Erich Hartmann's 109

[Pongo]

Is that your home town Hortlund? Not Sweden?
If I name it..are you wrong?
I will check out
"Hitlers Willing Executioners- Ordinary Germans and the Holocast" from the library again and put the full quote in for you. It is quite well supported there. if the quote says Average instead of absolute does it undue the LW pilots knowledge of the state of freedom in Germany in the Hitler years? Does it undue the obsurdity of them revolting for pride and not for atrocity?
I dont expect it to make a difference to you though. Cause if wont fit in with your agenda. You will just say it doesnt matter.

And yes I get very pissed when seemingly mild people try to calmly undue the evils of the German people in the early 20th century. We all should. I will leave others to try to calmly un-brain wash you. I will keep with my current tactic which is to point out what you are.
A nut.
Repeatedly pointing out that Adolf was elected without pointing out that he murdered his opponents and terrorized those who could stop him. Supporting Glasses who equates Hitler with Reagan.

Do I think that liking german AC makes you a nazi...no I dont. But flying one for Adolf certainly does. Revising through lie or omision the history of Germany during the Nazi years to portray it more favourably certainly does make a person a Nazi.
That is what you are doing.

[Glasses]

This is my last post in the whole matter because most  like to see this as someone trying to convince you of something, I'm not trying to convince anyone, what I'm trying to do is put points forth which validate what I'm saying and I think I make a good argument.

It's really inflating to think that these men were cowards or were just fighting to defend Hitler, considering the odds that were against them and what the  all benevolent allies were doing to their country's cities  civilian population, and many relatives of the fighting soldiers, while  many American  civilians slept silently at night without being woken up in the middle of the night by the sound of air raid sirens and bombs exploding, they wanted payback for that. Though, Hitler was in error for declaring War on the USA and I agree he brought this upon Germany himself there is no question about that!

The rise and fall of the Nazis in Germany is much more complicated that what people are trying to portray.  At the time(AT THE TIME) it seemed like a very reasonable step to rebuild the country and originally one of the plans for that dictatorship was to establish order and economic success then later  establishing a Democracy, of course we all know what happened. Even Mr. Roosevelt  at first  thought this was an alternative , that being fascism, to rebuild the country which by the time Hitler came to power the USA was in the middle of the Great Depression and they were looking for ways to revive and kick start the economy, of course the upcoming war would that.

Again Seawulfe, regardless of their loss in WW1 Germany was not entirely responsible for the Central powers and it got the whole, note, the whole blame for starting WW1 . The Allies decided to impose  this upon Germany which ultimately came to hurt the people not their leaders. The Germans rebelled and the subsequent decade was filled by desperation, unemployment, and homeless,  massive inflation and civil unrest, while people in the Allied countries were getting rich fat and happy.  Which lead people like Hitler  to  FEED, THRIVE, and have SUCCESS thanks to this atmosphere to take radical action thus the rise of the Nazis which amazingly during the early years delivered on almost everything they have promised .  

Again the we won you lost argument and you have taken the Versailles Treaty and starved to death and your country should have been destroyed argument we see here is as disgusting as you calling me a Nazi or calling that am writing Mein Kampf II  with Hortlund.  

I am putting things in perspective of  the events that lead such people and governments  to rise even today like the Taliban like  Saddam Hussein , and many other tyrants and tyrannical forms of organized government. I'm not making excuses for them I'm pointing out facts.

[Nashwan]

Just to point out exactly how outrageously stupid your "no town in Germany that was more then 4 km from some kind of detenion camp or work camp"-theory is I want you to name the detenion camp or work camp that was within 4 km from Garmisch-Partenkirchen.

Garmisch-Partenkirchen was a satelite camp of Dachau.

[Hortlund]

Originally posted by midnight Target

You consistantly sound like an apologist for Nazi's and when someone points this out you get offended. Now maybe you don't feel this way, maybe you just enjoy a good debate. I hope that is the case.

Midnight, let me take this opportunity to say a few things.

IMO it is really sad that I should have to say them, but judging from your reply and pongos ramblings, I feel I should point out the following.

I have no sympathy whatsoever for revisionists or neo-nazis, nor do I support, defend or excuse in any way what Hitler and his henchmen did and what they tried to do.

Germany 1933-1945 is directly responsible for 20 946 000 deaths. Anyone trying to defend that, excuse that, or diminish that needs to reevaluate his opinions (to put it mildly).

I am also half German. And I did lose many relatives in wwii.

What pisses me off with some posts in this thread, as well as in other threads, is peoples tendency to want to paint everyting with a big brush. Every German was evil, every German was a nazi, every German supported Hitler. These people, whether they know it or not, are often repeating allied wwii-era propaganda. The term Nazi-Germany is a good example of this.

In a war, you dehumanize your opponents. This to make it easier for the public opinion to accept the fact that war, basically, is about killing people.

It saddens me to see that this dehumaanization still exists today. Look at the kind of replies you and others have given me in this thread and other threads when all I have tried to point out is that Germans in 1933-1945 were also human beings, and they were not all evil to the core.

For some reason this is very provocative to some. Im not sure why really. Perhaps deep down they are wondering if some things "their" side did was right (Dresden), and it is easier to hide behind the dehumanization "They were all nazis, they all had it coming, they did it first, look at Auschwitz" etc.

Because at the end of the day who can really defend the butchery of unarmed civilians?  

When you and others accuse me of being a revisionist or a neo-nazi, you have no idea exactly how disgusing that is. A revisionist is someone who tries to "change history", in this case to try to cover up the responsibility of the death of 20 946 000 CIVILIANS, non-combatants (yes, that figure is not including war-casualties).


A neo-Nazi is even more weird than a revisionist IMO, because he wants to start killing people again...

The only thing I can think of right now that might make you understand exactly how disgusting it feels to be accused of that, might be if someone accused you of raping your own child.

There is a difference between being German in 1933-45 and being a nazi. The world is not and has never been all black or all white. I will never accept that someone wants to paint all Germans with the nazi-brush. Please accept that, and please stop insulting me by calling me names I do not deserve.

[AKSWulfe]

Okay Glassess, your argument lost all weight right here:
The Germans rebelled and the subsequent decade was filled by desperation, unemployment, and homeless, massive inflation and civil unrest, while people in the Allied countries were getting rich fat and happy.

Yeah- you ever heard of the Great Depression? Those poor Germans.. no wait, between them and Japan they saved our economy and made countless jobs by starting WWII.

It's really inflating to think that these men were cowards or were just fighting to defend Hitler, considering the odds that were against them and what the all benevolent allies were doing to their country's cities civilian population, and many relatives of the fighting soldiers, while many American civilians slept silently at night without being woken up in the middle of the night by the sound of air raid sirens and bombs exploding, they wanted payback for that.

So, eh... they were defending themselves from a war they started? Or are you talking about WWI? In which case the Germans did their share of terror bombing French, Italian, and British cities.

No Glassess, indeed, in your own mind you might have a great argument... but history says otherwise.

Did I ever say Germany was entirely responsible for starting WWI? Not at all, you need a new pair of spectacles my friend... whether or not I'm all doped up, atleast I clearly read the points, which by the way I already know about(well the factual ones you have posted anyway).

But then, whatever facts you post here... despite some being incorrect... does not dispute the fact that Nazi Germany created an airforce in direct violation of the Versailles Treaty... it was a Nazi air force, it fought for the Nazis. It did not defend the Nazis until the Allies could recoup and figure out what the hell was going on, and start to fight back.

So basically, whatever point you are arguing here is doing nothing to dispute that the LuftWaffe was a Nazi airforce... it's only rehashing things I already knew (for the most part, a few things you must of pulled from a Nazi sympathizers book)...
-SW

[Wotan]

I like the way you avoid the personnal attacks there hypocrit.

But thats your mo.

[Pongo]

Hortland.
The world is not black and white.  But trying so hard to portray any German soldier as inocent..much less a whole arm of the Nazi- German armed forces is very suspect. The amount of ignoring you have to do to equate the moral responsiblity of a LW pilot to the moral responsibility of a USAAF pilot is pretty severe.
Yes both sides destroyed citys full of civillians. Deliberatly. Both sides waged total war and both sides fought for what they thought was right.
One side thought it was right to enslave whole populations and commit genocide against them. Another side thought it was right to oppose that with all force available and thier own lives.
Are we acctually posting critisism here that the US was not being bombed so how could they know courage..they had the courage to die for other peoples children....Not to die to enslave other peoples children.
The guys on one side where Nazis.  How ever skilled and however cool the paint jobs on thier aircraft they are Nazis.
Black and white.

[Viper17]

PEOPLE PEOPLE THIS IS CALLED HIJACKING. I WAS JUST SAYING IF IT COULD BE REDON TO MAKE IT AND ALL 109 BETER LIKE THE 109E. THIS IS NOT ABOUT NAZISM. IT IS ABOUT AN AIRCRAFT. But a nice discusion anyhow.

[Charon]

Because at the end of the day who can really defend the butchery of unarmed civilians?

Hortlund

As I posted in the Dresden thread, I can for the following reasons (taken from that thread):

A lot of what we know about the relative success or failure of any bombing approach was learned after the fact. The bombing surveys did not come out until AFTER the war. At the time, both strategic and dehousing were considered to be more successful than they were (at least directly, see ancillary benefits below). [edit: Nashwan also provided some compelling, specific examples of the impact of the bombing campaign on production in that thread] However, they were very successful in some areas (petroleum) and provided at least short-term disruption in most areas attacked -- a week, two weeks, a month -- it all added up.

The terror concept was also still alive and well [as a military philosophy], in some circles at least. Hitler, for example, seems to have held on to it longer than most with his wasteful V-weapon programs. Terror hadn't been "soundly" rejected, though it was certainly questioned.

There were a lot of ancillary factors as well:

1. You have to factor in a reduction in quality, reliability and service life with the weapons produced.

2. You have to factor in the impact on resources with having to defend the homeland. Each plane defending the homeland couldn't be used out East. Each experienced pilot killed couldn't be replaced (some claim that this aspect made the campaign successful in its own right). Even the "bombing round the clock" concept, that started as a sales pitch to save daylight bombardment, caused a increased dilution of the defense infrastructure compared to a daylight only approach. All of these factors made D-day that much easier, the Russian advance that much easier, and helped speed the end of the war.

3. The fact that we don't know what the final German production numbers would have been without the disruption, drain from relocation, death of skilled workers, and the damage of heavy equipment that couldn't be replaced or relocated. Remember too, those surging production numbers late in the war reflect, in part, Germany's belated switch to a war economy and I believe Speer's partial cleaning of up of the corruption and lack of coordination that had plagued German industry earlier. 25 fewer submarines or several hundred fewer Tigers here or there, and the war is that much shorter with fewer allied causalities.

Hindsight is great, but what's the alternative at the time? Allow unhindered production and say: "The lives of my soldiers and sailors and the life and well being of all those people living [and dying daily in great numbers] in the occupied territories is less important than the lives of German civilians who are supporting their country's war of conquest?" How do you sell that to the families of your soldiers, whose husbands and sons wouldn't even be putting their lives on the line in the first place if it wasn't for Axis aggression? In my estimation, a soldier fighting in defense or to liberate occupied lands is no less valuable than a German housewife. And hell, even in America, hardly the worst sufferer of the war, we lost over 3 "World Trade Centers" a month in war dead.

In an industrial war, one lasting half a decade, production has to be stopped. Tanks that are not made don't kill your tank crews. Torpedoes that aren't fired, because a submarine is not in existence to be on station, allow your troops and weapons to arrive where they are needed...

...I've seen similarly horrible pictures of German housewives and children killed in an air raid. That is very tragic and horrible. But I would exchange their lives, as a necessary evil, to save as many lives as possible from an unnecessary evil. I would even be fairly generous about the ratio. I would even do it if I didn't know for sure it would be 100 percent effective But strategic bombing did have, in many facets including its main purpose, more than a minor effect on the length of the war. Tragic, but not as tragic as stopping Nazi aggression as rapidly as possible.

 

What would you have done to end the war in the same time frame without any additional allied losses? (And remember, the bombing surveys are not compiled until after the war.) Or are the lives of additional allied soldier ok to lose in this cause, but civilians supporting the Nazi war effort totally off limits?

You lost relatives in the war, and I don't feel happy about that. From my point of view, I had a grandfather who missed the first five years of my mother's life -- and, in places like North Africa, Sicily, Normandy (later, in the Pacific, Iwo Jima and Okinawa) had his life threatened many times by bombers, bombs, glide bombs, shells, submarines and torpedoes manufactured by German civilians supporting their war effort. He was a coal miner from West Virginia who had no interest in a foreign war until one was thrust upon him, and I don't really see a distinction between the value of his life and that of a civilian supporting the war effort of a regime that started the most destructive war in world history [if their deaths mean the war is shortened and the toll on the non agressors is thus reduced].

Charon

[Charon]

For those who belive the Luftwaffe was strongly anti-Nazi, please, please post the relevent quotes that establish this. Most of these aces wrote books, most of us have read most of the books. I don't recall any criticism (even in hindsight, years after the war) beyond areas like Hitler's mismanagement of the war effort. Certainly no major criticism of the ideals of Nazism. There may be evidence to support that they were anti-nazi for all I know, and if so I would genuinely like to see it.

Charon

[GRUNHERZ]

I really dont understand this arguing about whether the Luftwaffe or any other normal German armed service was "pro-Nazi" or "anti-Nazi".  Such arguments are pointless.  Who can you ask how the Luftwaffe or the Heer felt about the Nazis?  Hello Mr Luftwaffe, do you like the Nazis? Not likely.

Anyway what is clear is that there were ceratainly individuals who had differeing opinions about the Nazis. In the Luftwaffe we had people like Molders and Marsailles who were decidely anti-Nazi, but we also had Rudel woh was deciedly pro-Nazi. Lets not forget the numerous attempts on Hitler's life by various conspiracies of high ranking Heer officers. Certainly nobody would say Count Von Staufenberg and his associates were pro-Nazi. What about admiral Canaris, head of Abwehr?  And remember that Von Staufenbergs plan was not only to kill hitler but also to arrest the Nazi high ups and SS officals.

So I think it gets decidely murky if the normal (non SS, SS was unquestionably pro nazi) armed services were pro or against the Nazis. Different individuals at all levels of command had different opinions.

Now it goes without saying that WW2 Germany will always be seen as the Nazi period and anything connected to it will be connected to Nazism- one way or another.

[palef]

This is a pretty disturbing thread.

There's just a little bit too much name calling to be able to interject objectively, but I would like to add a few points.

1. In general Politicians do not measurably "represent" the populace they "govern". The politicians that I respect in my country (that does NOT mean that I agree with their policies always) generally do not last more than one term in office. Principles and basic human dignity do not mix with political life.

2. How many people do you know personally would advocate a reduction in the quality of life of any other person? There are exceptions, but those are generally governed by cultural factors and laws that reflect a culture's desire to punish individuals for crimes against individuals or the state. I don't know anyone who could realistically support an argument that would mean that children would die as a direct result. This includes WWII veterans that I have had the privilege of talking to about this issue, who came from all "sides" of the conflict.

3. How soon would your principles fade when you could no longer provide the basics of life for your family? This single factor contributes more to a persons attitudes to government and foreign policy than any other. If someone promised to fix this problem, and fast, would you vote for him in given the opportunity. It is generally accepted that Weimar Germany in the '20s was a very unpleasant place to be.

4. The democracies of the world are largely either Constitutional Monarchies or Republics. Both these forms of government assume that the general populace are such a bunch of handsomehunkes that they can't be trusted to get a law right in the first place so we'll either get a bunch of Aristocrats or Privileged educated folk to make sure they don't hurt theselves when they play at responsible governance. Two party political systems are DEFINITELY NOT democracies. There's been one stab a Democracy in it's truest form, and even then only Male Landowners were allowed to vote. They could however nominate and vote for anyone that met that criteria: Ancient Athens.

5. I Won does not Equal Good guys. I Lost does not equal evil guys. My country was used as a staging post for the Pacific invasion. There are one hell of a lot of 60 year old Dwights and Wyatts wandering about today, and some of them weren't conceived in a loving environment. Ask the female residents of Anzio and Naples '43-'45 if they remember US GIs with fondness. I have a grandfather that joined the merchant navy at age 14 because his parents had to go into service at a Manor in the early '30s due to a lack of funds, and they told him to go a get a job because they couldn't support their children any more. He then ended up in the Royal Navy and watched people do awful things to each other throught the Spanish Civil War, WWII, and KOrea. He joined the Merchant Navy to train as a Steward and Cook because he figured he'd always have access to food that way. This is how people are! They vast majority of people don't give a toss about political systems, just so long as they have a comfortable life for themselves and the people they love. The Irony is that this always leads to Tyranny of some sort - Nazi Germany is one example, and modern day Western political systems with their slavish dependence on commercial "realities" is another.

Stop kicking each other and try something constructive. Celebrate differences, and especially the fact that we have never lived in a more open global society. Look at where all these people come from who are contributing to this argument! How many times have cultures and "sides" been able to freely and openly swap ideas?

Palef

[Pongo]

If swapping ideas means re writting the history of Germany and the German military for the years 1930-46 then I am not interested in swapping ideas.
If you cant accept that the German military did indeed set out to deprive any one they could get thier hands on of their freedom and or lives then you have taken open mindedness a bit far.  If you dont understand that the German military(all arms) was populated by Germans that are responsible for thier own actions and inactions then we dont have common ground to discuss.
At the time of thier attempt at global enslavement they called themselves Nazis. So I call them. The ones that participated in the war will always be subject to that name. Their fault. their shame.
More current generations of Germans of course are not nazis. Unless they try to rewrite the history or what happend. then whaterver thier nationality..I consider them Nazis...

The free speech that the allied soldiers died for does not mean that you cant be ridiculed for your opinions.

The fundimental issue here is that German soldiers were nazis. Even if they didnt carry a nazi card..they where fighting for the nazi way of life.
They were nazis.
No matter the branch of service.

[mauser]

It seems anything involving german aircraft markings tends to decay into political and academic d*(& waving.  Besides being a big hijack of the original poster's intentions, this kind of thing, at least to me leaves a bad taste in my mouth wrt the AH board.  Leave all this discussion in the O-Club pls - your arguments on who's sources are right and wrong are pushing me into the realm of existentialism.  You won't convince each other anything, why even try?

As far as the 109's and the other older aircraft's art - Natedog and Superfly have been improving their products steadily throughout the growth of AH.  They've added more and more weathering for instance.  Beautiful stuff, and AH still doesn't require that large a download compared to other games.  Very efficient.  I'm sure someday the other planes will get a facelift, just like the Spitfires did.  Personally, I'd love to see a different paint scheme for some of the a/c; like the P-47's being done in those wild camo schemes of the 56th (hi Frenchy ), or Hans Dortenmann's FW-190D-9, but that is just me and if they don't change it's no big deal either.  

Let's steer this another way... how much weathering and stuff do you think can be added until we start bumping into the graphics engine's limitations?

mauser

[AKSWulfe]

Mauser- the weathering and other features are independent of the graphics engine. How the aircraft looks (coloring, etc) is done on a bitmap. So the limits of what they can draw is how good they are.

Now, as you'll notice, the new Spitfire models have higher resolution than the previous ones... this means they must have  made the bitmaps larger (larger textures on the same size model will produce more fine detail).

So basically, it's just a limit of graphics card memory and not the engine itself.
-SW