Who was the more evil power in WWII ?

[Bear]

Ah, but there is the rub. To blame an emblem, nazi or otherwise for the acts of a "few men" in relation to the size of the nation, lessens the deeds of those who fought not out of madness, but out of duty for their country. Are all guilty? The Russians killed millions, the Nazi's killed millions, the Japs killed millions, the Americans killed millions (combining UTO & PTO), thus is the nature of war.

It is good that when we play these sims we remember not the powers that sent men out to murder, but the men who had the courage to live or die with what they did.

Someone smarter than I is supposed to have said (i wasn't with him that day so i can't be sure he said it.)

"If The Dead Could Return, There Would Be No More War."

[Mostinius]

Originally Posted by Ducimus

i could never willingly put A nazi emblem of any shape or form on my conning tower, nor in a signiture pic for the forums. Others do, but i couldnt do it. (...) I have always respected this portion of history, and respected the human ordeal on the Ubootwaffes side of the story, its quite a story to be sure, and one i have empathy for, but i have never lost perspective of what flag they sailed under.

You make a fair point. I believe it's illegal to display that flag in some countries, not to mention morally dubious in all of them. (That said, it's worth pointing out - though common knowledge, I'm sure - that the swastika itself was a holy symbol in many cultures long before the Nazis got hold of it. We can judge instances from context, of course, and if we're talking about World War II German subs then the context is pretty clear so I can agree wholeheartedly with your position.)

At the risk of sounding like an apologist, though, I do think it bears mentioning that - excluding the SS - most German sailors, soldiers and airmen in that period weren't fighting for the Nazis. At least, that is to say they weren't fighting for the Nazis as we now understand the full ramifications of the term. They were fighting for Germany - for family and friends, home and hearth, ashes and temples, all the usual stuff. We know now what the Nazis stood for, and therefore what the German army, navy and air force were effectively fighting for, but, I suspect, the troops just did what they thought they had to do - as do most combatants in any conflict.

The point I'm rambling around to is that you're entirely right to abhor the flag of that contemptible regime: pull it down, tear it up, burn it, trample it - whatever makes the point. But I'd be surprised if many of those who fought and died under that flag did so in the awareness and conscious support of the atrocities that were being committed under it in other places and by other people.

I don't advocate hero worship. I do advocate the simple acknowledgement of courage - which is to say, if Dr Jeffers will excuse me, feeling the fear and doing it anyway. I don't pretend that both sides were right: the fact is that Germany was wrong. It was the aggressor, and it was rightly defeated. Its masters at that time were evil men who should and will be reviled for all time by decent people. But at the same time I wouldn't want to see someone denied the recognition their courage deserves simply because they fought and died under a flag whose full meaning they probably didn't even realise.

Of course, it's always possible I just have a foolishly fluffy impression of history. At 32, I can't argue that I Was There - but I hope I've picked one or two things up over the years... We Shall See... :hmm:

[Ducimus]

At the risk of sounding like an apologist, though, I do think it bears mentioning that - excluding the SS - most German sailors, soldiers and airmen in that period weren't fighting for the Nazis.

Soundly true. Infact the Ubootwaffe, was argubly the most "unpoltiical" branch of their armed forces. But i will say what set me on my course of thought. Somewhere on uboat.net i found a post once (I can't find it now), by a fellow who claimed to be in the merchant marines during the time. He admonished the posters in this particular thread for hero worship, or rather, words like, "I never thought id hear about admiration for the uboats!" This set me thinking. Here was a man who faced it. On our side of the conflict, and now now, we "youngin's" are bestowing adulation, and praise for the same men who tried to kill him.

Even if his claim is false, the principle remains true. Put yourself into this situation: you find an old man in your home country. (US or UK), and he starts to talk about how it was out in the atlantic as a merchant sailor. How lofty will you hold uboats in admiration then? Will you defend or bestow praise on their actions to this man (a fellow countryman or ally) who was there? To us, the reality of Uboats nothing more then storybook material. We never see, nor feel, nor touch, nor fear. Its just a story. To others, the reality was very different. Its these thoughts, that made me rethink my enthusiasm.

[McBeck]

most German sailors, soldiers and airmen in that period weren't fighting for the Nazis. At least, that is to say they weren't fighting for the Nazis as we now understand the full ramifications of the term. They were fighting for Germany - for family and friends, home and hearth, ashes and temples, all the usual stuff.

This is very true and that makes them no different from any most other fighting soldiers. They were only a tool of politics, so if you want to go into the good/bad discussion dont blame the soldiers, sailors or airmen.

[Mostinius]

Originally Posted by Ducimus

Soundly true. Infact the Ubootwaffe, was argubly the most "unpoltiical" branch of their armed forces. But i will say what set me on my course of thought. Somewhere on uboat.net i found a post once (I can't find it now), by a fellow who claimed to be in the merchant marines during the time. He admonished the posters in this particular thread for hero worship, or rather, words like, "I never thought id hear about admiration for the uboats!" This set me thinking. Here was a man who faced it. On our side of the conflict, and now now, we "youngin's" are bestowing adulation, and praise for the same men who tried to kill him.

Even if his claim is false, the principle remains true. Put yourself into this situation: you find an old man in your home country. (US or UK), and he starts to talk about how it was out in the atlantic as a merchant sailor. How lofty will you hold uboats in admiration then? Will you defend or bestow praise on their actions to this man (a fellow countryman or ally) who was there? To us, the reality of Uboats nothing more then storybook material. We never see, nor feel, nor touch, nor fear. Its just a story. To others, the reality was very different. Its these thoughts, that made me rethink my enthusiasm.

I've no reason to wonder whether his claim was false. And yes, I understand what you're saying. In answer, and at the risk of sounding condescending, if I were to meet that man or someone like him I would shut the f--- up and listen to his stories. I would acknowledge his own courage and that of his comrades. And I would always appreciate and be grateful to those people for that courage, without which we couldn't possibly have won the war.

And now, in a time of relative peace when Germany and Britain and America and France and Japan and Russia are friends (if uneasily so sometimes), I have the luxury of being able to acknowledge the bravery and sacrifice of the men and women on all sides - while at the same time recognising and despising the horror and the atrocities inflicted by some.

Only if we're willing to recognise the people involved in that conflict as people can we have any hope of averting the next one.

[Von Tonner]

Originally Posted by Mostinius

Only if we're willing to recognise the people involved in that conflict as people can we have any hope of averting the next one.

A very profound statement

[namika]

Hmm, really good points from everyone.
This topic is the one which really shows that the posters are mature and serious people when coming to this discussion and not letting themselves rant about the evil xx country.
If all people thought this way I highly doubt there would be any conflicts regarding WW2 in these days. But that's of course only an utopistic dream until people get to know all the sides, their combatants' feelings in WW2 and try to understand that they were human aswell. After that they wouldn't fear them as an "unknown evil".
Old harms are not forgotten. That's natural, becouse people can never really forget such horrific things that have happened. But it is a problem when there are some territorries where the people or some groups of individuals can't set a line between past and present and they still try to make conflicts based ONLY the harms another nation inflicted to them in the past.
Why should a youngster be hated only becouse his/her grandfathers fought on the other side in the war?

[Frederf]

A fun point I like to make at parties (and why nobody invites me anymore) is there's nothing inherently evil about Germans circa 1940. Take pretty much take any Tom Dick and Francis and put them in the same position and the same thing would happen. It's utterly inconceivable that other people put under the exact same conditions wouldn't have nearly identical results.

The argument comically ends up with a complete rejection of the idea of an American, Austrailian or British person being able to be a cog in the holocaust machine despite the obvious conclusion that psychology is immune to nationality.

I have tremendous sympathy for German soldiers pitched in a losing battle. It always confuses me when others don't share that view.

[tater]

If you want to compare deaths due to allied bombings, only count the deaths inflicted after the axis surrendered. THAT is the difference. The axis powers slaughtered people who were already under their total control, the allies bombed people who were actively fighting them before the bomb run, during it, and RTB.

Evil on such a broad scale requires many hundreds of thousands of willing actors at the bare minimum (and millions of passive participants). Giving everyone but a tiny handful at the top a pass means you miss an important lesson in what not to do (or allow) in the future. That's a mistake people make at their own peril, IMO.

tater

[ReallyDedPoet]

Originally Posted by Von Manteuffel

Gentlemen, your sensitivities and sensibilities do you great credit. My father went to war in 1939 in the British Army. His three brothers all joined the Royal Navy. All survived - thank Goodness, but I remember my two uncles who were in destroyers talking about some of the things they had seen. It was actually their silences which spoke loudest.

If the game we play recreated the true horror of ships struck by torpedoes - men mutiliated, burnt, scalded, blinded and choked by swimming in fuel-oil, I don't believe any but the sickest minds would go near it. But, thankfully, the game concentrates on the mechanics and tactics of submarine warfare, not its human consequences.

And in the game, you're not sinking Brits, or Japs, or Yanks, or Jerries - you're firing a virtual weapon at an often anonymous virtual ship whose flag delineates that it's "one of theirs" rather than "one of ours."

A great computer game SH IV certainly is - as is SH III. War they are definitely not.

Indeed a very intelligent\thoughtful post, well done


RDP

Originally Posted by tater

If you want to compare deaths due to allied bombings, only count the deaths inflicted after the axis surrendered. THAT is the difference. The axis powers slaughtered people who were already under their total control, the allies bombed people who were actively fighting them before the bomb run, during it, and RTB.

Evil on such a broad scale requires many hundreds of thousands of willing actors at the bare minimum (and millions of passive participants). Giving everyone but a tiny handful at the top a pass means you miss an important lesson in what not to do (or allow) in the future. That's a mistake people make at their own peril, IMO.

tater

Ever heard of Dresden, Hamburg or Berlin?

The americans bombed those cities into rubble, historical beautiful cities with hundreds of thousands of civilians.

Or what about the Millions of rapes by the russian hordes?

You should realize that its the victor that writes the history books. The Germans are only the bad guys of the world because they lost, if germany had won im sure we would all know about the american concentration camps for italians, germans and japs.

[Ducimus]

I predict this thread now takes a spiralling tumble downwards. Participating in Threads like this are kind of like an car accident on the side of the freeway. You know you shouldn't rubberneck (cause you'll slow down and add to the traffic congestion), but you do it anyway.

[tater]

Dresden is grossly overstated. 35k. Maybe. The large numbers came about from Nazi propaganda during the war, then Soviet propaganda during the cold war. Real Germans records support the lower numbers, Goebels literally added a zero to the real figure civil defense gave him and published it as an allied attrocity. I'll give you the Soviet rapes, etc. They had no problem murdering their own in countless tens of millions, a few hundreds of thousands or even millions of Germans would be small change to the CCCP killing machine.

Regardless, there is a huge difference between bombing--even area bombing--a city that is actively involved in war, and rounding up people who have already capitulated and (take your pick of industrial murder techniques and place here) them.

How many cities did we burn to the ground AFTER they had surrendered? None. How many people who surrendered themselves to German "relocation" were relocated to a trench covered with lime, or smoke in the air? A lot more than "none." A lot more than all the allied bombing deaths (legitimate or not) combined.

We'd know about American Concentration Camps? Where? The best you'll get are the Japanese Americans rounded up wrongly. They lost time, and property, they weren't murdered. None of them.

http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/20TH.HTM
(US in ww2 is in there, BTW, he credits us with ~700k democides from bombing (mostly Japan---which might be in error since technically most japanese were combatants by Imperial Edict (all men 15-65, all women 17-47)).

tater

[-Pv-]

Decay...

There were many thoughtful and articulate posts near the beginning. Now it degrades into who killed the most and who is more evil.

More attuned to the intent of the thread at the beginning, I have played all the computer sub simulations since the mid 80s. I have played both sides. Being a US dude, I didn't have the emersion I suspect many in Europe get from playing the German boats.

Sonalysts games let you play US and Russian. SH lets us play either side so you can choose. I've noticed there is a similar dynamic in the Flight Simulator world where most people fly within a few hundred miles of their home even though they have the whole planet to explore. We are more likely to enjoy a familiar culture. Pacific Storm lets the player choose Japanese or US with equal chance of winning.

When I play sub sims, I don't even think of war though I know it's a concept deaply ingrained in the game. Having grown up on the mystique of sub stories since a child, gaming lets me participate in that mystique. I was 8 years old when I got to tour a nuclear sub. More, I'm thinking about the game logic as I've come to know it (the rules so to speak) and how to "beat" the game. I'm also thinking of how brave my parent's generation was to be wiling to flight in the many dangerous machines being developed and how difficult. Teamwork, logistics, strategy, environment, daring, luck. I'm also admiring the technology. Both that which is being simulated, and the computer techology that brings it so movie-like to my home desk. Being a technical kind of guy, I like simulations which encourage me to learn about the real world. Practical physics and mechanics. Different ways of solving complex problems.

So, I'm entertained on many levels but the level at which I'm NOT entertained is that of most 1st person shooters with gore splashing all over my screen. In that way, most sub sims are anesthetic enough I'm not re-living war which is why you're unlikely to find people participating in this forum going out and commiting mass murder. I'm not out for blood as much as I'm out for a score.
I'm not amblivalent to the theme of the game, nor am I so sensitive I cannot enjoy it at some level, but I HAVE drawn a line and I will NOT cross it. Ever.

Have I rescued the thread? I doubt it. Flame wars are perpetuated by those who will never give up a contentious opinion even after repeating it hundreds of times. Isn't this what war is really about? Fight to the death for an idea, then fight to the death because the other guy's idea killed your family and friends?
-Pv-

Hey tater, take your pro american propaganda to the people of Hiroshima and Nagasaki