View Full Version : U-864 is finally being raised!
Today, the Norwegian government decided to raise the U-864 (Sank after being torpedoed outside Fedje during WWII) , due to the possible environmental damage all the mercury onboard could cause:cool::up:
Link to norwegian newspaper: http://www.bt.no/lokalt/hordaland/article782736.ece
It's a shame they have to disturb a grave, but mercury really is nasty stuff.
It's a shame they have to disturb a grave, but mercury really is nasty stuff.I truly agree, mate. I hope the do this with the proper respect since it is the last resting place of the crew.:yep:
SteamWake
01-29-09, 01:07 PM
The link dident help me since I cant read that but I'm wondering...
Where did all this mercury come from? How much is there?
Isnt there a possibility of doing more damage by trying to raise her as opposed to letting her lie?
FIREWALL
01-29-09, 01:11 PM
The link dident help me since I cant read that but I'm wondering...
Where did all this mercury come from? How much is there?
Isnt there a possibility of doing more damage by trying to raise her as opposed to letting her lie?
SW makes a very good point.
@ SETH Thx for article.
AVGWarhawk
01-29-09, 01:14 PM
There was thoughts of making a huge dome to cover the entire boat. I would think this is best. Do not disturb the final resting place and possibility of spilling the mercury would be non-existant.
SteamWake
01-29-09, 01:25 PM
But how much mercury are we talking about?
Is it barrels full? Or just in the switches / batterys etc.
Seems to me if its just a few tilt switches and such yea best thing to do would be to leave it alone.
But if its like 20 or more gallons then there is a cause for concearn.
On an interesting footnote ... Did you know that the alchemial make up of sea water is virtually the same throughout the globe? A seawater sample taken in the gulf stream will have the same amount of gold, lead, mercury, arsinic, etc. as a sample taken in the bearing straights.
But how much mercury are we talking about?
Is it barrels full? Or just in the switches / batterys etc.
Seems to me if its just a few tilt switches and such yea best thing to do would be to leave it alone.
But if its like 20 or more gallons then there is a cause for concearn.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U-864
GoldenRivet
01-29-09, 01:31 PM
It's a shame they have to disturb a grave, but mercury really is nasty stuff.I truly agree, mate. I hope the do this with the proper respect since it is the last resting place of the crew.:yep:
The German navy should have a full military honor guard present who will all salute arms when the boat breaks the surface.
SteamWake
01-29-09, 01:48 PM
But how much mercury are we talking about?
Is it barrels full? Or just in the switches / batterys etc.
Seems to me if its just a few tilt switches and such yea best thing to do would be to leave it alone.
But if its like 20 or more gallons then there is a cause for concearn.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U-864
67 Tons worth... yea thats cause for concearn. :dead:
AVGWarhawk
01-29-09, 01:49 PM
I'd say:yep:
FIREWALL
01-29-09, 02:31 PM
How deep is the sub ? If divers can reach it and work under those depths a high vacuum hose could suck the mercury out and leave sub and crew alone.
There must be a better way than raising it. :yep:
Just read that the boat went down with a crew of 73 according to Danish TV2's website. She was on her way to Japan with a cargo of 67 tons of mercury for weapons production and the drawings for a new Messerschmitt fighter Me 262. She was sunk by a torpedo from the British submarine 'Venturer' the 9th. of February 1945.
Today she lies 150 metres below the surface only 2 nautical miles from the island of Fedje off Norways west coast. The boat is broken in 2 pieces and is leaking several kilos of mercury per year.
SteamWake
01-29-09, 05:19 PM
What in the hell do you need 67 tons of mecury for munitions?
Thats a hella lot of tilt switches or was it used for other things?
An interesting question here is::
who in fact will pay for the salvage costs and for the costs resulting from possible damage to the maritime environment?
There was a similar case with U 859:
"On 23 September U-859 was running on the surface, within 23 mi (37 km) of Penang and the end of her voyage, when she was intercepted in the Malacca Straits by HMS Trenchant. In difficult conditions with a heavy swell running and a second U-boat thought to be lurking, Trenchant's commander Arthur Hezlet carried out a snap attack using his stern torpedo tubes, hitting U-859 amidships. The U-boat sank immediately in 50 m (160 ft) of water with several compartments flooded, and 47 men drowned, including her commander.
Twenty of the crew did manage to escape however, opening the hatch in the relatively shallow sea and struggling to the calm surface. Eleven of the survivors were picked up by HMS Trenchant immediately following the sinking, and the remaining 9 were picked up by the Japanese after being adrift for 24 hours and were taken ashore to await repatriation.[4]
Salvage
In 1972 a total of 12 tons of mercury were recovered from the U-859 and brought into Singapore. The West German Embassy claimed ownership of the mercury. The Receiver of Wreck took possession of the mercury, and the High Court of Singapore [English law school] ruled that "the German state has never ceased to exist despite Germany's unconditional surrender in 1945 and whatever was the property of the German State, unless it was captured and taken away by one of the Allied Powers, still remains the property of the German State..."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U-859#cite_note-4
Given that the Federal Republic of Germany is the legal successor of the German Reich (prevailing international opinion) and that there is the rule that the property of warships „is only lost by capture during battle (before sinking)... or by any express act of abandonment“, the u-boat and the mercury is property of Germany.
Consequence would be that Germany as the flag state has the duty to remove the wreck, if the wreck causes damage to the environment. If Germany fails to do so, Norway could remove the wreck as a reprisal and could claim damage afterwards.
Also, whoever wants to lift the wreck of the German Graf Spee in Uruguay better asks for Germany's approval because it is Germany's property. The US e.g. asked Germany first, before the US Navy defused the weapons of U 352 which had been sunk off the coast of North Carolina in 1942.
Anyway, I think it is unlikely that Germany will tough it out to be the owner of the mercury in the case of the U-864.
What in the hell do you need 67 tons of mecury for munitions?
Thats a hella lot of tilt switches or was it used for other things?
It has many uses:
Fuses
Rocket fuel production
An old fashioned way of enriching uranium
Auto-pilot and rocket systems
Old fashioned electrics. Especially arc valves for power plants
Optics, especially naval.
Batteries
It is expensive
The Germans also shipped radioactive materials mixed in mercury, but it is not clear why.
U-859's mercury only contains trace radioactive materials as a by product of it's
method of extraction tho.
They won't raise the boat. Not broken in pieces with 64 years of deterioration. I'll bet they pump out as much of it's cargo as possible then seal the wreck.
bookworm_020
01-29-09, 10:10 PM
67 Tons worth... yea thats cause for concearn. :dead:
That's an understatement!:know:
It's a shame they have to disturb a grave, but mercury really is nasty stuff.I truly agree, mate. I hope the do this with the proper respect since it is the last resting place of the crew.
The German navy should have a full military honor guard present who will all salute arms when the boat breaks the surface.
I disagree.
Those who fought for the Nazis should be respected in death as humans, but not
honored in death as soldiers.
OneToughHerring
01-30-09, 12:54 AM
Personally I understand the need to respect a designated war grave that I'm sure this sub is seen as. It would make sense to remove the mercury without actually hauling any part of the sub up to the surface. However, I'm also interested in WW 2 wrecks especially in near-by Scandinavian waters.
If there's a wreck that sank and nobody went down with it, it would be ok to raise it? Nobody would say no to that? What about raising some cargo, I know that quite a lot of cargo went to the bottom of the sea in the Barents sea with the Arctic convoys, PQ-17 depicted in my sig image.
It's a shame they have to disturb a grave, but mercury really is nasty stuff.I truly agree, mate. I hope the do this with the proper respect since it is the last resting place of the crew.
The German navy should have a full military honor guard present who will all salute arms when the boat breaks the surface.
I disagree.
Those who fought for the Nazis should be respected in death as humans, but not
honored in death as soldiers.
I totally disagree. They fought for their country. If Himmler sank in a one man sub full of mercury, I would agree that a saluting band would be wierd.
The german submarine service was know to fight for the country - not for the Nazi party. Any kind of Nazi propagande was not allowed on the bases or boats.
I totally disagree. They fought for their country. If Himmler sank in a one man sub full of mercury, I would agree that a saluting band would be wierd.
What part of their country do you think they where fighting for?
They certainly didn't fight for the freedom loving, peaceful or humane part.
The allies fought for those parts of Germany, not the German army.
The men entombed in U864 fought for much less desirable aspects of Germany. That
makes them human and does not lessen the tragedy of their death, but it does not
bring them any honor, glory or righteousness.
What part of their country do you think they where fighting for?
For their families. I have readed lots of books with 1st person accounts and have many friends whose grandfather fought in WW2, and what all of them will tell you is the same: They fought for victory because defeat would mean the terror and chaos for their beloved ones. More than anything, they feared the Red Army and in the eastern front war on the defensive was desperate because of that. They knew what came with the invasion of the Red Army: Death, rape and destruction of everything they loved, mainly in a horrible and saddist way.
BTW incidentally the russians thought the very same of the "german hordes" and also fought the german army desperately because of the same reasons. Not because of being "good bolschevists".
Politicians start wars, most soldiers just obbey and once the disaster has started, they don't want their families to be in the losing side. Just that.
What part of their country do you think they where fighting for?
For their families. I have readed lots of books with 1st person accounts and have many friends whose grandfather fought in WW2, and what all of them will tell you is the same: They fought for victory because defeat would mean the terror and chaos for their beloved ones. More than anything, they feared the Red Army and in the eastern front war on the defensive was desperate because of that. They knew what came with the invasion of the Red Army: Death, rape and destruction of everything they loved, mainly in a horrible and saddist way.
BTW incidentally the russians thought the very same of the "german hordes" and also fought the german army desperately because of the same reasons. Not because of being "good bolschevists".
Politicians start wars, most soldiers just obbey and once the disaster has started, they don't want their families to be in the losing side. Just that.exactly :up:
Politicians start wars, most soldiers just obbey and once the disaster has started, they don't want their families to be in the losing side. Just that.
I'm sure if that was the case for some in the German military, then it makes them
honorable people in so far as they had good intentions, however, it is a big leap
from that to say that they deserve military honors.
As humans they may have wanted just to protect their family, but as soldiers in the
German military, they where trying to invade most of Europe and facilitate genocide.
These where he military objectives for them.
Certainly honor them as humans, scared about their families future etc. but not as
soldiers taking part in a utterly unjust war; there is no honor in that.
Politicians start wars, most soldiers just obbey and once the disaster has started, they don't want their families to be in the losing side. Just that.
I'm sure if that was the case for some in the German military, then it makes them
honorable people in so far as they had good intentions, however, it is a big leap
from that to say that they deserve military honors.
As humans they may have wanted just to protect their family, but as soldiers in the
German military, they where trying to invade most of Europe and facilitate genocide.
These where he military objectives for them.
Certainly honor them as humans, scared about their families future etc. but not as
soldiers taking part in a utterly unjust war; there is no honor in that.
On the other hand even in WW2 when the situation allowed for it enemy soldiers were occasionally given military funerals, so I see no reason not to let the Germans honor their U-864 dead if it so chooses.
antikristuseke
01-30-09, 10:23 AM
I totally disagree. They fought for their country. If Himmler sank in a one man sub full of mercury, I would agree that a saluting band would be wierd.
What part of their country do you think they where fighting for?
They certainly didn't fight for the freedom loving, peaceful or humane part.
The allies fought for those parts of Germany, not the German army.
The men entombed in U864 fought for much less desirable aspects of Germany. That
makes them human and does not lessen the tragedy of their death, but it does not
bring them any honor, glory or righteousness.
It still makes them soldiers and as such they deserve a burrial with soldiers honours.
FIREWALL
01-30-09, 10:39 AM
Politicians start wars, most soldiers just obbey and once the disaster has started, they don't want their families to be in the losing side. Just that.
I'm sure if that was the case for some in the German military, then it makes them
honorable people in so far as they had good intentions, however, it is a big leap
from that to say that they deserve military honors.
As humans they may have wanted just to protect their family, but as soldiers in the
German military, they where trying to invade most of Europe and facilitate genocide.
These where he military objectives for them.
Certainly honor them as humans, scared about their families future etc. but not as
soldiers taking part in a utterly unjust war; there is no honor in that.
On the other hand even in WW2 when the situation allowed for it enemy soldiers were occasionally given military funerals, so I see no reason not to let the Germans honor their U-864 dead if it so chooses.
I agree with August whole heartedly. Their grave is being disturbed after this many years. Yes for good reason but, it's still being disturbed
Schroeder
01-30-09, 11:16 AM
@Letum
If the UK should ever start an unjust war and draft you I bet you will just say "I don't want to take part in this!" and bravely meet the firing squad....
(I know the U-boat crews were not drafted, but everyone who didn't volunteer was drafted and likely sent to the infantry:dead:.)
@Letum
If the UK should ever start an unjust war and draft you I bet you will just say "I don't want to take part in this!" and bravely meet the firing squad....
I believe I would, but that is besides the point.
I'm not saying the u-boat crews made any bad personal decisions. I just don't think
that they did anything that warrens military honor.
Remembrance of their death as humans, yes. Honoring the sacrifice they made for
the Third Reich, no.
FIREWALL
01-30-09, 11:40 AM
A warrior can only die once. A coward dies a thousand deaths.
A warrior can only die once. A coward dies a thousand deaths.
...you have lost me.
You think I am a coward because I would rather meet a firing squad than take part in
an unjust war?
I don't think it is an especially brave thing to do, but I don't see how it could be
considered cowardice.
I totally disagree. They fought for their country. If Himmler sank in a one man sub full of mercury, I would agree that a saluting band would be wierd.
What part of their country do you think they where fighting for?
They certainly didn't fight for the freedom loving, peaceful or humane part.
The allies fought for those parts of Germany, not the German army.
The men entombed in U864 fought for much less desirable aspects of Germany. That
makes them human and does not lessen the tragedy of their death, but it does not
bring them any honor, glory or righteousness.
Unluckily I have to correct you here. The allies did not fight for any german or german group/part, no matter if Nazi or the numerous but small and isolated german resistance groups. Despite parts of these groups trying to get in contact with the allies, they never really gave them any hope. Chruchill was actually afraid of Hitler beeing killed for this would have ment a possible compromise in the allied war goals, the unconditional surrender of Germany. You also may want to check the Morgenthau Plan, which upon it's release caused great uproar in Germany and was one reason why the german soldiers fought on to the very bitter end even in the west.
As to the problem at hand, if military honors or not, that's a difficult question. Modern day Germany has a problem with military per se. There are no heroes in todays german military, up until 2009 there weren't even any "fallen" soldiers in the Bundeswehr, just "accidently killed" ones. The reinistatement of the iron cross was declined for some ugly new medal without any reputation or feel of achievement to it. Within such an environment honoring any soldiers from WW2 is very difficult, unless they were proven members of some anti Hitler/Nazi Organisation. Even I am not yet quite sure how to deal with this. On the one hand these ppl more often then not just fought to protect (by all they knew) their country. Many many soldiers nevertheless sympathized with the NAZI regime. The U_boat arm at the start was the least NAZI brand of arms for sure, but that changed from 43 onwards when the old crews were send to the bottom and new recuits were mostly die hard nazi fanatics. It's not a question of black and white, but lots and lots of different shades of grey. Some ppl certainly deserve propper honoring, some certainly do not. And it's not always clear how to decide that.
Unluckily I have to correct you here. The allies did not fight for any german or german group/part, no matter if Nazi or the numerous but small and isolated german resistance groups. It could be argued that we fought for your future just as much as we fought for our
own survival. Better a Germany divided as per Morgenthau, than a Germany under
fascist rule.
Even if the Morgenthau Plan came to fruition and was still in place today, it could be
argued you should be grateful to those who bought it about if the alternative is the
survival of fascism in Germany.
I'm not convinced that Germany would be in a better place now if there had been a
conditional peace agreement in 1943.
Unluckily I have to correct you here. The allies did not fight for any german or german group/part, no matter if Nazi or the numerous but small and isolated german resistance groups. It could be argued that we fought for your future just as much as we fought for our
own survival. Better a Germany divided as per Morgenthau, than a Germany under
fascist rule.
Even if the Morgenthau Plan came to fruition and was still in place today, it could be
argued you should be grateful to those who bought it about if the alternative is the
survival of fascism in Germany.
I'm not convinced that Germany would be in a better place now if there had been a
conditional peace agreement in 1943.
I am not sure how to respond to this. Though at first glance I'd agree to you, at least when it comes to the current generations of germans, I think we were talking about the folks back then, and they certainly would have not agreed with that. And even though I consider democracy and human rights as some of the most important achievements in human history, I do not give it the holy sanction of them beeing the only important factors in defining the well beeing of a country. The german empire, for example, was not a democracy, but it was a country build on the principles of justice nevertheless. The justice system of the holy roman empire had a reputation of not making destinction between nobles and peasants when cases were brought to court, one contributing factor to the german tendency to be rather trustworthy of their government and not as willing to revolt as in was the case in other countries, which came biting us in our asses when the Nazis took over. Whenever germans started to revolt big time, the case of national "unification" was the most dominant one, 1918 beeing the sole exception to that rule. The Morgenthau Plan in this would have been much worse then the partition of Germany had been anyways.
So, I am grateful for what the allies did, but I am certainly not grateful because ppl like you tell me "you should be", or because I think the allies back then were of any morale superiourity in their goals for this war. The only ppl I'd shake hands with are the soldiers and all the other folks that took the burden to go to war for their own private reasons, mostly idealistic ones, willing to risk their lives for these. Everything else just served the political and economical goals of Russia, England and the US respectivly.
In this we actually have to thank the Russians, without their opposition to the US and the american politics to contain communism, Germany would have faced a much worse fate me thinks. And this would have led to huge problems nowadays.
Just to avoid confusion, I said "It could be argued that" because that isn't necessarily my view.
FIREWALL
01-30-09, 04:56 PM
A warrior can only die once. A coward dies a thousand deaths.
...you have lost me.
You think I am a coward because I would rather meet a firing squad than take part in
an unjust war?
I don't think it is an especially brave thing to do, but I don't see how it could be
considered cowardice.
I don't see your name being mentioned in my post.
Got a guilty conscience ?
A warrior can only die once. A coward dies a thousand deaths.
...you have lost me.
You think I am a coward because I would rather meet a firing squad than take part in
an unjust war?
I don't think it is an especially brave thing to do, but I don't see how it could be
considered cowardice.
I don't see your name being mentioned in my post.
Got a guilty conscience ?
I don't see who it is referring to, but it is below my post.
I don't see a name in your post either.
Got a habit of veiled knives?
I have a guilty conscience,, but not for anything you know or could guess about.
It's a shame they have to disturb a grave, but mercury really is nasty stuff.I truly agree, mate. I hope the do this with the proper respect since it is the last resting place of the crew.
The German navy should have a full military honor guard present who will all salute arms when the boat breaks the surface.
I disagree.
Those who fought for the Nazis should be respected in death as humans, but not
honored in death as soldiers.
You sir, make me sick with that statement. I really wouldnt have expected that from you, Letum.
And what Letum said above is waht pisses me off, German is always looked as the baddies, every one of them. Yet, I dare to say that 80% of the armed forces had nothing to do with the political Nazi party or had any will to fight for it. They fought for their country, just as brits for UK, finns for Finland, americans for US.
And to top that, we all know (yet some dont want to admit it) germany had the most advanced and the most skilled army at the time.
If you take a dive to the history books of german army, you realise that there's hundreds or even thousands of soldiers who all would deserve an statue somewhere, but they dont. Why? Because they were the baddies. :nope:
Tell me what they did in their role as soldiers that deserves the slightest bit of honor.
Don't tell me they had nothing to do with the political Nazi party! The German military
was the only reason the Nazi party was still in power.
As humans that died tragically through no fault of their own, the deserve statues, but
as soldiers they deserve nothing what so ever.
There certainly should be a monument to them, but one that is is memory and morning
for them, not one to give glorification of their military endeavor. That would sicken me.
Tell me what they did in their role as soldiers that deserves the slightest bit of honor.
The same as any soldier, fought for their country.
Don't tell me they had nothing to do with the political Nazi party! The German military
was the only reason the Nazi party was still in power.
Ok, they were under the government of lead by an Nazi leader. That's about as much they had to do with it. And by that I mean, most of them werent nazi's.
As humans that dies tragically through no fault of their own, the deserve statues, but
as soldiers they deserve nothing what so ever.
And I say again, some of the german Wehrmacht and even SS showed bravery that no other soldier had shown to that day, and that is a fact, said and written by many historians.
As for the statues, why there's statues for allied soldiers? Not because the were brave or elite, but because the won the war.
There certainly should be a monument to them, but one that is is memory and morning
for them, not one to give glorification of their military endeavor. That would sicken me.
I feel like repeating myself, but let's take another approach. Let's say, you live in a street X, on the next morning you watch the news and hear that on that street X, a murderer has been arrested. Now, the next you know is that the police is knocking on your door, you open in and they arrest you. You ask them what the heck is this and they answer "A murderer was living on this street, all living on this street must be murderers too, so we arrest everyone."
See, this is exactly what you are saying about the german military in WWII. Some do bad things = everyone are bad.
I feel like repeating myself, but let's take another approach. Let's say, you live in a street X, on the next morning you watch the news and hear that on that street X, a murderer has been arrested. Now, the next you know is that the police is knocking on your door, you open in and they arrest you. You ask them what the heck is this and they answer "A murderer was living on this street, all living on this street must be murderers too, so we arrest everyone."
That is not analogous.
A correct analogy would be you live in a street with a murderer. When the police
come to arrest him you start shooting the police because you are "fighting for your
street". After the police manage to kill you and the murderer someone thinks it would
be a good idea to honor your brave battle against the police.
Tell me what they did in their role as soldiers that deserves the slightest bit of honor.
Don't tell me they had nothing to do with the political Nazi party! The German military
was the only reason the Nazi party was still in power.
As humans that died tragically through no fault of their own, the deserve statues, but
as soldiers they deserve nothing what so ever.
There certainly should be a monument to them, but one that is is memory and morning
for them, not one to give glorification of their military endeavor. That would sicken me.
That kinda brings up the question why honor any military men or women that died for their country. Or are you saying 'Bomber' Harris is any more honourable than the U-Boat crew? And Harris certainly has more blood on his hands than they do...
As long as they did not commit war crimes, I don't see what should speak against a burial and remembrance with Military honors.
Even your Countrymen, assuming you are indeed Britsh, and the Americans showed respect for their adversaries and gave burials with military honors to fallen Germans.
I feel like repeating myself, but let's take another approach. Let's say, you live in a street X, on the next morning you watch the news and hear that on that street X, a murderer has been arrested. Now, the next you know is that the police is knocking on your door, you open in and they arrest you. You ask them what the heck is this and they answer "A murderer was living on this street, all living on this street must be murderers too, so we arrest everyone."
That is not analogous.
A correct analogy would be you live in a street with a murderer. When the police
come to arrest him you start shooting the police because you are "fighting for your
street". After the police manage to kill you and the murderer someone thinks it would
be a good idea to honor your brave battle against the police.
That's not right either. The correct would be that the police is coming to take your street by force and kill you if you'd oppose it. Knowing that yer wife would personally kill you if you didnt oppose the attackers, you have no choice but to fight. (The wife in this case being the leader of the nation)
Tell me what they did in their role as soldiers that deserves the slightest bit of honor.
Don't tell me they had nothing to do with the political Nazi party! The German military
was the only reason the Nazi party was still in power.
As humans that died tragically through no fault of their own, the deserve statues, but
as soldiers they deserve nothing what so ever.
There certainly should be a monument to them, but one that is is memory and morning
for them, not one to give glorification of their military endeavor. That would sicken me.
That kinda brings up the question why honor any military men or women that died for their country. Or are you saying 'Bomber' Harris is any more honourable than the U-Boat crew? And Harris certainly has more blood on his hands than they do...
As long as they did not commit war crimes, I don't see what should speak against a burial and remembrance with Military honors.
Even your Countrymen, assuming you are indeed Britsh, and the Americans showed respect for their adversaries and gave burials with military honors to fallen Germans.
Excellent post!
I think this pic sums the respect you just talked about quite well. Title for the pic says: This dead German soldier was one of the "last stand" defenders of German-held Cherbourg. Captain Earl Topley, who led one of the first outfits into the fallen city, blamed him for killing three of his boys. France, 06/27/1944 (WARNING, CRUESOME SHOT):
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/55/Dead_German_soldier_in_Cherbourg.jpg
HunterICX
01-31-09, 04:47 AM
That kinda brings up the question why honor any military men or women that died for their country. Or are you saying 'Bomber' Harris is any more honourable than the U-Boat crew? And Harris certainly has more blood on his hands than they do...
Harris's been bathing in Blood
Allied bombing of German cities claimed between 300,000 and 600,000 civilian lives.
the battle of the atlantic claimed aprox 30,200 merchant sailors
so knowing that wouldnt it be fair to degrade the graves of the bomber crew shot down to human states and take away any Honorable military resemblece as they didnt deserve them, they just killed civilians for their butcher Harris
I've seen graves of a whole family wiped out in one raid, the youngest one was just 3 months old did they asked to be bombed to kingdom come?
Harris tought so, he thought killing enough civilians would get the country on its knees...bastard hasnt learned anything from the raids on london...it only fuels the people to hold on even harder.
I respect almost all of the soldiers/airmen/sailors on both sides of World War II (apart from the few rotten ones) They followed the orders and did the hard work and gave their lifes in the line of duty. and they deserve to be honored in Military fashion.
HunterICX
OneToughHerring
01-31-09, 05:01 AM
Link with Youtube - video.
http://www.xray-mag.com/en/content/norway-salvage-german-ww2-uboat
Regardless of what one thinks about nazis etc. it would be interesting to have some wrecks raised to the surface. Some of the merchant ships had cargo that would be of some value still, not to mention the historical value of tanks etc.
That kinda brings up the question why honor any military men or women that died for their country. Or are you saying 'Bomber' Harris is any more honourable than the U-Boat crew? And Harris certainly has more blood on his hands than they do...
My criteria is that a person deserves military honors if they fought for a just cause and
did so in a just way.
Bomber Harris fits the bill here for many people, but not for me personally.
That kinda brings up the question why honor any military men or women that died for their country. Or are you saying 'Bomber' Harris is any more honourable than the U-Boat crew? And Harris certainly has more blood on his hands than they do...
My criteria is that a person deserves military honors if they fought for a just cause and
did so in a just way.
Bomber Harris fits the bill here for many people, but not for me personally.
Curious, and there I thought just wars were only fought by those who came out on top.
SteamWake
01-31-09, 10:26 AM
Tell me what they did in their role as soldiers that deserves the slightest bit of honor.
They did their duty and followed orders... to the end.
What those orders are and whom they came from are actually irrelevant.
Curious, and there I thought just wars were only fought by those who came out on top.
History says otherwise.
Tell me what they did in their role as soldiers that deserves the slightest bit of honor.
They did their duty and followed orders... to the end.
What those orders are and whom they came from are actually irrelevant.
What the order are are not irrelevant. Everyone takes responsibility for his/her actions
you can't pass responsibility up the chain of command.
gandalf71
01-31-09, 10:51 AM
My criteria is that a person deserves military honors if they fought for a just cause and
did so in a just way.
Bomber Harris fits the bill here for many people, but not for me personally.
Is that why people like Colin Campbell are honoured in the UK?
Sorry but for me there is no difference between any soldier, who gave his life for his country, at least thinking that he was fighting for a right cause.
br
Michael
My criteria is that a person deserves military honors if they fought for a just cause and
did so in a just way.
What the order are are not irrelevant. Everyone takes responsibility for his/her actions
you can't pass responsibility up the chain of command.
Oh that's great. Now prepare to open up Westminster Abbey and drag out most of those entombed there, as they took part in imperialist wars of aggression against many Indian, African, and American states of their time.
Things are not so easy, Letum, you should know better :nope:
My criteria is that a person deserves military honors if they fought for a just cause and
did so in a just way.
What the order are are not irrelevant. Everyone takes responsibility for his/her actions
you can't pass responsibility up the chain of command.
Oh that's great. Now prepare to open up Westminster Abbey and drag out most of those entombed there[...]
I'm not saying those who did such things should be dug up, condemned or anything like
that. They just should not have a celebration of what they did. They should not be
honored or glorified, but remembered and mourned as humans who died tragically.
My criteria is that a person deserves military honors if they fought for a just cause and
did so in a just way.
What the order are are not irrelevant. Everyone takes responsibility for his/her actions
you can't pass responsibility up the chain of command.
Oh that's great. Now prepare to open up Westminster Abbey and drag out most of those entombed there[...]
I'm not saying those who did such things should be dug up, condemned or anything like
that. They just should not have a celebration of what they did. They should not be
honored or glorified, but remembered and mourned as humans who died tragically.
Letum, I agree to your stance towards soldiers in general, but then you have to apply these rules to all nations, not just the germans. Most wars called "just" by the population were not that "just" anymore on the political level. No country goes to war just for friendships or morales sake, but only if important interests are threatend. Britain especially followed a "balance on the continent" policy for centuries, getting involved in wars that did have nothing to do with them.
I personally have zero problems with your principles, even though I tend to disagree, out of humanitarian reasons, however, but a huge problem with the hypocrisis displayed in regards to judging soldiers just because they fought for one side and not the other.
I do apply it to all nations, although it is not often black and white, in this case it is
clear enough to anyone. I could certainly dig up countless British military endeavors
that conferred no honor to it's participants.
snakeyez
01-31-09, 02:56 PM
From the Norway Post:
http://www.norwaypost.no/content/view/21562/26/
I do apply it to all nations, although it is not often black and white, in this case it is
clear enough to anyone. I could certainly dig up countless British military endeavors
that conferred no honor to it's participants.
Clear enough only if you look at the surface. As usual, things are a bit more complicated and general arguments don't do the individual justice.
I do apply it to all nations, although it is not often black and white, in this case it is
clear enough to anyone. I could certainly dig up countless British military endeavors
that conferred no honor to it's participants.
Clear enough only if you look at the surface. As usual, things are a bit more complicated and general arguments don't do the individual justice.
That is true enough.
Few things do the individual justice.
jazzabilly
02-02-09, 02:36 PM
The apologists for the German armed services of WW2 need to be reminded that:
All German servicemen were required to, and did take an oath of loyalty to Adolf Hitler personally. Not to Germany, it's people, constitution or government, but personally to Adolf Hitler. That in effect makes them directly involved in carrying out his personal wishes, not those of the people or government of Germany.
Germany aggressively made war on nearly every country in Europe, invaded, enslaved, despoiled and murdered millions of people.
These are not the acts of honorable men. These are the acts of criminals. There were many who were dupes, but they acted as criminals nonetheless.
The apologists for the German armed services of WW2 need to be reminded that:
All German servicemen were required to, and did take an oath of loyalty to Adolf Hitler personally. Not to Germany, it's people, constitution or government, but personally to Adolf Hitler. That in effect makes them directly involved in carrying out his personal wishes, not those of the people or government of Germany.
Germany aggressively made war on nearly every country in Europe, invaded, enslaved, despoiled and murdered millions of people.
These are not the acts of honorable men. These are the acts of criminals. There were many who were dupes, but they acted as criminals nonetheless.
It does not matter to whom one takes an oath, you should know that. As far as I know, the Canadians and those who wish to obtain citizenship, still take the oth on the Queen of England.
I swear (or affirm) that I will be faithful
and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty
Queen Elizabeth the Second, Queen of Canada,
Her Heirs and Successors, and that I will faithfully
observe the laws of Canada
and fulfil my duties as a Canadian citizen.
Does this means you are all FUBAR'ed if England does somthing stupid?
It wont probably mean that you guys will go down the drain together with the Queen since you are an independent country, so to say.
And it has nothing to do with "Apologists" if you want to respect the service that individuals did to their country. What is much worse is, that you are willing discount individual acts and just put 'em into the same box with those who did commit crimes.
jazzabilly
02-02-09, 05:25 PM
Yep, your're FUBAR. Especially if the person you just took an oath to tells you to "jump into your tank and invade Poland. We're going to save the world from world Jewry and catapult our country to it's rightful place as the premier world power."
You're totally FUBAR.
But you can't plead "I was just defending my country".
I don't respect the German armed services of WW2. Not in the least. They fought for the most excrable cause that men have ever fought for. That, and perhaps the crusades.
The record of the 'honorable Wehrmacht' speaks for itself.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_crimes_of_the_Wehrmacht
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_war_crimes#German_perpetrated_crimes
Anybody who defends this, is defending the holocaust. IMO.
Yep, your're FUBAR. Especially if the person you just took an oath to tells you to "jump into your tank and invade Poland. We're going to save the world from world Jewry and catapult our country to it's rightful place as the premier world power."
You're totally FUBAR.
But you can't plead "I was just defending my country".
I don't respect the German armed services of WW2. Not in the least. They fought for the most excrable cause that men have ever fought for. That, and perhaps the crusades.
You are certainly entitled to your opinion. ;) But, tell me.. didn't Canada try wipe it's indigenous population off the earth by destroying their culture and stealing their children?
Hello, Mr Kettle.. meet Mr Pot.
EDIT:
Mind you, I don't make excuses for the atrocities that were committed. It were despicable acts of crime and behavior. But they were not commited by EVERYONE in the Wehrmacht, nor was every soldier a Nazi.
The record of the 'honorable Wehrmacht' speaks for itself.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_crimes_of_the_Wehrmacht
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_war_crimes#German_perpetrated_crimes
Anybody who defends this, is defending the holocaust. IMO.
Yea.. I am aware about those. And I certainly do not find these 'honorable' or excusable in anyway. IMO, the whole War was a ****-up'ed thing. Or to quote my Grandpa when I asked him about the war: " Es war alles ein Haufen Scheisse!" The whole thing was a big pile of ****.
But they were not commited by EVERYONE in the Wehrmacht, nor was every soldier a Nazi.
Those who did not commit the acts, supported them by being active members of the
German army, swearing allegiance, not to their country, but Hitler, aggressively
attacking foreign nations, prolonging the war long enough for the atrocities to be
carried out and generally helping the Nazi cause.
EVERY active member of the German armed forces was guilty of that.
You can certainly have a soldier who wasn't a Nazi, but you could never have had
the Nazis with out all the soldiers.
Now that does not make them bad people one bit. It is how the vast majority of
any group of people would act in the same situation.
However, to say it bestows honor upon them?
It gives them no honor, no glory and made no heroes.
But they were not commited by EVERYONE in the Wehrmacht, nor was every soldier a Nazi.
Those who did not commit the acts, supported them by being active members of the
German army, swearing allegiance, not to their country, but Hitler, aggressively
attacking foreign nations, prolonging the war long enough for the atrocities to be
carried out and generally helping the Nazi cause.
EVERY active member of the German armed forces was guilty of that.
You can certainly have a soldier who wasn't a Nazi, but you could never have had
the Nazis with out all the soldiers.
Now that does not make them bad people one bit. It is how the vast majority of
any group of people would act in the same situation.
However, to say it bestows honor upon them?
It gives them no honor, no glory and made no heroes.
Again, everyone is entitled to his or her own opinion.
You want to see black and white and throw them all in one pot? Whatever floats your boats.
I preferr see them individualy and make my judgement accordingly.
I guess, we can agree to disagree on this. ;)
But they are all in one pot. The Wehrmacht pot.
All those in that pot are tarred by their support of the 3rd Reich and it's armies.
How are you seeing them individually?
Do you plan to go round gathering witness statements and references?
And here we are again, 70 years in the past, where judgement is not done by common sense and reason, but led by propaganda and nationalism from "all" sides back then. That Germany was the baddie and did horrible acts of crimes is without any dispute. But that is true for all nations and armies in their history at one point, and "still" servicemen are beeing recogized for individual bravery.
To make a distinction there may be led by good will and high morales, both concepts I respect, but objectivly viewed from the outside, there is way too much hypocrisis involved. Either ppl get a grip and then judge "all" armies to lump the criminals together with the barave ones, or one makes the distinction. I am no apologist or relativist for sure, I recogize the crimes, the holocaust, the atrocoties.
But, I also recogize the firebombings of german and japanese cities, shooting of axis POWs, ignorance of the deathcamps and not doing anything against them despite better knowledge, no support for the german resistance whatsoever for purely power political reasons and finally, the atomic bomb.
A lot of bad things happend there. But that does not mean I will let a murderer point fingers at a mass murderer. Both deserve the death sentence.
Once the sh*t hits the fan, it's not a question of crimes anymore, but a question of quanitity of these. And just saying "they fought for the baddies, we fought for good" is such a convinient simplification of the matter you do not have to wonder why ppl get hostile. Ppl "do" get violent, brutal and inhumane if you just leave them to be. That was the case for the germans, but also the americans, the russians, the british, the french or all other armies that operated within a framework of no punishment or even encouragement for crimes. I mean, just look at the americas. An estimated 90 percent of the native population seized to exist over the course of 3 centuries after the arrival of the europeans. And examples for that are quite obvious even today, abu ghuraib beeing a prime example. But that takes nothing away from individual bravery in face of grave danger, where the prioritiy is survival of oneself, your comrades and the nation, not political parties.
I know Britian is facing huge problems and never really recovered from the loss of the Empire, WW2 beeing the last big hurray for the island before again becoming a medicore european country like everybody else. But you really should try to stop looking at the past with such rose tinted glasses just to have a warm feeling of rightousness to compensate for the lack of power nowadays.
I know Britian is facing huge problems and never really recovered from the loss of the Empire, WW2 beeing the last big hurray for the island before again becoming a medicore european country like everybody else. But you really should try to stop looking at the past with such rose tinted glasses just to have a warm feeling of rightousness to compensate for the lack of power nowadays.
The sun still does not set on British soil all year round. It has been a very long time
since it did. ;)
I don't think I am looking at anything with rose tinted glasses or jingoistically.
There are plenty of British who deserve no honor because they fought in a
dishonorable war and/or fought in a dishonorable way.
It would be highly questionable to most people (but not all, it is still controversial) to
have a statue celebrating the fire bombing of Germany or (less controversially) the
British concentration camps in South Africa or the troops who fought in the army at
the time and therefore indirectly supported the concentration camps.
Aside from that, it is not even about bad things happening.
Even if there where no concentration camps, etc in Germany (or SA) the German
army would not accrue any kind of honor as the war had no honorable purpose.
Schroeder
02-03-09, 09:40 AM
Would you kindly name me one soldier from any army in any war who would be deserving honour then?
It would be highly questionable to most people (but not all, it is still controversial) to
have a statue celebrating the fire bombing of Germany or (less controversially) the
British concentration camps in South Africa or the troops who fought in the army at
the time and therefore indirectly supported the concentration camps.
Yet, still the British do.
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E0CE4D6103CF935A35752C0A9649582 60&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1581186/Airmen-killed-over-Germany-%27deserve-memorial%27.html
http://www.londonremembers.com/memorial/?id=1208
Nice hypocrisy here.
For the small Soldier the goal was clear: To keep your country safe... The Polish start shooting at you, and 2 days later the English and French are declaring war on you and start air raiding you country.
Propaganda is a powerful instrument, even in these days.
You are apparently willing to make amendments to your judgment for those 'who fought the just cause' or rather unwilling to see it from perspective and without any peeking at 20/20 hindsight.
[links]
Nice hypocrisy here.
Don't confuse the actions of others in my country when I do not support them or do
anything to support them.
I'm all for memorials for the airmen and the crew of U-864, but not for any kind
of military honors, glorification etc.
For the small Soldier the goal was clear: To keep your country safe... The Polish start shooting at you, and 2 days later the English and French are declaring war on you and start air raiding you country.
Propaganda is a powerful instrument, even in these days.
You are apparently willing to make amendments to your judgment for those 'who fought the just cause' or rather unwilling to see it from perspective and without any peeking at 20/20 hindsight.
Exactly!
Back then it seamed the right and honorable thing to do, now we can see it was not.
Their ignorance goes some way to excuse their actions, but we can not use it to
justify our actions.
[links]
Nice hypocrisy here.
Don't confuse the actions of others in my country when I do not support them or do
anything to support them.
I'm all for memorials for the airmen and the crew of U-864, but not for any kind
of military honors, glorification etc.
For the small Soldier the goal was clear: To keep your country safe... The Polish start shooting at you, and 2 days later the English and French are declaring war on you and start air raiding you country.
Propaganda is a powerful instrument, even in these days.
You are apparently willing to make amendments to your judgment for those 'who fought the just cause' or rather unwilling to see it from perspective and without any peeking at 20/20 hindsight.
Exactly!
Back then it seamed the right and honorable thing to do, now we can see it was not.
Their ignorance goes some way to excuse their actions, but we can not use it to
justify our actions.
As long you are coherent with your views to all nations, then that is more then fine with me. Actually, I am on your side in this. As said before, I just have a huge problem with selective perception based on wartime views.
about your points here:
The sun still does not set on British soil all year round. It has been a very long time
since it did. ;)
I don't think I am looking at anything with rose tinted glasses or jingoistically.
There are plenty of British who deserve no honor because they fought in a
dishonorable war and/or fought in a dishonorable way.
It would be highly questionable to most people (but not all, it is still controversial) to
have a statue celebrating the fire bombing of Germany or (less controversially) the
British concentration camps in South Africa or the troops who fought in the army at
the time and therefore indirectly supported the concentration camps.
Aside from that, it is not even about bad things happening.
Even if there where no concentration camps, etc in Germany (or SA) the German
army would not accrue any kind of honor as the war had no honorable purpose.
Unluckily I can't agree to this views of yours, not because I doubt your good intentions, but because of the overall picture the british nowadays present.
If you check what's going on in british tabloids during football games, parties Prince Harry attends to, episodes of Top Gear where the cast comes in flying Spitfires to show the german contenders what's up, then I can't help but to think of a country with some huge issues regarding their history and self esteem in the present. Your argumention of "honorable" versus "evil" supports this view.
And now please tell me what war serves an honorable purpose? That is a contradiction in itself. Young ppl die on all sides for the mistakes and agendas of polititians. And the real reasons polititians go to war are never the same to those they tell the public.
For the german public it was the polish corridor and percieved agressions, but also revision of the Versailles treaty, for Hitler it was powermongering and Lebensraum.
For the british public it was helping the Poles and freedom in general, for Churchill it was the age old policy of balance on the continent and die hard economic/strategic interests. There is a reason Britian declared war on Germany, not vice versa. And the reasons were not of humanitarian nature, that one is for sure, else Britian, France and the US would have allowed Jews to escape into their countries en masse, which did "not" happen, not to speak of the after war arrengement of Europe. Freedom for Poland, hmm hmm. More hypocrisis right there.
Honrable my a**, war sucks, period. There is no good and bade side, just bad and worse.
Bewolf, I think we agree more than you know.
I have, here and there, put aside various beliefs of mine in this topic so that I can
better explore others.
Honrable my a**, war sucks, period. There is no good and bade side, just bad and worse.
I agree with you wholly here, although it is far from the most common view, especially
when war is discussed practically, rather than in abstract.
Bewolf, I think we agree more than you know.
I have, here and there, put aside various beliefs of mine in this topic so that I can
better explore others.
Honrable my a**, war sucks, period. There is no good and bade side, just bad and worse.
I agree with you wholly here, although it is far from the most common view, especially
when war is discussed practically, rather than in abstract.
Nice to reach a common conclusion then. Now for the fun part :cool: :()1:
jazzabilly
02-03-09, 01:58 PM
Thomen:
>>But, tell me.. didn't Canada try wipe it's indigenous population off the earth by destroying their culture and stealing their children?
Apples, oranges and red herrings. Just because I'm Canadian, do not assume that I condone or excuse the actions of past Canadian governments or institutions. We are talking about the crimes of Nazi Germany here, and not only select groups.
The evidence and documentation does not support any previous claim that there was "no knowledge" of the holocaust on the part of any arm of the German armed services, or of the support and logistical services. If anything, quite the opposite. They were complicit.
I also point out that Hitler never concealed his intentions or plans. Justifications were mere window dressing. The entire war was, to him at least, a race war.
It is surprising to me that any reasonable or literate person would go on supporting the position that the 3rd Reich was justified in its actions. Unless that support is based in either ignorance (willful or otherwise) of its crimes, or that person feels that the holocaust was justified.
I have encountered both, in varied forums and message boards. All I expect is that every person who identifies themself or themselves as those who seek to defend or justify the behaviour of the servants of the 3rd Reich to examine and explain why they do.
It's worth keeping in mind that I've read more than one account of American sailors having German sailors as captors aboard their US navy boat. In one such case, a German Navy Captain died in captivity. The US Military themselves gave the man a military burial at sea, and allowed the German crew to honor their captain in the process....
http://www.history.navy.mil/faqs/faq87-3o.htm
Exactly!
Back then it seamed the right and honorable thing to do, now we can see it was not.
Their ignorance goes some way to excuse their actions, but we can not use it to
justify our actions.
I am not saying you are wrong, Letum. And I do agree to a certain degree with you. All I am saying is: Why put them all in the same box and make no distinction between 'Monster' and 'Hero', so to say?
There were many many soldiers who fought brave and honorable on either side, did not commit any crimes or cruelties. Why not use those as an example that even when the **** hits the fan, there are still people out there that are (or rather were) decent human beings?
The Nazi's where bad guys? No doubt about that. Hitler a loony? Hell yea. Unfortunately all attempts on his life (I think it were 42 attempts) failed. And mind you many of those came from within the military (for many different reasons, admittedly) or from the German resistance, who got no support whatsoever from the Allies and subsequently were doomed to fail.
I prefer to look at things from a rather 'detached' point of view and try to see things in perspective and look at the alternatives and not to judge everyone as being in the same box.
One, in my opinion, important thing the 'everybody is in the boat and therefore guilty as charged' does, it totally ignores soldiers that actively supported the German Resistance or even those who joined the French Resistance while on active duty. There were many acts of kindness and active or passive resistance from regular Joe Grunts. And I am not willing to negate those by just saying: Bah.. they were all Nazi's or in the Wehrmacht, therefore off with their heads.
It's worth keeping in mind that I've read more than one account of American sailors having German sailors as captors aboard their US navy boat. In one such case, a German Navy Captain died in captivity. The US Military themselves gave the man a military burial at sea, and allowed the German crew to honor their captain in the process....
http://www.history.navy.mil/faqs/faq87-3o.htm
There were quite a few cases like that, I believe. One is got buried with military honors in Virginia.
I am not saying you are wrong, Letum. And I do agree to a certain degree with you. All I am saying is: Why put them all in the same box and make no distinction between 'Monster' and 'Hero', so to say?
My argument does not require the presence of 'monsters' at all.
Even if every single German fought according to all the rules of war and rescued kittens
etc. my argument would still be the same.
This is because I am not saying that all Germans where good/bad/any other value.
I am saying that taking part in warfare is only ever honorable if the war can be
considered just and the method of warfare can be considered just. The former being
the most relevant here.
Those who fight in unjust wars or in unjust ways should never be honored.
Most of the time they should not be blamed either for the reasons you put froward
They should be respected, remembered and mourned as humans who dies tragically
and in vain.
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.