Erich Rudorffer

[nrshida]

I saw that video a few months ago and decided not to post it. That's a Dutch lady talking I should emphasise. I think she did an excellent job of illustrating that their rigidity is only matched by their hypocrisy. Feel it's completely justifiable for 550 men taken and killed for one staff car attacked by an unidentified resistance unit. Who amongst us would not resist such an oppressive and illegal occupation anyway? The Dutch had it particularly bad under Nazi occupation. They were meticulous about records including exaclty what religion every citizen subscribed to. Unfortunately these records were not destroyed so guess what happened...

I live not so far from the dunes here in NL. Hundreds of Dutch civilians were taken out there and shot. Still in the 1960s they were finding remains in the sand. There is a burial place called Erebegraafplaats Bloemendaal, Erebegraafplaats meaning honorary cemetery. Johanna Schaft is buried there. It's one of the stillest and strangest places I've ever been to on earth. All you can think when you read the graves is why?

I think it's important to remember the broader context when recognizing the bravery of individuals. Let's not have any revisionist claptrap.

[GScholz]

All true, but you have to consider the fact that reprisals against civilians were not forbidden by international law until 1949. Back then the Germans were within the laws of war to make reprisals against civilians if they concluded that the civilians were supporting illegal combatants in the field. Partisans, the resistance, or freedom fighters as we call them were to a large extent illegal combatants back then, as they continue to be today. The laws of war, to this day, states that civilians shall obey the rule of an occupying army. Of course, executing civilians as reprisals is as revolting to us today as firebombing civilians is. Let's not forget that the Germans were not alone in deliberately killing civilians en masse.

[nrshida]

All true, but you have to consider the fact that reprisals against civilians were not forbidden by international law until 1949. Back then the Germans were within the laws of war to make reprisals against civilians if they concluded that the civilians were supporting illegal combatants in the field. Partisans, the resistance, or freedom fighters as we call them were to a large extent illegal combatants back then, as they continue to be today. The laws of war, to this day, states that civilians shall obey the rule of an occupying army. Of course, executing civilians as reprisals is as revolting to us today as firebombing civilians is. Let's not forget that the Germans were not alone in deliberately killing civilians en masse.

Agreed, within the subset of an illegal invasion and occupation of a non-agressive country (is kind of my point about their hypocrisy). The limit of the law dictates behaviour no more than a speed limit dictates minimum speed. Weird discussion. Legality in this context.

[zack1234]

Between Goebbels' propaganda, the fact that France and Britain declared war and attacked Germany first, and the indiscriminate fire bombing of German civilians, many Germans felt they were the ones defending their country and people.

If they did not drop bombs on Narzzies civilians the Narzzies would not have had to divert massive amounts of armaments to the Reichs cities to defend them, this used up resources it needed to conquer other nations.

Are there any JAPANESE heroes who bombed Pear Harbour

[NatCigg]

it was a truce, between zack and bustr, to only troll half of the thread.  From there, downhill. 

Sounds like he was a legend, and you know this, man.

 

[zack1234]

He was a Narzzie

Japanese pilots  who bombed pearl harbour anyone? No did not think so!

The Narzzie terror bombings at the start of WWII anyone? No did not think so!

[nrshida]

I have to wonder why on Earth you fly a cartoon Focke-Wulfe?

Aces High just a game, mini sport at best on a par with crazy golf or amateur snooker. I'm presently flying the K-4 a bit, and while I do appreciate some of the design elements of the real one, and the 30-mm of the cartoon one, it doesn't imply any acceptance of the motivations of those that built or flew it or ordered what was done with it.

Bustr can fly what he wants and still disapprove.

[Masherbrum]

Aces High just a game, mini sport at best on a par with crazy golf or amateur snooker. I'm presently flying the K-4 a bit, and while I do appreciate some of the design elements of the real one, and the 30-mm of the cartoon one, it doesn't imply any acceptance of the motivations of those that built or flew it or ordered what was done with it.

Bustr can fly what he wants and still disapprove.

I know it is a game.   But hypocrisy is a fickle beast and so is hitting submit when you shouldn't. 

[GScholz]

Anyone willing to fly a cartoon B-17, Lancaster, and especially a B-29 should have no qualms about flying anything in the axis plane set. This whole discussion is irrational and stupid, and in a thread about the passing of a remarkable warrior... it is disgraceful.

[zack1234]

No it's not

Who's side are you on?

[Shamus]

Anyone willing to fly a cartoon B-17, Lancaster, and especially a B-29 should have no qualms about flying anything in the axis plane set. This whole discussion is irrational and stupid, and in a thread about the passing of a remarkable warrior... it is disgraceful.

About sums it up.

[zack1234]

Who's side are you on?

[morfiend]

Who's side are you on?

  My side,it allows me to respect those that fought,regardless of which side the fought!

  It was over 70 years ago,most have past or are close to it,all should be respected.....Lest we forget!



   

[FESS67]

wow.  I am almost speechless with some of the responses.

The truth is we do remember the feats of great fighting men, from the mythology of the ancients to modern day conflicts.  The motivations of the leadership and the legalities of the conflict are IMO a very separate issue and not relevant when considering an individuals military record.  There are exceptional people from all sides of the conflict that we remember.  History is not just for the victors and respect for skill and valour can and should be afforded to combatants of all sides.

I am very firmly on the side of remembering all heroes.

[guncrasher]

  My side,it allows me to respect those that fought,regardless of which side the fought!

  It was over 70 years ago,most have past or are close to it,all should be respected.....Lest we forget!



   

and yet we are still putting them on trial for the atrocities they committed 70 years ago.  point is this is a bb.  you can put whoever you want here and call him a hero.  while others have a right to disagree.


semp