Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

If Stauffenberg had killed Hitler on July 20th 1944

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by clackers View Post
    You must have read Guderian's book, Pink, which is a great attempt to sanitize his past, which includes being one of the three generals on the tribunal of the show trials of Stauffenberg's plotters.

    As Williamson and Murray say on p72 of "A War To Be Won":

    " ... his postwar memoirs, perhaps the most self-serving by any German general, which is saying a great deal. .... Guderian was also an enthusiastic Nazi whose loyalty to the regime would lead to his appointment as the army's chief-of-staff in the aftermath of the failed 20 July 1944 coup."
    I use books for reference only. I don't read them like a novel, If you get my meaning. I've read a few articles now and can't find any evidence of Nazi party membership, do you know different?

    I hear fully what you are saying and he certainly has guilt in that he turned a blind eye and like so many, didn't want to see. I make no excuse for him!

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Pink View Post
      I use books for reference only. I don't read them like a novel, If you get my meaning.
      No Pink, I don't, I'm afraid.

      You might enjoy your skimming, but the details in between are actually kind of important too! :))

      If you're only into web articles, here are some of those too:

      Most German generals who cooperated with Hitler and the Nazi Party were not card carrying members of the party themselves (including the second Fuhrer ... Karl Doenitz) ... that would be too obvious.

      See Cape Royd and Bigfella's posts on the delicate relationship between Adolf and the Army: http://www.worldaffairsboard.com/sho...&postcount=268

      Even then, the OKW's Walter Warlimont noted that Guderian " ... politically sought a closer association with the Party than was customary among the officers"
      http://www.h-net.msu.edu/reviews/showrev.php?id=7977

      " ... As a result of the July Plot Guderian demanded the resignation of any officer who did not fully support the ideals of the Nazi Party. Over the next few months Guderian sat with Gerd von Rundstedt and Wilhelm Keitel on the Army Court of Honour that expelled hundreds of officers suspected of being opposed to the policies of Adolf Hitler. This removed them from court martial jurisdiction and turned them over to Roland Freisler and his People's Court."
      http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/GERguderian.htm

      And:
      Guderian's long-term sympathies for Adolf Hitler as a person and the National Socialists as a movement. Guderian's endorsement of the cause of the Freikorps in 1919 was followed by his occasional attendance at Nazi Party meetings after Hitler took power; numerous personal meetings and dinners with Hitler; and, his insertion of flattering prose about Hitler in his Achtung! Panzer in 1937.[10] He ignored or repressed the reality of the Kristallnacht, the development of the concentration camp system and the Holocaust, as well as the sordid behavior of some elements of the Wehrmacht in the East, beginning in Poland. He showed little interest in protecting Polish and Soviet prisoners of war and citizens, or protesting their treatment; and was inattentive to the depredations of the Einsatzgruppen on the Eastern Front. Guderian consistently refused to do more than listen to the anti-Hitler resistance, which fit with his servile radio broadcast and issuance of written orders after becoming Chief of Staff of the OKH in July 1944, in which he demanded a National Socialist officer corps and told General Staff officers they should "exhibit the thoughts of the Fuehrer" (p. 190); his "half hearted" encouragement of attempts to begin peace negotiations; and, his early 1950s leadership of a group of former German military leaders and Nazis who sought to rearm and reunify Germany."
      http://www.h-net.msu.edu/reviews/showrev.php?id=7977

      There is of course an additional particularly selfish reason for Guderian choosing to purge his fellow officers and inspect factories ignoring their slave labour that goes beyond all claims of simply obeying orders, upholding officer oaths, etc etc ... he was 'on the take' from the Nazis.

      Like other key figures in Germany, he accepted " ... a huge gift of money from Hitler in 1942 and then took possession of a large estate in Poland, evicting the family that had owned it."

      http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/a...rev/hart1.html
      Last edited by clackers; 03 Mar 09,, 04:43.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by clackers View Post
        No Pink, I don't, I'm afraid.

        You might enjoy your skimming, but the details in between are actually kind of important too! :))
        Yeh I read "It" and "and" and "the" too but I like the big words best;):))


        If you're only into web articles, here are some of those too:
        I use the web, but don't need to really as I've acquired a library over the years.

        Most German generals who cooperated with Hitler and the Nazi Party were not card carrying members of the party themselves (including the second Fuhrer ... Karl Doenitz) ... that would be too obvious.
        Good point! I wonder why, As so many saw it as a career necessity.

        See Cape Royd and Bigfella's posts on the delicate relationship between Adolf and the Army: http://www.worldaffairsboard.com/sho...&postcount=268

        Even then, the OKW's Walter Warlimont noted that Guderian " ... politically sought a closer association with the Party than was customary among the officers"
        http://www.h-net.msu.edu/reviews/showrev.php?id=7977
        Thanks:)



        " ... As a result of the July Plot Guderian demanded the resignation of any officer who did not fully support the ideals of the Nazi Party. Over the next few months Guderian sat with Gerd von Rundstedt and Wilhelm Keitel on the Army Court of Honour that expelled hundreds of officers suspected of being opposed to the policies of Adolf Hitler. This removed them from court martial jurisdiction and turned them over to Roland Freisler and his People's Court."
        http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/GERguderian.htm

        And:
        Guderian's long-term sympathies for Adolf Hitler as a person and the National Socialists as a movement. Guderian's endorsement of the cause of the Freikorps in 1919 was followed by his occasional attendance at Nazi Party meetings after Hitler took power; numerous personal meetings and dinners with Hitler; and, his insertion of flattering prose about Hitler in his Achtung! Panzer in 1937.[10] He ignored or repressed the reality of the Kristallnacht, the development of the concentration camp system and the Holocaust, as well as the sordid behavior of some elements of the Wehrmacht in the East, beginning in Poland. He showed little interest in protecting Polish and Soviet prisoners of war and citizens, or protesting their treatment; and was inattentive to the depredations of the Einsatzgruppen on the Eastern Front. Guderian consistently refused to do more than listen to the anti-Hitler resistance, which fit with his servile radio broadcast and issuance of written orders after becoming Chief of Staff of the OKH in July 1944, in which he demanded a National Socialist officer corps and told General Staff officers they should "exhibit the thoughts of the Fuehrer" (p. 190); his "half hearted" encouragement of attempts to begin peace negotiations; and, his early 1950s leadership of a group of former German military leaders and Nazis who sought to rearm and reunify Germany."
        http://www.h-net.msu.edu/reviews/showrev.php?id=7977

        There is of course an additional particularly selfish reason for Guderian choosing to purge his fellow officers and inspect factories ignoring their slave labour that goes beyond all claims of simply obeying orders, upholding officer oaths, etc etc ... he was 'on the take' from the Nazis.

        Like other key figures in Germany, he accepted " ... a huge gift of money from Hitler in 1942 and then took possession of a large estate in Poland, evicting the family that had owned it."

        http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/a...rev/hart1.html
        Well that clears that up, Thanks for the info. How about Rundstedt?

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by clackers View Post
          his early 1950s leadership of a group of former German military leaders and Nazis who sought to rearm and reunify Germany."
          This was a common aspiration amongst Germans at this time. The Bundeswehr which was given its name by Hasso von Manteuffel (an ex-Wehrmacht general and commander of the Gross Deutchland div), was formed in 1955. After NATO approval Chancellor Konrad Adenauer gave the green light, After it became apparent that the GDR was secretly rearming with Soviet approval.


          From wiki

          "the seeds of a new West German force started in 1950 when former high-ranking German officers were tasked by Chancellor Konrad Adenauer to discuss the options for West German rearmament. The results of a meeting in the monastery of Himmerod formed the conceptual base to build the new armed forces in West Germany. The "Amt Blank" (Bureau Blank, named after its director Theodor Blank), the predecessor of the later Federal Ministry of Defense, was formed the same year to prepare the establishment of the future forces"

          So in that respect Guderian was not out of step. However, his and other Germans dreaming of a unified Germany with the added recovery of territories lost to Poland clearly were out of step and not on the cards at all.
          Last edited by Pink; 03 Mar 09,, 22:46.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Pink View Post

            Good point! I wonder why, As so many saw it as a career necessity.
            I think you'll find not many of the Army generals ever did... it was an organization that predated the Nazis and even Hitler favourites like Dietl, Rommel, Guderian, von Manstein and Model weren't card carriers.

            On the other hand, the rival SS was very political, and perhaps nearly all of its generals were party members ... Sepp Dietrich, Himmler, Hausser, Meyer and Peiper, for instance.
            Last edited by clackers; 04 Mar 09,, 12:47.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Pink View Post
              Well that clears that up, Thanks for the info. How about Rundstedt?
              The late, great American Eastern Front expert Earl Ziemke wrote an essay on him in Corelli Barnett's Hitler's Generals, and saw him as an elderly traditional Prussian officer who thought that the Army should be above party politics. He hated his rival Reichenau, who perhaps like Guderian, was " ... a brilliant, energetic and a radical nonconformist who was believed to be so close to being a Nazi that whether he was an actual Party member or not was immaterial ..."

              Yet von Rundstedt was genuinely upset by the July 20 plot, and served without hesitation on the tribunal with Guderian and Keitel to make sure that officers were sent to the People's Court for hanging rather than die a soldier's death by firing squad. Unlike a real court martial, the tribunal heard no evidence from witnesses and relied only on Gestapo testimony. For this Rundstedt was awarded the Swords to his Knight's Cross.

              Like Guderian and others, von Rundstedt was also bought by the Fuhrer. He had monthly tax free deposits made to a bank account, and on his sixty-fourth birthday in 1941 was presented by Hitler with a bonus 250,000 Reichsmark cheque.
              Last edited by clackers; 04 Mar 09,, 12:48.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Pink View Post
                So in that respect Guderian was not out of step. However, his and other Germans dreaming of a unified Germany with the added recovery of territories lost to Poland clearly were out of step and not on the cards at all.
                Well, as that H-Net review points out that new army was going to name a barracks after him in the 1960s when " ... Subsequent media attention and public discussion focused considerable attention on unresolved and embarrassing aspects of Guderian's career, and the Bundeswehr ultimately abandoned the naming notion despite his amazing military achievements."

                Comment


                • #23
                  Regardless of government or country, preferential treatment during times of war is hardly a German or Nazi phenomenon. Haliburton in Iraq is a major recent example of the gravy train in full swing...
                  Last edited by Pink; 04 Mar 09,, 20:28.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    No, Pink, corporations are legally free to make money out of other peoples' sufferings, individual officers can actually have ethics and choose to serve their country without lining their pockets.

                    Let's look at your country's army as an example.

                    In old age, Montgomery had to put up with journalists watching him as he stood politely in the queue at the pension office.

                    Neither was the half-pension of a retired Field Marshall enough for Lord Alanbrooke (Britain's highest ranked soldier) and his wife to get by, and they had to move into the cottage beside their own house ... he later had to sell some of his beloved ornithological books as well ...

                    No such worries on the German side for a Monty equivalent like von Manstein, or an Alanbrooke equivalent like Keitel ... with their marshall's batons came wealth for them and their families ... if they complied with Nazi crimes ...
                    Last edited by clackers; 05 Mar 09,, 00:24.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by clackers View Post
                      No, Pink, corporations are legally free to make money out of other peoples' sufferings
                      That's a very disappointing answer, No to mention morally corrupt and slightly surreal!


                      individual officers can actually have ethics and choose to serve their country without lining their pockets.
                      Quite and there are many, But I don't see what this has to do with my point.


                      Let's look at your country's army as an example.
                      If you insist!

                      In old age, Montgomery had to put up with journalists watching him as he stood politely in the queue at the pension office.
                      Well it has to be an improvement on being shot at by the Germans:)

                      Neither was the half-pension of a retired Field Marshall enough for Lord Alanbrooke (Britain's highest ranked soldier) and his wife to get by, and they had to move into the cottage beside their own house ... he later had to sell some of his beloved ornithological books as well ...
                      My heart bleeds

                      No such worries on the German side for a Monty equivalent like von Manstein, or an Alanbrooke equivalent like Keitel ... with their marshall's batons came wealth for them and their families ... if they complied with Nazi crimes
                      We don't disagree here........ what the hell has this got to with Haliburton?.............You're sounding awefully American for an Ozzie!

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        I'm afraid you have missed my point entirely, Pink.

                        Companies like Haliburton are obligated by their stockholders to apply to be part of any military gravy train. The ethics runs a poor second. When Douglas MacArthur left Bataan with secret Phillippine Government payments, he had been their professional soldier for hire ... a mercenary. Siemens, Rolls-Royce and Mitsubishi all made money from warfare, if you think that somehow only American companies are guilty of cashing in on tragedy.

                        But the concerns of a career soldier are meant to be different from a Blackwater CEO.

                        Only personal ambitions kept the German Field Marshalls with their snouts in the trough ... instead of seeing what was happening to the country they were supposed to be serving, and either resigning and letting others replace them, or even braver, joining a Resistance movement, they kept on accepting their regular bribes on top of their army salaries and looked the other way.
                        Last edited by clackers; 05 Mar 09,, 13:13.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by clackers View Post
                          I'm afraid you have missed my point entirely, Pink
                          I think you've missed my point actually.

                          Companies like Haliburton are obligated by their stockholders to apply to be part of any military gravy train. The ethics runs a poor second
                          Thats true!.....But clearly you don't know that there was only one company that applied for numerous US military logistic contracts in Iraq. Other companies would have tendered for the contract, only they weren't asked to. This bizarre behaviour becomes easy to understand when one realises that the Vice President (Dick Cheney)of the day was chairman and CEO of Halliburton Company from 1995 to 2000.

                          When Douglas MacArthur left Bataan with secret Phillippine Government payments, he had been their professional soldier for hire ... a mercenary. Siemens, Rolls-Royce and Mitsubishi all made money from warfare, if you think that somehow only American companies are guilty of cashing in on tragedy.
                          Yeh I accept that, it wasn't the point I was making though

                          But the concerns of a career soldier are meant to be different from a Blackwater CEO.
                          Blackwater in Iraq, don't get me started on that, that was a joke.

                          Only personal ambitions kept the German Field Marshalls with their snouts in the trough ... instead of seeing what was happening to the country they were supposed to be serving, and either resigning and letting others replace them, or even braver, joining a Resistance movement, they kept on accepting their regular bribes on top of their army salaries and looked the other way
                          Thats right, which is why I brought up Haliburton and its direct association with the people awarding the contracts
                          Last edited by Pink; 05 Mar 09,, 20:07.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Would Russians stop after the death of Hitler?
                            Love all, trust a few, do wrong to none; be able for thine enemy rather in power than use; and keep thy friend under thine own life's key; be checked for silence, but never taxed for speech.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Pink View Post
                              I think you've missed my point actually.

                              Thats true!.....But clearly you don't know that there was only one company that applied for numerous US military logistic contracts in Iraq. Other companies would have tendered for the contract, only they weren't asked to. This bizarre behaviour becomes easy to understand when one realises that the Vice President (Dick Cheney)of the day was chairman and CEO of Halliburton Company from 1995 to 2000.
                              I don't think you are correct on this one. Looking at most of the services that were provided, Haliburton was the only company fully prepared to provide them in the time frame the military required. I did some research on this a few years ago (sorry don't have the sources on file anymore), but since Haliburton was experienced in providing the services the military required in the area (middle east) that they were required, Haliburton was in effect the only company immediately ready to meet military requirements.

                              IMO, any anger over the Haliburton contracts should be directed at the lack of preparation for a scenario in which these services would be provided. With the military cutbacks in the 90's, it was known that such services as Haliburton provided would be required if a military buildup became necessary, and yet the military had only one option for those services. They should have had more than one company prepared to provide the services.
                              Last edited by Johnny W; 06 Mar 09,, 19:16.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Big K View Post
                                Would Russians stop after the death of Hitler?
                                They won't. Germany the nation was the threat and the Soviets wanted to neutralize it once and for all.
                                All those who are merciful with the cruel will come to be cruel to the merciful.
                                -Talmud Kohelet Rabbah, 7:16.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X