Finns / Jews

[sid guttridge]

Hi J. P. Slovjanski,

Indeed, if there really were American and British POW death camps which had worse conditions than German camps for Soviet POWs then I would, indeed, condemn them. However, this was not the case. Even if you believe James Bacque's nonsense that some 1,000,000 German POWs died in Western Allied hands after the war, this is still a much lower toll than of Soviet POWs in German hands.

Horrible as the results may have been, the UK was acting entirely legally in sending Yugoslav and Soviet citizens back to their countries. Why is your condemnation not directed towards the Communist Yugoslav and USSR governments who actually killed them? Where are your posts on that?

Cheers,

Sid.

[J.P. Slovjanski]

Hi J. P. Slovjanski,

Indeed, if there really were American and British POW death camps which had worse conditions than German camps for Soviet POWs then I would, indeed, condemn them. However, this was not the case. Even if you believe James Bacque's nonsense that some 1,000,000 German POWs died in Western Allied hands after the war, this is still a much lower toll than of Soviet POWs in German hands.

Horrible as the results may have been, the UK was acting entirely legally in sending Yugoslav and Soviet citizens back to their countries. Why is your condemnation not directed towards the Communist Yugoslav and USSR governments who actually killed them? Where are your posts on that?

Cheers,

Sid.

The camps did indeed exist; read about it from Hans Schmidt, who survived such a camp. He also relates the stories of others, as well as a recent discovery in Austria that may very well be German victims of these camps. They were little more than jam-packed barbed-wire enclosures with no shelter whatsoever. Allies are guilty.

The nation of Luxembourg, where members of the Russian Sonderdivision R hid out, had the courage to stand up to Communist demands and help the patriotic Russians escape or at least gain citizenship in their nation. Such a shame that the US and UK did not have the kind of courage.

The US and UK cannot simply extricate themselves from the deeds of Communists THEY enabled with weapons, money, and all manner of support. Tito, for example, got most of his imported weapons from the Americans and British as opposed to the Soviets. It's amazing that these brave nations could knuckly under Soviet pressure, lying to Eastern volunteers to get them to surrender before shipping them off.

Tis a dark age indeed, where people will commit atrocities yet can no longer admit them as leaders of the past did.

[sid guttridge]

Hi J. P. Slovjanski,

Nobody is denying that there were huge American and British POW camps at the end of the war "that were little more than jam-packed barbed wire enclosures with no shelter whatsoever" and that there were probably thousands of deaths in them for which the Allies were, indeed, culpable.

However, given that they suddenly found themselves with about 7,000,000 POWs, it is not altogether surprising that the Western Allies had initially to resort to "jam-packed barbed wire enclosures with no shelter whatsoever".

This might also be put forward as a mitigating factor in German favour with regard to the high mortality of Soviet POWs in 1941-42, if it were not for the fact that the fate of most German POWs in Anglo-American hands in 1945 was very different from the fate of most Soviet POWs in German hands in 1941-42. In the Anglo-American case the situation of almost all German POWs was resolved by the rapid improvement of conditions and a rapid decline in German fatalities. In the German case the situation was resolved by the deaths of at least a million Soviet POWs.

By all means criticise the Western Allies for the deaths of German POWs in Allied hands, but don't draw spurious comparisons in an attempt to make the Western Allies look as bad as the Germans in this matter.

Are you seriously advancing Luxemburg, a minuscule country with no armed forces, without contact with the Red Army and protected by Anglo-American forces, as an analogous case with the USA and UK?

It is very easy to criticise with 20/20 hindsight, but what seems obvious to us now was not necessarily obvious then. Mistakes were undoubtedly made, but to describe the entirely legal sending home of nationals of Allied countries who had worn German uniform or otherwise served the Axis cause as "atrocities" is to devalue the word, especially when very real atrocities were often committed on them by their home governments.

You seem to be trying to draw some spurious equations in culpability between the Western Allies and Nazi Germany and the USSR. I am sorry, but for all their faults, and they were not perfect, the Westen Allies were not remotely comparable with either of those brutal regimes.

Cheers,

Sid.

[John W. Howard]

Hello Sid and J.P.:
In addition to the 7 Million POW's, the Allies had to feed the many thousand displaced persons and camp survivors as well, who did not fight against the Allies. These people were in horrible health and needed immediate medical and nutritional attention to stave off death. Housing was needed as well, in a country devastated by bombing. In addition the Allies were probably still shipping supplies from as far away as Antwerp and Marseilles. I am not sure if the Allies did all they could for the German POW's, but I do know, had I been with the Allies, I would have tended to care for those whom I considered victims of Nazi tyranny first, before I cared for those who, just a short time before, had been shooting at me. And I am sure the Germans would have done the same, were the situation reversed. Best wishes.

[J.P. Slovjanski]

Hi J. P. Slovjanski,

Nobody is denying that there were huge American and British POW camps at the end of the war "that were little more than jam-packed barbed wire enclosures with no shelter whatsoever" and that there were probably thousands of deaths in them for which the Allies were, indeed, culpable.

However, given that they suddenly found themselves with about 7,000,000 POWs, it is not altogether surprising that the Western Allies had initially to resort to "jam-packed barbed wire enclosures with no shelter whatsoever".

This might also be put forward as a mitigating factor in German favour with regard to the high mortality of Soviet POWs in 1941-42, if it were not for the fact that the fate of most German POWs in Anglo-American hands in 1945 was very different from the fate of most Soviet POWs in German hands in 1941-42. In the Anglo-American case the situation of almost all German POWs was resolved by the rapid improvement of conditions and a rapid decline in German fatalities. In the German case the situation was resolved by the deaths of at least a million Soviet POWs.

By all means criticise the Western Allies for the deaths of German POWs in Allied hands, but don't draw spurious comparisons in an attempt to make the Western Allies look as bad as the Germans in this matter.

Are you seriously advancing Luxemburg, a minuscule country with no armed forces, without contact with the Red Army and protected by Anglo-American forces, as an analogous case with the USA and UK?

It is very easy to criticise with 20/20 hindsight, but what seems obvious to us now was not necessarily obvious then. Mistakes were undoubtedly made, but to describe the entirely legal sending home of nationals of Allied countries who had worn German uniform or otherwise served the Axis cause as "atrocities" is to devalue the word, especially when very real atrocities were often committed on them by their home governments.

You seem to be trying to draw some spurious equations in culpability between the Western Allies and Nazi Germany and the USSR. I am sorry, but for all their faults, and they were not perfect, the Westen Allies were not remotely comparable with either of those brutal regimes.

Cheers,

Sid.

The Germans had the same problem when trying to house POWs, they had simply not planned to take on that many people. It is also important to note that those regions in which they were housed on the Eastern Front, along with much of the Western Soviet Union, had a serious problem with Typhus dating back to the end of WWI. Typhus devastaved both Ukrainian armies of the Russian Civil War for example, and they weren't even in camps. Couple that with the fact that Soviets were killing POWS even in German custody, and it is understandable how this could happen.

It is also logical to assume many that were killed trying to return to their lines were probably listed as killed by the Germans.

[J.P. Slovjanski]

Hi J. P. Slovjanski,

Nobody is denying that there were huge American and British POW camps at the end of the war "that were little more than jam-packed barbed wire enclosures with no shelter whatsoever" and that there were probably thousands of deaths in them for which the Allies were, indeed, culpable.

However, given that they suddenly found themselves with about 7,000,000 POWs, it is not altogether surprising that the Western Allies had initially to resort to "jam-packed barbed wire enclosures with no shelter whatsoever".

This might also be put forward as a mitigating factor in German favour with regard to the high mortality of Soviet POWs in 1941-42, if it were not for the fact that the fate of most German POWs in Anglo-American hands in 1945 was very different from the fate of most Soviet POWs in German hands in 1941-42. In the Anglo-American case the situation of almost all German POWs was resolved by the rapid improvement of conditions and a rapid decline in German fatalities. In the German case the situation was resolved by the deaths of at least a million Soviet POWs.

By all means criticise the Western Allies for the deaths of German POWs in Allied hands, but don't draw spurious comparisons in an attempt to make the Western Allies look as bad as the Germans in this matter.

Are you seriously advancing Luxemburg, a minuscule country with no armed forces, without contact with the Red Army and protected by Anglo-American forces, as an analogous case with the USA and UK?

It is very easy to criticise with 20/20 hindsight, but what seems obvious to us now was not necessarily obvious then. Mistakes were undoubtedly made, but to describe the entirely legal sending home of nationals of Allied countries who had worn German uniform or otherwise served the Axis cause as "atrocities" is to devalue the word, especially when very real atrocities were often committed on them by their home governments.

You seem to be trying to draw some spurious equations in culpability between the Western Allies and Nazi Germany and the USSR. I am sorry, but for all their faults, and they were not perfect, the Westen Allies were not remotely comparable with either of those brutal regimes.

Cheers,

Sid.

The Germans had the same problem when trying to house POWs, they had simply not planned to take on that many people. It is also important to note that those regions in which they were housed on the Eastern Front, along with much of the Western Soviet Union, had a serious problem with Typhus dating back to the end of WWI. Typhus devastaved both Ukrainian armies of the Russian Civil War for example, and they weren't even in camps. Couple that with the fact that Soviets were killing POWS even in German custody, and it is understandable how this could happen.

It is also logical to assume many that were killed trying to return to their lines were probably listed as killed by the Germans.



The Western Allies cannot be separated from the Soviet Union. They are guilty via "enabling", or depraved indifference at the least.

[sid guttridge]

Hi J. P. Slovajanski,

Nope.

What is logical is to assume that over a million Soviet POWs died in German hands in 1941-42 due to malign neglect. This was not a transitory and quickly rectified event like the deaths of a far smaller number of Germans out of a far larger number of POWs in Western Allied hands in May 1945. The deaths of the Soviet POWs in 1941-42 was dragged out over many, many months before partial amelioration. As a result, it looks a lot like policy, not misfortune or lack of resources.

Besides, the deaths of the POWs was not the only mass death of Soviet citizens in German jurisdiction in 1941-42. Were the simultaneous activities of the Einsatzgruppen also the result of circumstantial accidents and Soviet malice?

Cheers,

Sid.

[Schachbrett]

It is really a time of miracles :) i don`t know is it Christmas or what , but for the first time I agree with J.P. :)

It is really unbelivable that the Allies were so good and fine and never did anything wrong. They are ( not were ) the true angels. On one hand they are not to be held responsable for having so many prisoner camp of german POW, detaining them for months or even in some cases for years. The argument that the conditions were terrible becouse of the vast number of prisoners one can understand, but it can`t be an excuse. I must wonder then why were so many prisoners of other nations, like Croats, Estonians etc, disarmed and sent back to their executioners ON THE SAME DAY OF SURRENDERNG?
Sid you claim ( and probably will claim untill your last breath ) that these extradiction were lawful. It is simply not true. You and I have very different interpretation of the international law. But even if we put that aside, it can`t be justified ( at least not in my mind ) that it is correct to keep the german POW for a longer period of time (some of them in very inhumane conditions) and at the same time turn over some other people to be executed right away just becouse they were not Germans. I don`t see how anybody reasonable can justify that there was no foul play at least in one of these matters. It can`t be right in both cases.


This does`t beling in this forum but I bare with me for a few lines :)
It was all a dirty, dirty politics and a game of interest. It had nothing to do with international law and it certainly wasn`t etical. In order to get Tito and Yougoslavia closer to the Western Allies all the non-comunist Croats were knowingly and deliberately sacrificed. That is how I see it (and that is how sir Winston Churchill described it in his memoirs, as one of his biggest mistakes -trusting and supporting Tito).

Now, I`ll say only this: i don`t have anything aganst brits, americans or no other nation in the world, but i reserve the prerogative to hate their decisionmakers and the policy they produce(d) .

Btw do you think that occupation of Iraq was lawful?

[sid guttridge]

Hi Schachbrett,

I think you are in danger of falling for JPS's false proposition.

I know of absolutely nobody who believes "that the Allies were so good and fine and never did anything wrong" or that they were "true angels". That is JPS's invention. Basically he is putting up his own straw man, the easier to knock him down.

You will note that on 17 December I wrote of the Western Allied POW camps in 1945: "there were probably thousands of deaths in them, for which the Allies were, indeed, culpable." I have no problem recognising that the Western Allies were less than perfect. However, what I don't accept is JPS's proposition that this was equivalent in cause or scale to the deaths of many, many times more Soviet POWs in German hands in 1941-42. Nor do I have to accept his unlikely proposition that the USSR managed to kill a significant proportion of these POWs after they were in German hands. Do believe that to?

JPS's real message is that the Western Allies were as bad as Nazi Germany or Stalinist Russia. Do you agree with that?

It is ahistorical to talk of POWs being sent back to their "executioners". We now know they were their executioners, but at the time they were sent "back" nobody was to know that this was to occur. 20/20 hindsight makes it all appear so obvious to us now, but the decision makers of the time did not possess it. Had they been possessed of it, things might have been very different. It is very easy for us today, with our hindsight and ack of personal responsibility in the matter, to sit back and pontificate sef righteously, but I doubt that we are better men than them or that we would have possessed the knowledge and character to act any differently.

There is a great deal of difference between turning over citizens of Allied countries to those Allied countries and the situation of Germans who were the enemy. As the two cases are different in law it is entirely legitimate to treat them differently.

There was a clear breach of international law in turning over White Russian in the Cossack Corps to the Soviet Union, because these men had never been Soviet citizens. However, this does not apply to other groups.

Of course it was all a game of interest and politics. However, on the Western Allied side it was largely a game of interest and politics that was conducted within the letter of the law. The same cannot be said of Nazi Germany or Stalinist Russia.

Law and Justice aren't necessarily the same thing, but it remains better to respect the rule of law than not.

Cheers,

Sid

[Schachbrett]

dear sid
it was not my inteniton to say that the western allies were as bad as nazis or stalinist ussr. i believe that i never stated something like that but if there was any doubt hope we cleared that.

it maybe ahistorical to claim that (in the case of surrendered croats) they were sent back to their executioners but it is true my friend. you claim it was within the law, i as a man who has legal education ( i`m not trying to brag, don`t get me wrong) claim otherwise. we will never agree on this subject, but that is why this forum exist i suppose :) you also claim that they didn`t know what was happening, and that is the ony thing i resent you really. on the other matters we may discuss but on that one grrr i don`t claim that i`m the better man than they were but theat is beside the point. politics and big "multistar" generals ( a certan fieldmarshal ) made the decision. army must obey......

hope there are no misunderstandings this time :)
i`ll have a brake these days, see you after the hollidays

[sid guttridge]

Hi Schachbrett,

I didn't really think you were trying to equate the Western Allies to Nazi Germany or the Stalinist USSR. I was merely concerned that you were being over charitable, at this time of good will to all men, to JPS, who does do so.

I have no formal legal training. So I am happy to take a lead from someone who has.

As I understand it, the surrender of the White Russians, who had never held Soviet citizenship, to the USSR was undoubtedly illegal under international law. Most White Russians could have legally been sent back to Yugoslavia or Bulgaria, where they had residence in the inter-war years, but to hand them over directly to the USSR was illegal. Efforts should have been made to differentiate them.

However, as I understand it, there was nothing illegal in turning over foreign nationals to their own countries. That it was clearly a terrible mistake is not at issue in retrospect. Even Churchill acknowledged that. However, the point that JPS is trying to advance is that this sin of omission by the Western Allies was the direct equivalent to the sin of commission of their Soviet and Yugoslav killers. This is not, in my opinion, remotely sustainable. The Western Allies (particularly in this case the British), were undoubtedly unwitting or uncaring accessories before the fact, but they were equally undoubtedly not complicit in the killings.

Cheers,

Sid.

[Pirx]

J.P. Slovjanski
If the Germans were obligated to keep all those Soviet POWs alive, then you must condemn the UK and especially America for running POW deathcamps which had worse conditions than those for Soviet POWs, not to mention sending hundreds of thousands of Serb, Croat, and Russian civilians back to the Soviets.

My grandpa was taken to Russian POW Camp near Vienner Neustadt in Austria in May 1945. Coz he was badly wounded in left arm he was released after few months coz he was "unable to work". Those soldiers who was healthy where sent to USSR and those who survive "work and reeducation", goes back to Heimat in 1949 - 1950 (when Stalin created DDR). After Russian POW camp, my Grandpa goes to Munich when in American check point he was taken to hospital. He was transported on december 1945 to Military Hospital where doctors saved his arm or even life. He was back in home in the end of 1946.
So American POW's in opinion of my grandpa was 100000 times better than Russian, and Your opinion J.P. is unfair.
Deathcamps? In Jaworzno was soviet POW camp where in 6 months beetwen june - december 1945 died over 5000 prisoners! Not shooted but died from "hard work" or beating. 27 person each day.

[Grunt]

Those soldiers who was healthy where sent to USSR and those who survive "work and reeducation", goes back to Heimat in 1949 - 1950 (when Stalin created DDR).

Here I have to add: ten thousands were kept in USSR until 1956! Officially they were judged for "war crimes" and "crimes against the soviet people", but the real reason comes obvious when you take a look at their professions: the Russians kept the high skilled craftsmen, engineers and technicians they needed to rebuild their country.

[J.P. Slovjanski]

Maybe there is some mistake about my "message". My message is that Nazi Germany was far BETTER than the Soviet Union or its opportunistic allies, particularly because it was far more open about its positions than the Allies. The allies created many German "crimes" out of issues that were legal during the war(e.g. reprisals for partisans). Let's also not forget 2 major rules of the Nuremburg Trials: 1. There is no discussion of Allied crimes. 2. The laws of technical evidence need not apply.

Let's also not forget the American bombing of Dresden, Budapest, and Belgrade. A friend of mine met an eyewitness to the bombing of Budapest by the Americans, where they dropped their entire bombloads on the civilian sections of the city, which were not defended by flak.

[sid guttridge]

Hi JPS,

My profuse apologies.

So, because Hitler was so open about his anti-Semitism this somehow makes the "Holocaust" less awful?

Budapest? Don't forget that in early March 1944, before it was bombed, the Hungarians wanted to declared Budapest an "Open City" and were in contact with the Allies over this. However, this would have meant that no German military traffic could pass through the city, which was a vital rail node for the direct supply of Army Group South. (The only other major rail route available ran through Belgrade, which, as you point out, was also bombed). The German response was to occupy Budapest on 19 March in order to prevent it being declared an "Open City". Within a couple of weeks the city was bombed.

Cheers,

Sid.