs?
"...we had the duty towards our Volk (the German people) to kill this Volk (the Jewish people) that wanted to kill us." - Himmler in his 1943 Posen speech reminding any future holocaust denier how absurd their beliefs really are.
I compile rebuttals to popular holocaust denier canards here: http://imgur.com/a/725A7

User avatar
Denying-History
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1651
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2016 3:01 pm

Re: Eisenhower's "Death Camps"

Postby Denying-History » Tue Sep 13, 2016 3:43 pm

I don't think any online archive exists.
« Oral history is a complex field. After all, memory can be a distorting mirror, as anyone who has ever worked with memoir literature knows very well...They may be imperfect, and, at times, inaccurate as the narrator tries to cast himself in the most favorable light, but all sources are imperfect. Even an archival document reflects how the person who drafted it understood something and remains something less than the unvarnished truth. »
- James Mace

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Has No Life
Posts: 16177
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Eisenhower's "Death Camps"

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Tue Sep 13, 2016 3:43 pm

Oh my gosh, in so many places. Here's what I have handy. The 3 most significant of the criminal orders were

1) the Barbarossa jurisdiction decree - 13 May 1941
2) the Commissar order - discussed above, 6 June 1941
3) Guidelines for the behavior of the troops in Russia - usually dated 4 June 1941

(Follow-up orders, such as von Reichenau's order of 10 October 1941, are in Stackelberg & Winkle, The Nazi Germany Sourcebook; also this might help as a kind of quick survey - I'm not on my laptop with bookmarks, so I'm struggling a bit right now. Here's Hitler's Barbarossa order, which is pertinent.)

The so-called criminal orders and related topics are discussed here and here.
"World peace is certainly an ideal worth striving for; in Hitler's opinion it will be realizable only when one power, the racially best one, has attained complete and uncontested supremacy. That can then provide a sort of world police, seeing to it at the same time that the most valuable race is guaranteed the necessary living space. And if no other way is open to them, the lower races will have to restrict themselves accordingly."

- Rudolf Hess, letter, 1927

User avatar
Aaron Richards
Poster
Posts: 169
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2016 9:03 am

Re: Eisenhower's "Death Camps"

Postby Aaron Richards » Tue Sep 13, 2016 4:19 pm

Found the commissar order:

Image
"...we had the duty towards our Volk (the German people) to kill this Volk (the Jewish people) that wanted to kill us." - Himmler in his 1943 Posen speech reminding any future holocaust denier how absurd their beliefs really are.
I compile rebuttals to popular holocaust denier canards here: http://imgur.com/a/725A7

User avatar
Jeff_36
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4492
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:45 pm
Location: At the hundredth meridian, where the great plains begin

Re: Eisenhower's "Death Camps"

Postby Jeff_36 » Tue Sep 13, 2016 5:42 pm

Statistical Mechanic wrote:Oh my gosh, in so many places. Here's what I have handy. The 3 most significant of the criminal orders were

1) the Barbarossa jurisdiction decree - 13 May 1941
2) the Commissar order - discussed above, 6 June 1941
3) Guidelines for the behavior of the troops in Russia - usually dated 4 June 1941

(Follow-up orders, such as von Reichenau's order of 10 October 1941, are in Stackelberg & Winkle, The Nazi Germany Sourcebook; also this might help as a kind of quick survey - I'm not on my laptop with bookmarks, so I'm struggling a bit right now. Here's Hitler's Barbarossa order, which is pertinent.)

The so-called criminal orders and related topics are discussed here and here.


Don't forget the Morgen judgment linked in th thread bearing his name, and Gerlach's discussion of this topic, linked and translated by RM on the HC forum page.

User avatar
Balsamo
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1470
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 9:29 pm

Re: Eisenhower's "Death Camps"

Postby Balsamo » Tue Sep 13, 2016 10:47 pm

Jeffk 1970 wrote:
Cerdic wrote:IIRC no other historian has backed up Bacque's findings re: the death toll in the Rhineland POW camps. Historians agree a great number of German POWs died, but all others place the great bulk of this in the Soviet Union. There have been a number of Axis History discussions about Other Losses over the years, check here: https://www.google.co.uk/webhp?sourceid ... istory.com


Thanks for the link.

I do think that Ambrose is right, the condition of the German POWs in the Rhineland Camps is something that needs to be researched.
However the idea that this was deliberate is ludicrous. One of things I want to add is that the conditions in the camps improved and, even more important, there was an enormous effort to release these POWs as quickly as possible. By the Fall of 1945 most of the camps were empty.
Now, depending on who the POWs were released to went a long way towards determining their survival. The French used German POWs to clear mine fields, which isn't exactly conducive to long term survival. I understand why the French did it but I can hardly condone it.


As i am going to play the devil's advocate?
Fall 1945 means more than 6 months...and indeed many were dispatched in European countries to be used as labor (dare i say "slave labor"?)...750.000 in France.

As for your last sentence, any instances of French pow's used to clear mines during their captivity in Germany? What was France anyway?

Denying history :
I would highly recommend you read James Coons essay. I sent you it earlier though PM.


Was this addressed to me? If yes, i did not get your PM, i would gladly read James Coons essay... ;)

Jeff_36:
The death rate for Russian POW's in German custody was 60-65%. The death rate for German in Russian custody was 38%. That is a difference of 22-27%, a fairly massive gap. The Russian camps were awful places, but the German treatment of the Soviet POW's was genocidal, massacres, deliberate starvation, daily rations that induced massive loss of life even after the genocidal phase had ended.


Indeed but those numbers refers to a global statistic. As mentioned above, the Soviets changed their policy regarding the pow's. Ironically the death rate of German prisoners decreased dramatically after the war, while having been really poor in the first years if the war. How many survivors of the 6th Army?

What figures do you have in mind then? Terms like "the official figures" is a sign of conspiracy-based thinking.


Well...if every time one contests a data coming from an official institution like ...well the government...and i guess whatever government...one are on the slide to CT...well, i would then assume my conspiracist tendency, as i doubt the official inflation numbers, the official unemployment numbers... I am aware of being silly and paranoid, as everyone knows that the governments always tells the truth and the truth only...lies and omissions are not even in the governmental vocabulary. And concept like censorship in democracies - during wartime and postwar times well is a CT theory by itself.

Sorry, but whatever any government says, when it insults common sense too obviously, i claim my right to doubt...
You cannot just gathered millions of people and put them into open air camps from April to September/october, in camps of around 100.000 under fed DEF's, and pretend to have a almost normal death rate, sorry.
Wiki propose around 56.000 German Pow's death out of like 7-8.000.000 and everyone is fine with that.
It is not like there were no testimonies available, actually quite a lot of them, there are photos, and even films of how those camps looked like...

I have absolutely no numbers or figures in mind, i never had access to the specific archives and never will, but the simple fact that Bacque can publish something like that and basically only faces weak refutation clearly shows that well the topic is under studied to say the least.

For a very long time, the west sincerely believed that the liberation of Europe just looked like the images shown, that is GI's kissing joyful girls, distributing chocolate to children, cigarettes to civilians, and helping the eldery to cross the street...Of course there had been atrocities by by the Soviets, rapes, murders, but not in the west where liberation took the form of a great almost holy celebration.
It is now well known that massive rapes, plundering, also took place on the western front, in France, Belgium, Italy and of course Germany.

Meh, the Americans were hardly the first in the war to herd millions into open pens if you know what I mean and understand where I'm coming from......


Of course not!
i am not trying to minimize or to offer new perspectives on the crimes committed by the Nazis: the Germans did it, and does not deny it, the Russians did it and don't hide the results, but a few well deniers. But when it comes to America or France, well the vast majority is in denial, and if not in denial, they justify it with basically the same arguments than the deniers. Sorry if i am harsh here.

The Germans did that with Polish prisoners.


of course they did, but again it is irrelevant. The important point is that they did it by denying the very existence of any Polish State - a concept shared by the Soviets - but lesser known is that the western allies used this very same arguments to justify their global occupation policies, including the treatment of many million pow's, but only after the war, when no threats of reciprocity was at stake.

Between 1945 and 1948, Germany ceased to exist as a State, Germans were basically as Stateless as those Jews under Nazi occupation.
The USA were THE STATE that wanted a "legal frame" and play it "JUSTICE", but then as it could not afford - or did not want to - playing it legally, they just changed the terms of the deal, and as the convention deals with the treatments of Prisoners of War, well let's just change the name into a new concept as crazy as "Disarmed Enemy Forces", let's claim that the rules of war and the Hague Convention only apply during wartime, and are irrelevant after a capitulation, and many such tactics...So that in the end, one can proclaim that "We did not break the law, we just change it".

Could a former invader, occupier, and oppressor expect fair treatment form his former victims?


I did not say that. But then one has to assume that one was outside any legal frame. As a German pow testified it," we would not have had any expectation in the hand of the Soviets, but the Americans were pretending acting in the name of Justice and international law" and this is just hypocrisy.

I saw Le Battle D'Algiers a year ago, good flick that. But fundamentally we are discussing different wars, different circumstances.


Oups sorry, i did not realize we were discussing about wars, i thought we were discussing about crimes.
La bataille d'Alger is not even what i was referring. It is well known, and was studied and is still discussed today.
What is still unknown is the almost genocide in Cameroon in the 1950's. But i agree, it is indeed a different crime

NathanC:

Ever since I developed an interest in the US' postwar policies vis a vis Germany and the Cold War, I've pretty much dismissed this whole Idea as BS. The official foreign policy docs of the US government make it clear that as of 1948, the US was well on the way to releasing most German POWs, in the interests of rebuilding Germany. BS like this would've made it hard for the likes of Allen Dulles to recruit Karl Wolff and other former SS men into their service.

This is just more of the Deniers unable to deal with the actual, ridiculously lenient policies of the victors, and completely misrepresenting them.


It might surprise you, but i agree with what you are saying. What i call the "memory loss" is this immediate post war period, starting as soon as 1945 and indeed lasting until the Western Allies realized that there was kind of a problem with their former allies that will turn into something called a 40 years "cold war".

It was a spectacular "Volte-face", but there was this time when yes Karl Wolf, and many many others were on their way in a first class cabins to the USA or England, etc, while the millions of common PoW's had to pay the bill. It only adds to the hypocrisy.
And yes i agree that the policies of the western victors became "ridiculously lenient", although less than the West German trials of the 50's which represent a summit of absurdity.

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5852
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: Eisenhower's "Death Camps"

Postby Jeffk 1970 » Tue Sep 13, 2016 11:02 pm

Balsamo wrote:
Jeffk 1970 wrote:
Cerdic wrote:IIRC no other historian has backed up Bacque's findings re: the death toll in the Rhineland POW camps. Historians agree a great number of German POWs died, but all others place the great bulk of this in the Soviet Union. There have been a number of Axis History discussions about Other Losses over the years, check here: https://www.google.co.uk/webhp?sourceid ... istory.com


Thanks for the link.

I do think that Ambrose is right, the condition of the German POWs in the Rhineland Camps is something that needs to be researched.
However the idea that this was deliberate is ludicrous. One of things I want to add is that the conditions in the camps improved and, even more important, there was an enormous effort to release these POWs as quickly as possible. By the Fall of 1945 most of the camps were empty.
Now, depending on who the POWs were released to went a long way towards determining their survival. The French used German POWs to clear mine fields, which isn't exactly conducive to long term survival. I understand why the French did it but I can hardly condone it.


As i am going to play the devil's advocate?
Fall 1945 means more than 6 months...and indeed many were dispatched in European countries to be used as labor (dare i say "slave labor"?)...750.000 in France.

As for your last sentence, any instances of French pow's used to clear mines during their captivity in Germany? What was France anyway?

Denying history :
I would highly recommend you read James Coons essay. I sent you it earlier though PM.


Was this addressed to me? If yes, i did not get your PM, i would gladly read James Coons essay... ;)

Jeff_36:
The death rate for Russian POW's in German custody was 60-65%. The death rate for German in Russian custody was 38%. That is a difference of 22-27%, a fairly massive gap. The Russian camps were awful places, but the German treatment of the Soviet POW's was genocidal, massacres, deliberate starvation, daily rations that induced massive loss of life even after the genocidal phase had ended.


Indeed but those numbers refers to a global statistic. As mentioned above, the Soviets changed their policy regarding the pow's. Ironically the death rate of German prisoners decreased dramatically after the war, while having been really poor in the first years if the war. How many survivors of the 6th Army?

What figures do you have in mind then? Terms like "the official figures" is a sign of conspiracy-based thinking.


Well...if every time one contests a data coming from an official institution like ...well the government...and i guess whatever government...one are on the slide to CT...well, i would then assume my conspiracist tendency, as i doubt the official inflation numbers, the official unemployment numbers... I am aware of being silly and paranoid, as everyone knows that the governments always tells the truth and the truth only...lies and omissions are not even in the governmental vocabulary. And concept like censorship in democracies - during wartime and postwar times well is a CT theory by itself.

Sorry, but whatever any government says, when it insults common sense too obviously, i claim my right to doubt...
You cannot just gathered millions of people and put them into open air camps from April to September/october, in camps of around 100.000 under fed DEF's, and pretend to have a almost normal death rate, sorry.
Wiki propose around 56.000 German Pow's death out of like 7-8.000.000 and everyone is fine with that.
It is not like there were no testimonies available, actually quite a lot of them, there are photos, and even films of how those camps looked like...

I have absolutely no numbers or figures in mind, i never had access to the specific archives and never will, but the simple fact that Bacque can publish something like that and basically only faces weak refutation clearly shows that well the topic is under studied to say the least.

For a very long time, the west sincerely believed that the liberation of Europe just looked like the images shown, that is GI's kissing joyful girls, distributing chocolate to children, cigarettes to civilians, and helping the eldery to cross the street...Of course there had been atrocities by by the Soviets, rapes, murders, but not in the west where liberation took the form of a great almost holy celebration.
It is now well known that massive rapes, plundering, also took place on the western front, in France, Belgium, Italy and of course Germany.

Meh, the Americans were hardly the first in the war to herd millions into open pens if you know what I mean and understand where I'm coming from......


Of course not!
i am not trying to minimize or to offer new perspectives on the crimes committed by the Nazis: the Germans did it, and does not deny it, the Russians did it and don't hide the results, but a few well deniers. But when it comes to America or France, well the vast majority is in denial, and if not in denial, they justify it with basically the same arguments than the deniers. Sorry if i am harsh here.

The Germans did that with Polish prisoners.


of course they did, but again it is irrelevant. The important point is that they did it by denying the very existence of any Polish State - a concept shared by the Soviets - but lesser known is that the western allies used this very same arguments to justify their global occupation policies, including the treatment of many million pow's, but only after the war, when no threats of reciprocity was at stake.

Between 1945 and 1948, Germany ceased to exist as a State, Germans were basically as Stateless as those Jews under Nazi occupation.
The USA were THE STATE that wanted a "legal frame" and play it "JUSTICE", but then as it could not afford - or did not want to - playing it legally, they just changed the terms of the deal, and as the convention deals with the treatments of Prisoners of War, well let's just change the name into a new concept as crazy as "Disarmed Enemy Forces", let's claim that the rules of war and the Hague Convention only apply during wartime, and are irrelevant after a capitulation, and many such tactics...So that in the end, one can proclaim that "We did not break the law, we just change it".

Could a former invader, occupier, and oppressor expect fair treatment form his former victims?


I did not say that. But then one has to assume that one was outside any legal frame. As a German pow testified it," we would not have had any expectation in the hand of the Soviets, but the Americans were pretending acting in the name of Justice and international law" and this is just hypocrisy.

I saw Le Battle D'Algiers a year ago, good flick that. But fundamentally we are discussing different wars, different circumstances.


Oups sorry, i did not realize we were discussing about wars, i thought we were discussing about crimes.
La bataille d'Alger is not even what i was referring. It is well known, and was studied and is still discussed today.
What is still unknown is the almost genocide in Cameroon in the 1950's. But i agree, it is indeed a different crime

NathanC:

Ever since I developed an interest in the US' postwar policies vis a vis Germany and the Cold War, I've pretty much dismissed this whole Idea as BS. The official foreign policy docs of the US government make it clear that as of 1948, the US was well on the way to releasing most German POWs, in the interests of rebuilding Germany. BS like this would've made it hard for the likes of Allen Dulles to recruit Karl Wolff and other former SS men into their service.

This is just more of the Deniers unable to deal with the actual, ridiculously lenient policies of the victors, and completely misrepresenting them.


It might surprise you, but i agree with what you are saying. What i call the "memory loss" is this immediate post war period, starting as soon as 1945 and indeed lasting until the Western Allies realized that there was kind of a problem with their former allies that will turn into something called a 40 years "cold war".

It was a spectacular "Volte-face", but there was this time when yes Karl Wolf, and many many others were on their way in a first class cabins to the USA or England, etc, while the millions of common PoW's had to pay the bill. It only adds to the hypocrisy.
And yes i agree that the policies of the western victors became "ridiculously lenient", although less than the West German trials of the 50's which represent a summit of absurdity.


Ah, someone is trying to keep us on our toes...:lol:

Right now I am glancing through "Excorcising Hitler," it's been a bit so I am trying to find some further information about the camps. So does "Savage Continent," I just haven't pulled it out of my library.

The camps were open for six months but at an optimum time for them. I think the death toll would have been higher through Fall and Winter, instead of Summer and Fall.

However, I can't imagine a circumstance where 1,000,000 or even 500,000-1,000,000 men died. There were no mass burnings like the ARC, there's no evidence for if. The same holds for mass graves.

So, you may be right, the death toll may have been higher than the unofficial number. Undoubtedly those in French custody had a high casualty rate.

I'm doing some more research, my primary goal in opening this thread was to examine this from a Holocaust denial view but you've pointed this in an interesting direction.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Has No Life
Posts: 16177
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Eisenhower's "Death Camps"

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Tue Sep 13, 2016 11:33 pm

Balsamo wrote:Sorry, but whatever any government says, . . . I have absolutely no numbers or figures in mind

What do you have, then? What is your specific rebuttal of the conclusions of the New Orleans conference, which are quite hard on Bacque's use of documents and data and on his conclusions, as related by Ambrose and others? What's the evidence for many 100s of 1000s of deaths?

Back to Soviet POWs, of course, "only" about half a million Soviet POWs died once the Germans changed their approach (to saving POWs for slave labor) and got a grip on things. IIRC over 600,000 Soviet POWs ended up working in forced labor camps for the Germans. But this kind of proves the point with regard to the Germans' treatment of Soviet POWs.

Balsamo wrote:For a very long time, the west sincerely believed that the liberation of Europe just looked like the images shown, that is GI's kissing joyful girls, distributing chocolate to children, cigarettes to civilians, and helping the eldery to cross the street...Of course there had been atrocities by by the Soviets, rapes, murders, but not in the west where liberation took the form of a great almost holy celebration.
It is now well known that massive rapes, plundering, also took place on the western front, in France, Belgium, Italy and of course Germany.

A sound, balanced revisionist view of the American military during the WWII era is possible: David M Kennedy wrote one (it failed as a re-appraisal of the New Deal whilst succeeding in undoing myths about the "greatest generation" during wartime). We recently had a thread exploring the Allied air war, introducing work of Overy and others critical of major aspects of the air campaign. I welcome books like Kennedy's and Overy's - but not, from what I can tell so far here, the sort of dubious Ike-as-genocidaire that Bacque's books seem to be. 10s of 1000s of deaths in Allied POW camps, caused by callous and negligent treatment, are a significant violation of humane standards - but they do not represent not 1 million deaths in a genocidal campaign spearheaded by Eisenhower.

Balsamo wrote:the Germans did it, and does not deny it . . . when it comes to America or France, well the vast majority is in denial,

No one here has shown that the Allies in the immediate postwar "did it" (whatever "it" is). Maneuvers like changing prisoners' status are deplorable - although you yourself suggest a possibly reasonable cause for the DEF designation (the war was over and "Between 1945 and 1948, Germany ceased to exist as a State, Germans were basically as Stateless"), but even taken negatively, the DEF designation and other points raised here are not "it." Nor does that maneuver, again even if taken negatively (and since it apparently involved reduced rations, we should), answer questions about numbers of deaths, larger intentions, etc.
"World peace is certainly an ideal worth striving for; in Hitler's opinion it will be realizable only when one power, the racially best one, has attained complete and uncontested supremacy. That can then provide a sort of world police, seeing to it at the same time that the most valuable race is guaranteed the necessary living space. And if no other way is open to them, the lower races will have to restrict themselves accordingly."

- Rudolf Hess, letter, 1927

User avatar
Jeff_36
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4492
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:45 pm
Location: At the hundredth meridian, where the great plains begin

Re: Eisenhower's "Death Camps"

Postby Jeff_36 » Thu Sep 15, 2016 1:05 am

Balsamo wrote:
Indeed but those numbers refers to a global statistic. As mentioned above, the Soviets changed their policy regarding the pow's. Ironically the death rate of German prisoners decreased dramatically after the war, while having been really poor in the first years if the war.


Considering the nature of the Nazi war in Russia, the notion that they could have expected any less baffles me to no small end.

How many survivors of the 6th Army?


I really don't care.

For a very long time, the west sincerely believed that the liberation of Europe just looked like the images shown, that is GI's kissing joyful girls, distributing chocolate to children, cigarettes to civilians, and helping the eldery to cross the street...


In the Netherlands it was like that, this I know for a fact. The Dutch were starving and they were very happy to say the least that their ordeal was over. The occupation of the Netherlands had gotten very brutal in the last year or so, it was always harsh, but as the allies closed in the nazis behaved even more aggressively with the locals.

Of course there had been atrocities by by the Soviets, rapes, murders, but not in the west where liberation took the form of a great almost holy celebration.
It is now well known that massive rapes, plundering, also took place on the western front, in France, Belgium, Italy and of course Germany.


Next thing you know you'll say that the "evil allies" faked the Holocaust...... ;) :lol: :P

The rapes in Italy were done mostly by Les Goumiers, Moroccan Berber soldiers in the French army. By all accounts they were terrific soldiers, almost like the French version of the Ghurkas, but......... they were quite uncivilized, and their behavior towards local women was an indicator of that. The fact that it happened in Italy, a country that after 1943 was suffering from German occupation is something of a tragedy.

The only real case of mass rape I can recall happening in the western sector of Germany was done by Senegalese soldiers in Stuttgart, and IIRC they were punished for it. However, unlike the Red Army, there was no desperate yearning for vengeance, which is why the outrages were not as widespread.

In the context of the Nazi state, I must be clear that I have no problem with pillaging and looting, after all, it was a fundamentally just war and a just victory for everyone involved. However I draw the line with rape, that is unacceptable. That being said, any atrocities committed against Germans by the western allies must be taken in the context of Nazi crimes they had witnessed/come across the remains of.


But when it comes to America or France, well the vast majority is in denial, and if not in denial, they justify it with basically the same arguments than the deniers. Sorry if i am harsh here.


There is no moral equivalence. And once again, 56,000 is hardly a huge number in the grand scheme of things. If the Americans wanted the German POW's dead they would have killed them like the Germans killed 2.5 million Russian POW's in 7 months.

One reason why they were declared to be "Disarmed enemy forces" was the fear of a Soviet Invasion of Denmark, the allies wanted to have a reserve of troops available. I know that in the Netherlands a large number of Heer soldiers were given their weapons back and used for guard duty!

Between 1945 and 1948, Germany ceased to exist as a State, Germans were basically as Stateless as those Jews under Nazi occupation.


boo hoo. What would you have expected the allies to do/ say "Oh Herman, take your seat of power and Sig Hiel!". Nonsense. Germany had known nothing but Nazi dictatorship for twelve years and it naturally took time to get things back in order. The whole country was in need of rehabilitation and ideological/moral cleansing.

The truth is that by 1947 or perhaps even earlier, things shifted. DeNazification was cancelled, a West German constitution was written by independent German experts (not the allies), an independent judiciary was set up, a Federal Election was held, none of the candidates were allied stooges, and the winner, Konrad Adenauer, proved to be a thorn in the side of the allies in regards to everything from war crimes, to rearmment, to war criminals in prison, ect. ect. They got back on their feet in rapid order.

"Disarmed Enemy Forces", let's claim that the rules of war and the Hague Convention only apply during wartime, and are irrelevant after a capitulation, and many such tactics...So that in the end, one can proclaim that "We did not break the law, we just change it".


See above remarks on the fears of Soviet invasion of Denmark.

As a German pow testified it," we would not have had any expectation in the hand of the Soviets, but the Americans were pretending acting in the name of Justice and international law" and this is just hypocrisy.


he should have thought about that before he waged war for the self proclaimed Herrenvolk. You dance with the devil, you dance until the music stops.


Oups sorry, i did not realize we were discussing about wars, i thought we were discussing about crimes.
La bataille d'Alger is not even what i was referring. It is well known, and was studied and is still discussed today.


One of my favorite movies. A guide on how to win every battle and lose the war.

What is still unknown is the almost genocide in Cameroon in the 1950's. But i agree, it is indeed a different crime


I have never heard of it. I did hear about the rather speedy exit from Gambia though.....
Last edited by Jeff_36 on Thu Sep 15, 2016 5:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Has No Life
Posts: 16177
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Eisenhower's "Death Camps"

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Thu Sep 15, 2016 3:36 am

Jeff, I don't understand your last sentence. Can you elaborate? You were writing about Cameroon, right?
"World peace is certainly an ideal worth striving for; in Hitler's opinion it will be realizable only when one power, the racially best one, has attained complete and uncontested supremacy. That can then provide a sort of world police, seeing to it at the same time that the most valuable race is guaranteed the necessary living space. And if no other way is open to them, the lower races will have to restrict themselves accordingly."

- Rudolf Hess, letter, 1927

User avatar
Denying-History
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1651
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2016 3:01 pm

Re: Eisenhower's "Death Camps"

Postby Denying-History » Thu Sep 15, 2016 3:54 am

It seems to be a locational mistake. Aka seems like Jeff might have misread Balsamo's final statement.
« Oral history is a complex field. After all, memory can be a distorting mirror, as anyone who has ever worked with memoir literature knows very well...They may be imperfect, and, at times, inaccurate as the narrator tries to cast himself in the most favorable light, but all sources are imperfect. Even an archival document reflects how the person who drafted it understood something and remains something less than the unvarnished truth. »
- James Mace

User avatar
Jeffk 1970
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5852
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 3:00 am

Re: Eisenhower's "Death Camps"

Postby Jeffk 1970 » Thu Sep 15, 2016 4:07 am

From "Excorcising Hitler"
Chapter 7 "The Price"
Frederick Taylor points out that the change of status for the German POWs from Prisoners of War to Disarmed Enemy Forces by the US and Surrendered Enemy Personnel by the British was, to a large extent, a pragmatic one. The Geneva Convention stipulated that POWs had to be fed to the same level as British and US troops...and paid for the work they did.
Before April 1945 German POWs were shipped back to the United States. The US fed and paid those prisoners to the level required by the Geneva Convention. The problem after April 1945 was the sheer number of POWs, over 5 million by the end of the month. The JCS, not Eisenhower, ordered the change in status of these POWs so that they could feed these POWs at a more realistic level due to the food supplies available in Europe at that time.
Taylor does make a point that these POWs were initially housed in horrible conditions and that the death toll ranges wildly, from 8,000 to hundreds of thousands (though Taylor points out that the political orientation of the estimator directly correlates to the estimated dead).

I'm of the opinion that the number is probably between 56,000-78,000, based upon official numbers. While the numbers of German POWs taken in the Spring of 1945 actually exceeded the number of Sovier POWs taken during the Summer of 1941 and the Spring of 1942, the death toll was much lower due to the fact that the US was not genocidal in its outlook and the war was very close to completion.

The POWs did not have an easy time. A German POW named Fritz Mann relayed his after his capture his captors stripped him of his blanket and his rucksack. His captors placed him with 300,000 other prisoners at Gummersbach. He slept out in the open without receiving any water for four days and food for five days. His guards also abused prisoners.

There were two underlying issues at work:
One-lack of food supplies,
Two-lack of guards

At one point there were 2,400 US soldiers guarding 300,000 POWs. As a consequence the US Army drafted Displaced Persons as guards, among them Jews and Poles that understandably behaved harshly towards the Germans (I'm not condoning this behavior, I'm simply saying I understand it).

After a few weeks at the camp Mann relayed how rations improved to the point that the US set up bread ovens. On May 23rd, 1945 Eisenhower actually ordered the release of certain categories of prisoners. Pressure by the French caused these releases to cease and the French took over certain of the Rhineland Camps....but the US agreed to keep supplying these camps with rations, this continued until 1946.

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Has No Life
Posts: 16177
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Eisenhower's "Death Camps"

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Thu Sep 15, 2016 12:07 pm

Denying-History wrote:It seems to be a locational mistake. Aka seems like Jeff might have misread Balsamo's final statement.

Ah Cambodia for Cameroon . . . danke. Had me scratching my head.
"World peace is certainly an ideal worth striving for; in Hitler's opinion it will be realizable only when one power, the racially best one, has attained complete and uncontested supremacy. That can then provide a sort of world police, seeing to it at the same time that the most valuable race is guaranteed the necessary living space. And if no other way is open to them, the lower races will have to restrict themselves accordingly."

- Rudolf Hess, letter, 1927

User avatar
Jeff_36
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4492
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:45 pm
Location: At the hundredth meridian, where the great plains begin

Re: Eisenhower's "Death Camps"

Postby Jeff_36 » Thu Sep 15, 2016 5:13 pm

Statistical Mechanic wrote:Jeff, I don't understand your last sentence. Can you elaborate? You were writing about Cameroon, right?


At one point I thought he was referring to Cambodia....... {!#%@}. Must have been an auto-correct mistake by him or me. I have edited the final sentence.

User avatar
Balsamo
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1470
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 9:29 pm

Re: Eisenhower's "Death Camps"

Postby Balsamo » Thu Sep 15, 2016 11:51 pm

Statmec:

Yep. This morning I forget the number (it does matter, actually!) but about half a million Soviet POWs held by the Germans were executed when the POW camps, which were otherwise death traps, were combed through by German units for political commissars (under the Commissar Order of 6 June 1941), "politically intolerable and suspicious elements," and Jews. Those selected in the camps were to be shot at once (recall that the Commissar Order stated about the political commissars that, "if taken while fighting or offering resistance they must, on principle, be shot immediately" and that otherwise, the commissars "are to be separated from the prisoners of war immediately, i.e. already on the battlefield. . . . These commissars are not to be recognized as soldiers; the protection due to prisoners of war under international law does not apply to them. When they have been separated, they are to be finished off"; also, the combing of the camps was implicit in the order, as it also stated that for those commissars not shot on the spot, the SKs were "to decide whether they are, or should be handed over to the 'Sonderkommandos'" and that the SKs should base their decisions about what to do with individual commissars on attitude and outlook, not facts).


This is maybe one occasion to leave the well known Nazi crimes aside.

Indeed, Jeff number are correct, but they are based on the total of 1953, that is captured/released.
The strange reality is that the death rates of German pow's in Soviet hands dropped dramatically after the war was over, to a rate of 9.5% (between 1945 and 1953), so obviously this rate was quite high between 1941 and 1945 to reach an average of 38%.

The paradox being that while the Soviets increased dramatically the situation of their Pow's after the war, the contrary took place in the western democracies, as those democracies decided that the Geneva convention only concerns States at war. And by 1945, Germany was no longer a State nor was it at war.

The camps were open for six months but at an optimum time for them. I think the death toll would have been higher through Fall and Winter, instead of Summer and Fall.


April in the Rheinland is not what one would call the summer. There is a European saying that could be roughly translated to "In April, keep your sweater on". Seriously, nights are cold, it is still rainy, and the inmates were exhausted soldiers who fought through the winter, in their dirty uniforms, full of lice, gather in tens of thousands stacks in open air fields. Most were sleeping in holes dig in the mud... There are videos available by the way. Muddy meadows in spring and eventually dusty deserts in summer..Oh and there were no real water installation within the camps...Water was distributed by tanks.

However, I can't imagine a circumstance where 1,000,000 or even 500,000-1,000,000 men died. There were no mass burnings like the ARC, there's no evidence for if. The same holds for mass graves.


that is of course another question. How to determine the real number of victims?
Bacque's reasoning is difficult to follow, and mainly based on vague deduction...clearly not very convincing...

Bacque's book is primarily based on testimonies from "survivors", and allies officers and actors, correspondences, Articles from contemporary journalists, reports from activists and politicians, and of course some documents Allies, Red cross, etc, and of course the Soviet's archives which were opened for his second books. Of course there are no document saying that hundreds of thousands inmates died.

To sum up the logical process of the author.
It is established that around 1.4 millions German prisoners of wars went missing. The logical explanation spread in the West was that they must have disappeared in the hands of the Soviets. But according to Bacque, the soviet archives are amazingly documented on every single pow who were at some point in their custody. Each prisoners has a biography, place and date of capture, camps he has been to, eventually date and cause of death...etc,
And a great deal of those missing are just not to be found in there.
He gives the following numbers:
The soviet held 3.5 million Europeans prisoners, the American 6.1 millions, the British 2.4 millions, the Canadians 300.000 and the French around 200.000.
So an obvious question: if 1.4 million Pow are missing and if their absence cannot be explained by the 3.5 in Soviet hands, and must have been part of the 8.8 million in Western allies hands.

Not only that, but amazingly in the west, those millions of prisoners in the west were not even registered. There is no nominal list at all, only numbers, and kind of strange ones.


Then he will find out some really strange contradiction within the US documents. To take one example here: I quote Bacque, crimes and mercies, page 56-57

" For instance, on 4 August 1945, 132.262 DEF prisoners were reported by the prisoners of war section of Eisenhower's command (hitherto SHAEF) to have been "transferred" to Austria, where general Mark Clark was the political commissioner. Clark as political Commissioner was responsible for immigrants and emigrants, including DEF prisoners arriving in Austria, so he reported that in the month of August a total of 17.953 DEF prisoners arrived in Austria. Clearly no transfer 132.262 ever took place. If the 114.309 missing prisoners were transferred way as "other losses", but never arrived to Austria, what happened to them?"


Other documental anomalies includes one by general Louis Buisson. head of the Free French PoW service, who while presenting a incredible low number of deaths, mentioned an astonishing 166.000 germans Pows "release on the spot" (relache sur place). for whatever that means, of course, no names or identification...those french just felt like releasing 166.000 PoW's on spot. (a little knowledge of how the French were in demand for German pow's to do dirty jobs should be enough to consider this kind of statistic...strange), and as a matter of fact, the US and the British will give them 855.000 of their stock of Def.

That is only two examples, but the list is really long.

The main problem i actually have is that the "official numbers" in other words the ones that are to be found on wiki and in any rebuttal, if true would mean that those hundreds of thousands of exhausted PoW's has a better chance to survive than the civilians in Germany...You cannot make a more absurd affirmation, and it seems they did it.
Concerning the death rate of German civilians, the - sorry Jeff - official numbers are also so unbelievable. Governor Clay proudly announced that the death rate was around 12.1 %%... vs 11.9 pre-war...and even lower as the official numbers of the 1960's! (Bacque, p 110-111), even though the official ration was in those times between 1000 and 1275 calories per person.

It takes a lot of inner faith to take those numbers for granted. Which is basically what i was saying above.


We recently had a thread exploring the Allied air war, introducing work of Overy and others critical of major aspects of the air campaign. I welcome books like Kennedy's and Overy's - but not, from what I can tell so far here, the sort of dubious Ike-as-genocidaire that Bacque's books seem to be.


I was not talking about this forum which is kind of lesson addressed to Deniers, lol.
But Bacque is profiting from a kind of void so that he can basically get lose on some insane conclusions. But the rebuttals i have read don't addressed a single of the anomalies in the documents he has found, don't addressed the multitude of testimonies he proposes, and of course, don't answer the fundamental question : where are all the missing pows?

To sum up my views: Genocide? nope, but incompetence, indifference and a sentiment of vengeance turned the first years of the occupation into a form of criminal mess. Some measures were indeed criminal.
By 1945, no real decision had been taken about what to do with Germany. And as a matter of fact, criminal decisions were made based on the pernicious concept of "collective guilt".

User avatar
Statistical Mechanic
Has No Life
Posts: 16177
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 4:19 pm
Custom Title: Dostawca - sciany tekstu
Location: still in Greater Tomainia

Re: Eisenhower's "Death Camps"

Postby Statistical Mechanic » Thu Sep 15, 2016 11:56 pm

Balsamo wrote:This is maybe one occasion to leave the well known Nazi crimes aside.

Probably not. I was replying to Jeff_36's point with what you quoted. Also, I was hoping to pre-empt further use of false analogies, like those summarized in the links in the OP. By trying to think through what are the hallmarks of a genocidal (using the term a little loosely) policy towards POWs and what such a policy might look like in general. The features of the well-known crimes were something I wished to list out.

Besides we're just discussing a topic and its various links. No harm in exploring related issues, at least in my opinion, or bringing to the thread what can be learned from what's well known.

So I will just keep posting what I'd like, if anything catches my eye, I hope that's ok with you.
"World peace is certainly an ideal worth striving for; in Hitler's opinion it will be realizable only when one power, the racially best one, has attained complete and uncontested supremacy. That can then provide a sort of world police, seeing to it at the same time that the most valuable race is guaranteed the necessary living space. And if no other way is open to them, the lower races will have to restrict themselves accordingly."

- Rudolf Hess, letter, 1927

User avatar
Denying-History
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1651
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2016 3:01 pm

Re: Eisenhower's "Death Camps"

Postby Denying-History » Fri Sep 16, 2016 12:57 am

Niall Ferguson said that 0.15% of the German POW's died. No where close to the numbers that Bacque claimed... Bacques argument relies mostly on the title "Other Losses" which he still believes to have been intentional. The Major issue in his logic Balsamo is he completely ignored Fact's against Falsehood. His number of 1 million Germans in camps is nothing compared to his claim of 9.3 million in Crimes and Mercies.

To Believe Bacques story you need to believe that the western allies had the power which the holocaust deniers say they had. They would have to some how be able to fabricated the worldwide food shortage in 1945-47. Bacque argues that the world food production was “97 per cent of normal”. (Bacque, 124)

He argues that the Morgenthau Plan “assured the prolonged starvation of Germans.” Even though Eisenhower wouldn't have the authority to authorize it. I think one should take into account that Eisenhower “had never been trained at West Point on what to do with such masses of prisoners.” (Ambrose and Bischof, 8) Any decision to starve these people would need to come from Roosevelt, Stalin, and Churchill.
Last edited by Denying-History on Fri Sep 16, 2016 3:10 am, edited 1 time in total.
« Oral history is a complex field. After all, memory can be a distorting mirror, as anyone who has ever worked with memoir literature knows very well...They may be imperfect, and, at times, inaccurate as the narrator tries to cast himself in the most favorable light, but all sources are imperfect. Even an archival document reflects how the person who drafted it understood something and remains something less than the unvarnished truth. »
- James Mace

User avatar
Jeff_36
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4492
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 4:45 pm
Location: At the hundredth meridian, where the great plains begin

Re: Eisenhower's "Death Camps"

Postby Jeff_36 » Fri Sep 16, 2016 2:59 am

Denying-History wrote:Niall Ferguson said that 0.15% of the German POW's died. No where close to the numbers that Bacque claimed... Bacques argument relies mostly on the title "Other Losses" which he still believes to have been intentional.


I`m sticking with this figure until shown conclusive evidence otherwise. Saying that a hundreds of thousands of German prisoners died is akin in my opinion to stating that
600,000 people died at Dresden or whatever insane {!#%@} they keep blathering.

He argues that the Morgenthau Plan “assured the prolonged starvation of Germans.”


That is so incredibly offensive that I am surprised Bacque was not subjected to legal action. The Morgenthau plan, while very immoral in my opinion, was fairly benign and would have merely resulted in a demilitarized, non-industrial, smaller Germany. There were no Nazi-esque plans for mass starvation and population reduction. Bacque was a writer of fiction before he wrote on this subject. It is my opinion that he did not cease to be a writer of fiction at any point, especially when he made these claims.

User avatar
Denying-History
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1651
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2016 3:01 pm

Re: Eisenhower's "Death Camps"

Postby Denying-History » Fri Sep 16, 2016 3:16 am

Bacques credentials are the same as L. Ron Hubbard's... He has none, nore does he employ a good amount of evidence. His material is no better the Claude Rebbis book "Napoleons crimes: a blueprint for hitler", which claims Hatians were gassed in the hulls of wooden ships with solfur dioxide gas collected from near by valcanos. Rebbi had witness testimony but his logic was seriously flawed and criticized just as Baqcues works. The issue is that his sources are not reliable just as Claude Rebbi's sources are unreliable.
« Oral history is a complex field. After all, memory can be a distorting mirror, as anyone who has ever worked with memoir literature knows very well...They may be imperfect, and, at times, inaccurate as the narrator tries to cast himself in the most favorable light, but all sources are imperfect. Even an archival document reflects how the person who drafted it understood something and remains something less than the unvarnished truth. »
- James Mace

User avatar
Balsamo
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1470
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 9:29 pm

Re: Eisenhower's "Death Camps"

Postby Balsamo » Fri Sep 16, 2016 2:15 pm

Jeff:

Considering the nature of the Nazi war in Russia, the notion that they could have expected any less baffles me to no small end.


I am not sure that they were expecting anything since day one. And i have never encountered repeated German accusations towards the soviets as far as the PoW's are concerned. Most of the memoirs (German ones) i have read are fully aware of the crimes that took place in Russia, and it was the reason why they fought so hard on the eastern front up to the end. They knew that there were no leniency to expect.

On the western front, on the other hand, German expectations were higher. On the purely military point of view, the rules of war had been globally respected, at least enough not to expect a collective punishment. The Geneva conventions had been respected by the belligerents of both sides, and even a deaf old German farmer would have had heard somewhere that the Western Allies were fighting evil in the name of Liberty, Justice and Democracy.

I really don't care.


I have not asked you for sympathy, but to take in consideration a data.

In the Netherlands it was like that, this I know for a fact. The Dutch were starving and they were very happy to say the least that their ordeal was over. The occupation of the Netherlands had gotten very brutal in the last year or so, it was always harsh, but as the allies closed in the nazis behaved even more aggressively with the locals.


First the Dutch were not the only one starving, and i never said that the vast majority of the population was not relieved that the war was finally over. Just that behind those joyful scenes, nasty events were about to take place. (but i won't get into the epuration in this thread). Is it a feeling or do you keep making moral equivalencies.
Let me affirm once again that nothing i am writing here is meant to reduce, or to put the crimes committed by the Nazis into a new perspective. It is as stupid as it is futile, not that comparative analysis are useless, but only if done with a scientific intent.

Next thing you know you'll say that the "evil allies" faked the Holocaust...... ;) :lol: :P


:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:
You still believe i8n this Holo thing?
I thought it was obvious that Jimmy Rizzoli definitely closed the debate... I am surprise that anyone on this forum still is in doubt.
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Seriously, the funny thing is that since the start of the thread, reactions about a book no one seems to have read, were mostly...What? Any proofs? No wayy? Where are the graves?...
Well i found it funny anyway.

The rapes in Italy were done mostly by Les Goumiers, Moroccan Berber soldiers in the French army. By all accounts they were terrific soldiers, almost like the French version of the Ghurkas, but......... they were quite uncivilized, and their behavior towards local women was an indicator of that. The fact that it happened in Italy, a country that after 1943 was suffering from German occupation is something of a tragedy.


Yes the "Goumiers" raped a lot, not only women by the way.
But there were no Goumiers in Normandy, in Belgium...According to your logic, we could forgive the Goumiers as Italy under Mussolini acted quite badly in Somaly...Sorry...bad analogy.

The only real case of mass rape I can recall happening in the western sector of Germany was done by Senegalese soldiers in Stuttgart, and IIRC they were punished for it. However, unlike the Red Army, there was no desperate yearning for vengeance, which is why the outrages were not as widespread.


That Africans were punished should not come at a surprise, even some GI's were punished, especially if they were black (Ok i stop being nasty, just that 81% of the GI sentenced for rape in France were black...certainly a coincidence which shows a tendency of black people to rape,,,Lol...if one has to believe the documents)
I have never said that the "outrages" had been as widespread as on the Russian front, but that the true importance of the phenomenon took quite some decades to emerge and be acknowledged.
But hey, this is clearly out of topic.
I mentioned it because, at least in Europe, the topic was long taboo. And that it is almost impossible to determine a number after all these years. All we have are the cases (By US GI's) that were reported: 2500 in Great Britain, 3600 in France, etc.

More research have been done for Germany where one now speaks about 270.000 cases of rape by the Western Allies (all included)... According to Miriam Gebhardt, ""Als die Soldaten kamen" (or "When the soldiers came"...190.000 of them were due to US soldiers, 50.000 to French, and 30.000 to the British. that represent about 30% of the total of rapes inflicted in Germans women (and men) vs 70% done by the Russians...so maybe not so anecdotal as previously thought
The book is quite new, i don't know if it has been translated.

There is no moral equivalence. And once again, 56,000 is hardly a huge number in the grand scheme of things. If the Americans wanted the German POW's dead they would have killed them like the Germans killed 2.5 million Russian POW's in 7 months.


Sometimes, i have real difficulties to understand your point.

boo hoo. What would you have expected the allies to do/ say "Oh Herman, take your seat of power and Sig Hiel!". Nonsense. Germany had known nothing but Nazi dictatorship for twelve years and it naturally took time to get things back in order. The whole country was in need of rehabilitation and ideological/moral cleansing.


If your opinion is that because Germany had been a Nazi dictatorship, it is not only justifiable, but also normal to "rehabilitate" the whole German people globally outside any legal frames, to deprive them from any legal rights and even legal existence in order to achieve this rehabilitation,
then well, i do not share that opinion.
I reject any form of "collective guilt" and "collective punishment". Those are the roots of every genocide.

That being said, i have nothing to have expected, i am not here to fill a case for a trial or to conclude by a judgement.
Personally, i think it would have been a great opportunities to once and fall all promote new and strong international norms, like an international criminal code, too bad it did not happen that way. But well...

The truth is that by 1947 or perhaps even earlier, things shifted. DeNazification was cancelled, a West German constitution was written by independent German experts (not the allies), an independent judiciary was set up, a Federal Election was held, none of the candidates were allied stooges, and the winner, Konrad Adenauer, proved to be a thorn in the side of the allies in regards to everything from war crimes, to rearmment, to war criminals in prison, ect. ect. They got back on their feet in rapid order.


You might want to check out your facts...And the German consitution was established in 1949...

See above remarks on the fears of Soviet invasion of Denmark.


May i ask where this argument comes from?
You mean that those nice camps along the Rhine were some local military reserve in case the Red Army felt like attacking the 5.000.000 strong and fully mechanized western allies armies to conquer Denmark?

I have never heard of it. I did hear about the rather speedy exit from Gambia though....
.

Gambia?
I meant Cameroon, also in Africa...a former french colony that was the theater of one of the less known genocidish operation i am aware of. Sometimes called the "Bamileke war", it is a set of criminal policies put in place by the French in this colony, with high points in the 50's and 1960. It mostly targeted one people (the Bamileke). Given the scarcity of the sources, it is impossible to really quantify the number of victims: it goes from 50.000 to 500.000, some pretend 50% of this people died. Methods were internment in Concentration camps, shooting, starvation, torture, assassination of leaders, etc.
What is known has been gathered on one book published in 2011!

User avatar
Denying-History
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1651
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2016 3:01 pm

Re: Eisenhower's "Death Camps"

Postby Denying-History » Fri Sep 16, 2016 3:56 pm

I believe this chat is slowly seeping away from the quality of Bacques arguments. Perhaps we should again consider the 3 points I have mentioned about Bacque. He argues that the catagory "Other Losses" were those whom escaped and were systematically kill... Document tell another story.

Image

Bacque argues that no food shortage existed in 1945 to 1947. One really only needs to look at the reports from west Germany to show a food shortage existed in 1945.

Image

Image

Balsamo's pointed out this photograph.

Image

But does it honestly spell out a center of murder? Not exactly, and I question if Balsamo has taken into account that Eisenhower hadn't had any power to kill these people. Also mind this was only a Temporary enclosure.

I don't think anyone here has argued no mass graves existing means no mass murder ether. I think mostly everyone is disagreeing because of the lack of logic behind Bacques arguments. His witnesses are arguably unreliable and a lack of any statement from the big three on starving the Germans to death or anything which would imply it was intentional. I would agree that these camps did involve some harsh actions by the guards... But nothing Genocidal.
« Oral history is a complex field. After all, memory can be a distorting mirror, as anyone who has ever worked with memoir literature knows very well...They may be imperfect, and, at times, inaccurate as the narrator tries to cast himself in the most favorable light, but all sources are imperfect. Even an archival document reflects how the person who drafted it understood something and remains something less than the unvarnished truth. »
- James Mace


Return to “Holocaust Denial”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 1 guest