WW2: The Question of the Decent Ordinary Wehrmacht Member

**karoo.vellies** · 06-02-2016, 09:32

I am with BigT on this one. Of course the side who wins the war will write history in their favor.

I don't argue that some nations have higher general moral values, but in times of war most people will do horrible things to stay alive.

**Messor** · 06-02-2016, 09:55

Originally Posted by karoo.vellies

I don't argue that some nations have higher general moral values, but in times of war most people will do horrible things to stay alive.

Ja well if you read the stories most things were not done in the process of trying to stay alive, most did it for fun, or revenge.
I read once that when the allieds and the soviets converged on germany, the german woman preferred being "assaulted" by the allieds, but it was clear that everybody was doing it.

Evidence is what people made it to be.

**Koebelwagen** · 06-02-2016, 10:00

If I may ask, what is the point of dredging this up? If you take any conflict these kinds of atrocities happen more often than people would care to admit on all sides. Painting the commonwealth with a holy brush whilst condemning the axis forces evokes emotions that stretch back further than WW2 to when the British put my female ancestors in concentration camps under atrocious conditions and shipped the able bodied male ones to St Helena and Ceylon. Up to today the British have never apologised for the atrocities they visited upon the Boers.

So, should I go about beating my chest about how horrible the British were towards the Boers even though my grandfather wasn't even born when it happened? If I do that, then how do I expect the black population to move forward and forgive the atrocities committed on them by my ancestors as little as 25 - 30 years ago?

All the people actively involved in the Boer wars are dead, the vast majority of people actively involved in WW2 are dead. We can take lessons from history, in order not to repeat the same mistakes but finger pointing only stirs up anger best left where it belongs in the past and the pertinent question, at least to me, then becomes what is the point as stated in my opening sentence.

**karoo.vellies** · 06-02-2016, 10:09

I agree, rape during war times is a way of humiliating the enemy, sort off "see what we do to your wives, mothers and daughters and you can do nothing about it" which is also why so many of the rapes happened out in public.

Its difficult to put in words what happened during that time, but from personal accounts I have read its very clear that life was a living hell, for everyone and the scary part is that it has happened many times after the war and will happen many times again in the future.

**Messor** · 06-02-2016, 10:25

Originally Posted by Koebelwagen

We can take lessons from history, in order not to repeat the same mistakes

Originally Posted by karoo.vellies

the scary part is that it has happened many times after the war and will happen many times again in the future.

You know what the problem is?

We are always saying we should learn from history, whiles everybody agrees history was just written by the victors, so nobody gets to learn the truth, and thus everybody just repeats it again.

That nonsense of the gentleman british warriors, the righteous allieds, all just a bullshit blanket over civilian eyes. America STILL bombs the shit out of civilians and still their public doesn't believe it, they just see terrorists.

War is about killing, nothing more.

**Wanderin' Zero** · 06-02-2016, 10:38

Originally Posted by Koebelwagen

If I may ask, what is the point of dredging this up?

It's in the history section of the forum. Understanding history is an endless process of revision.

**Wanderin' Zero** · 06-02-2016, 10:40

Originally Posted by Messor

War is about killing, nothing more.

No, not true. Killing is only one facet of war (and not of all wars either). Its way more complex than that.

**Messor** · 06-02-2016, 11:34

Originally Posted by Wanderin' Zero

No, not true. Killing is only one facet of war (and not of all wars either). Its way more complex than that.

No

War is just about killing.

These other facets you are talking about is the reason no modern war is ever won.

**Digby** · 06-02-2016, 11:53

Originally Posted by Messor

No

War is just about killing.

These other facets you are talking about is the reason no modern war is ever won.

Perhaps the end result is just a lot of killing....but I don't believe War is just about, or the motive behind it is killing....albeit it is a common denominator in terms of outcome.

**Wanderin' Zero** · 06-02-2016, 11:56

Originally Posted by Messor

No

War is just about killing.

These other facets you are talking about is the reason no modern war is ever won.

War is never just about killing. It is about the achievement of an objective (usually political in some form or another) through the use of violence. The violence is purely a means to an end. Please provide a list of wars in which it was solely about the killing and not about achieving an obejctive other than the killing itself.