Are we tough enough?

[Gerald]

[Sgt_Raa]

yes..... yes we are!

[K-61]

If they don't like getting wet, they shouldn't have joined the Merchant Marine.

[papa_smurf]

That order was given after U-boats prior to this assisted with the rescue of survivors, often putting their own crew at risk.

[K-61]

The one that got Doenitz in trouble at the Nuremburg trials was the "Laconia order." For those unfamiliar with it, the Laconia was a British liner carrying British families and Italian P.O.W.'s from the Middle East. Hartenstein sunk it, then attempted to rescue the survivors. He tied up lifeboats to his sub, brought women and children onto the deck and sent an S.O.S. in the clear, asking for assistance and pledging not to attack any Allied units assisting. For his troubles, he was attacked by a B-24 and had to break off the rescue. After that, Doenitz ordered the U-boats not to make any further attempts at assisting survivors. He was acquitted of this charge after it was pointed out that Allied subs operated under essentially the same orders. One American commander, Dudley "Mush" Morton was particularly fond of machinegunning Japanese survivors in the water, for which he would not have been tried had he survived the war.

[Dogfish40]

Originally Posted by K-61

The one that got Doenitz in trouble at the Nuremburg trials was the "Laconia order." For those unfamiliar with it, the Laconia was a British liner carrying British families and Italian P.O.W.'s from the Middle East. Hartenstein sunk it, then attempted to rescue the survivors. He tied up lifeboats to his sub, brought women and children onto the deck and sent an S.O.S. in the clear, asking for assistance and pledging not to attack any Allied units assisting. For his troubles, he was attacked by a B-24 and had to break off the rescue. After that, Doenitz ordered the U-boats not to make any further attempts at assisting survivors. He was acquitted of this charge after it was pointed out that Allied subs operated under essentially the same orders. One American commander, Dudley "Mush" Morton was particularly fond of machinegunning Japanese survivors in the water, for which he would not have been tried had he survived the war.

Yeah, I know that one morning "Mush" woke up and said "Dang, I'm getting bored, Let's get some target practice, I haven't seen enough blood today. Damn the Lifeboats, run'em over and shoot all the survivors..." Sound stupid? In all the books I've read and patrol reports including the Wahoo, I'd like anyone to point out proof that "Mush" was "Fond" of Machine gunning suvivors in the water. In fact, after perusing the Wahoo's patrol reports again, I found several instances of humane treatment of survivors with the inclusion of medical aid, food and course for the nearest port or base. True, many of these were merchants but it doesn't sound like a bloodthirsty boat to me. Out of all the 300 odd US subs that participated in WW2 everyone always comes back to one incident, highly questionable and perpetrated on a sub commander who never got to defend himself or adorn any of his decorations. I have the utmost respect for most of the Skippers and crews of the US and German Subs and before I ever cast any judgement on them, I have to try and put myself in their place. For even a moment, it's an impossibility.
To anyone who wants to read the patrol reports of the US Fleetboats;
http://www.hnsa.org/doc/subreports.htm
Very educational and great reading.
D40

[Sailor Steve]

Thanks for pointing that out, Dogfish40. I somehow missed that when it was posted, and I'd like to add to what you said.

Originally Posted by K-61

One American commander, Dudley "Mush" Morton was particularly fond of machinegunning Japanese survivors in the water, for which he would not have been tried had he survived the war.

It happened once, and Morton claimed he was fired on first. Maybe he was lying, maybe not. I'm not defending Morton, but once hardly equals "particularly fond of". I do agree that he would likely not have been tried, though, and I also agree that is wrong.

Laconia Afair.
We have a thread on it somewhere in here.

[K-61]

Here's a Wiki link for quick info:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laconia_incident

[Sgt_Raa]

Originally Posted by Snestorm

Laconia Afair.
We have a thread on it somewhere in here.

oh no not this again!

[papa_smurf]

The one that got Doenitz in trouble at the Nuremburg trials was the "Laconia order." For those unfamiliar with it, the Laconia was a British liner carrying British families and Italian P.O.W.'s from the Middle East. Hartenstein sunk it, then attempted to rescue the survivors. He tied up lifeboats to his sub, brought women and children onto the deck and sent an S.O.S. in the clear, asking for assistance and pledging not to attack any Allied units assisting. For his troubles, he was attacked by a B-24 and had to break off the rescue. After that, Doenitz ordered the U-boats not to make any further attempts at assisting survivors. He was acquitted of this charge after it was pointed out that Allied subs operated under essentially the same orders. One American commander, Dudley "Mush" Morton was particularly fond of machinegunning Japanese survivors in the water, for which he would not have been tried had he survived the war

Thats the one incident I was thinking of regarding these orders, but could not remember which one.

@papa_smurf
The problem was that Dønitz was not aquited.
In spite of 2 USN admirals testifying in his defense, and noting that US Submarines were operating under identical orders, Dønitz was sentenced to 10 years by a kangaroo court.

2 US admirals testified for the defense of Dønitz:
Nimitz, Commander and Chief Pacific.
Lockwood, Commander and Chief Submarines Pacific.

[PhantomLord]

This message is from november 1939. The Laconia incident and the following order was from 1942. Some time warping here?


This is the Laconia order 1942:

"1. All efforts to save survivors of sunken ships, such as the fishing out of swimming men and putting them on board lifeboats, the righting of overturned lifeboats, or the handing over of food and water, must stop. Rescue contradicts the most basic demands of the war: the destruction of hostile ships and their crews.

2. The orders concerning the bringing-in of skippers and chief engineers stay in effect.

3. Survivors are to be saved only if their statements are important for the boat.

4. Stay firm. Remember that the enemy has no regard for women and children when bombing German cities!"

AFAIK the above 1939 order was given because many commanders offered help to the torpedoed sailors. In some cases they were in dangerous situations while doing this (caught by a plane or escort ship). As a part of the unrestricted u-boat warfare no one should be rescued. Sailors are the same important "war material" like ships, tanks, planes, ammo and so on.

This text is not exhaustive, i´ve to re-check my books

[Jimbuna]

Originally Posted by Snestorm

@papa_smurf
The problem was that Dønitz was not aquited.
In spite of 2 USN admirals testifying in his defense, and noting that US Submarines were operating under identical orders, Dønitz was sentenced to 10 years by a kangaroo court.

2 US admirals testified for the defense of Dønitz:
Nimitz, Commander and Chief Pacific.
Lockwood, Commander and Chief Submarines Pacific.

It could also be said that the sentence he received was lenient....there were powerful voices out there at the time who expected the death penalty.

[ediko]

Well history is written by the victors. In this case seems that the sentences too.