best Waffen-SS Division?

German SS and Waffen-SS 1923-1945.
Sebastian Pye
Enthusiast
Posts: 405
Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2002 5:32 am
Location: Sweden, Västerås
Contact:

Re: Sebastian: what about Nordland?

Post by Sebastian Pye » Sat Mar 01, 2003 8:21 am

Peter wrote:Sebastian: what about Nordland? Is Nordland your 'favorite' . If so, can you explane us why ??
I only ment that Abwehr didnt mention it, although it fought very well up til the very end. It wasnt in the same class as wiking and das reich, but not far from it I think.

Jaroslav Klíma
New Member
Posts: 2
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2003 7:41 am
Location: Ceske Budejovice (Budweis) Ceska Republika (Czech rep.)

Wallonia

Post by Jaroslav Klíma » Tue Mar 04, 2003 7:56 am

Don´t forget for SS sturmbrigade Wallonia
army, weapons, history, airsoft

User avatar
M.Wittmann
Supporter
Posts: 170
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2003 3:53 am
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Re: What’s your standard?

Post by M.Wittmann » Sun Oct 05, 2003 11:29 am

renwei wrote:Hi, guys
How do you rank these divisions? According to their KC holder’s number? 2ss and 5ss has won more KCs than 1ss and 3ss, so they rank first?

If I have to choose one between LSLAH and Wiking, I would prefer LSLAH. 1ss has seen more bloody battles than 5ss: Kursk, Kharkov, Normandy, and Bulge. 1ss has also contributed cadre to 9ss and 12ss. It is the first ss division indeed.

Regards
:shock: 1SS more bloody battles??? What about the Caucasus, Djnepr, Mius, Tsjerkassy pocket, etc. At Tsjerkassy, 5.SS and elements of 2.SS kept their ground when the Russians were pushing very hard.

IMO 5.SS is the favourite. Only "beaten" by 2.SS with KC recipients, but never accused of massacres :? (ones like Oradour or Lidice) The first mixed division with european volunteers that worked very well under command of men like Gille, Wagner, Dorr, Muhlenkamp, Dieckmann, etc.
Last edited by M.Wittmann on Sun Oct 05, 2003 9:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"Klagt nicht, kämpft!"

Wanted:
Info about 5.SS-Pz(Gren)Div 'Wiking' and the dutch Waffen-SS volunteers.

User avatar
jan willem
Supporter
Posts: 73
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2003 2:11 pm
Location: Leeuwarden (Netherlands)

I fully agree with Wiking!!!

Post by jan willem » Sun Oct 05, 2003 2:30 pm

The had indeed much fighting battle in Russia, even stronger they only have fought in Russia! And let us not forget that wiking also was involved in the battles in Hungary at the end of the war.

For me also three favorites are: Totenkopf, the Dutch and Vlamings Legion.

Jan Willem :!:

User avatar
Rudi Welz
Supporter
Posts: 58
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2003 4:03 am
Location: Bayern

Best SS-Divisions

Post by Rudi Welz » Mon Oct 06, 2003 7:21 am

M.Wittmann,
please remember, in Lidice was it a czech policeunit who shoot 199 men.
Not even one soldier of the Waffen-SS was there.
regards
Rudi

User avatar
Edelweiss.
Supporter
Posts: 154
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2003 1:48 pm
Location: UK

Post by Edelweiss. » Mon Oct 06, 2003 9:03 am

Best Waffen SS divisions?

My list in order:

5th SS Panzer Division "Wiking"
12th SS Panzer Division "Hitlerjugend"
23rd SS Panzergrenadier Division "Nederland"
28th SS Panzergrenadier Division "Wallionien"

Regards,
Edelweiss

Timo
Patron
Posts: 1056
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2002 4:32 am
Location: Former member

Post by Timo » Mon Oct 06, 2003 9:27 am

12.SS? What did they ever do to deserve a top-3 notation? Apart from Normandy they didn't do anything right.
Former member

User avatar
Edelweiss.
Supporter
Posts: 154
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2003 1:48 pm
Location: UK

Post by Edelweiss. » Mon Oct 06, 2003 9:36 am

Normandy constituted most of their battle time, did it not?

Regards,
Edelweiss

User avatar
Shadow
Patron
Posts: 1437
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2003 3:16 am
Location: Shadowland.

Best SS Divisions

Post by Shadow » Mon Oct 06, 2003 9:46 am

Good morning Timo -
What would your picks be ?
Just curious :D !
best regards -
Signed: "The Shadow"

Timo
Patron
Posts: 1056
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2002 4:32 am
Location: Former member

Post by Timo » Mon Oct 06, 2003 9:47 am

Well, especially given the fact that their part in the Ardennes Offensive is one of the worst performances by a Waffen-SS Panzer-Division ever, it's a bit poor to be listed among the best just for what they did in Normandy. Especially given the qually good performance of other SS Divisions in Normandy, which are not listed by you.
Former member

Timo
Patron
Posts: 1056
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2002 4:32 am
Location: Former member

Post by Timo » Mon Oct 06, 2003 9:51 am

Schaduw,

I don't like making such lists. It depends to much on incomparable factors such as opponents, accompanying units, equipment and supplies, the weather, luck, stage of the war, theatre of operations, etc.
Former member

User avatar
Shadow
Patron
Posts: 1437
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2003 3:16 am
Location: Shadowland.

Post by Shadow » Mon Oct 06, 2003 9:57 am

Tiimoe -
Fair enough!
Just thought I'd ask!
Signed: "The Shadow"

User avatar
Christoph Awender
Patron
Posts: 2119
Joined: Fri Sep 27, 2002 3:09 am
Location: Austria
Contact:

Post by Christoph Awender » Mon Oct 06, 2003 10:18 am

I cannot say how much annoyed I am by such "what was the best...." threads!
I never understood how someone knowing even just a little bit about WW2 can ask such a question.
And how come these questions are always asked and pushed forward by people which obviously have very limited knowledge about how a battle, engagement and all connecting factors worked? Well, I guess this question answers itself.
How can you say division XX was better than division YY?? You will never know what would have happened if the other unit fought the battle instead because of that someone hold a division in high regard! If the other division would have been set up for this battle and it would have performed the same way - you would change your mind? I guess yes so you see that such comparisons are total bullshit!

And as Timo said you will never have same conditions in two battles ever! A simple hill, a river, a forest can change the outcome of a battle! Hundreds of factors influence a battle outcome.
I also doubt that most of the people who do such comparisons know each and every engagement even just of the few W-SS units!
The same I think about the same threads about commander hitlists. Some people read some books about generals or officers and seem to know who is the "best" commander in WWII.
This would mean someone knows each and all generals (hundreds) and officers (thousands) and their "performance" during the war.
They forget that most books writers didn´t even know the person they write about!
Nobody writes about a commander of a rear command who maybe was a more excellent tactician as some front generals but never got the chance.

If you had problems with a officer and he wrote that into your personal file it could be that you just got commands at the "ass of the world" for the entire war.
I know this doesn´t add much to this thread but sometimes I am fed up and have to speak out what I think.

\Christoph

User avatar
schwedi
Supporter
Posts: 71
Joined: Fri Nov 29, 2002 8:56 am
Location: Austria, near Vienna
Contact:

Post by schwedi » Fri Oct 10, 2003 6:03 am

You are Right Christoph!!

My Grandfather was in the 11 SS Flak Regiment "Nordland"!

And he said to the replies that these people brings here:

"This is bullshit, no battle is the same! You cant campare African with Russian battles! So these people dont have a glue how a battle is organised, how the soldier are scared of battles! Sometimes soldiers are happy sometimes sad, so this is in battle very important. If soldiers have to fight, but dont want to fight, they fight worser then in good days!"

So, dont campare units with units and Division with Division.
Sterben ist eine Sache, überleben eine andere!

Michael Schwed

Lacplesis
Supporter
Posts: 76
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2002 8:07 am
Location: USA
Contact:

Noone was the best

Post by Lacplesis » Sun Oct 12, 2003 8:06 pm

As a Johnney come late to this thread , I agree with the later statements(without the unecessary language) that we can't compare units and and say who was the best. Fighting in Africa and the Ukraine was entirely different than the woods of the Baltic and the Hedges of France. The Baltic countries were more interested in keeping the Russians out of their territory so they fought for the country , where as the Germans got closer to their homeland , they also fought harder.
The early battles before 1943 are not a good guage of fighting, for the playing field only became equal in 1943. It was then that the Allies had trained soldiers and equipment equal or better than the Axis.
Anyone who has been in the forest of Latvia and Estonia would know how the thick forest helped in much of the fighting . Im not putting down the Latvians for my father fought "for Latvia" but when the 15th Latvian Legion was told they were to go to Germany for "retraining" , Latvian books in Latvian language tell that somewhere around 30% of the soldiers deserted to stay in Latvia to fight the Russians. My father told me the reason he boarded the ship to Germany was only because My mother and us kids were there. When in Germany they were ordered to defend Berlin , but they missed the turnoff to the city so they headed for the western front.( see http://www.lacplesis.com/Latvian_legion ... ny_map.htm)
In Germany the order of the day was to get to the western front as soon and with as little losses as posible.
The question could be extended to , what foreign legions did fight on German soil and how did they perform. I know about the Latvians , but what about the rest?
8)
History is what we repeat if we don't study it.

Post Reply