Plundering at Order 1945

[MDZ]

Plünderung auf Befehl 1945 ??

Hallo,

ich lese im Moment ein Buch zum Kriegsende 1945 zwischen Weser und Ems.

Darin wird öfters nach harten Kämpfen geschrieben das Orte 12 Stunden/24 Stunden/ zur Plünderung durch alliierte Truppen frei gegeben wurden.
Dieses drei Wochen und weniger !! vor Kriegsende durch westliche Truppen ??
Auch von vorsätzlichen Niederbrennen ganzer Straßenzüge nach starken Kämpfen oder den Verlust beliebter Qffiziere durch Minen u.a. ( keine Heckenschützen u.ä.) ist vereinzelt die Rede.

Ich habe wohl gehört das in Bayern die US- Streitkräfte einzelne Orte räumen ließen um angeblich nach Gefangenen zu suchen und dabei alles mitnahmen was von Interesse und Wert hatte, auch französische Truppen sollen darin im Süden Meister gewesen sein.

Aber per Befehl Orte zur Plünderung durch die Truppen freigeben, hat es so etwas im Westen
öfter gegeben , vielleicht auch durch die Wehrmacht 1940/41 schon ?

Dank und Gruß

Theo


Plundering at Order 1945

Hello,
I read for the moment a book to the end of war 1945 between Weser and Ems. To it repeatedly after hard fights written places to 12 hours /24 hours for plundering by allied troops were freely given.

This three weeks and less!! before end of war by western troops??
Also of deliberate burning down of whole road courses after strong fights or the loss of popular oficer by mines among other things (no snipers u.ae.) is isolates the speech.

I have probably belong in Bavaria US of armed forces individual places to vacate let around alleged for prisoners look and everything carried forward which from interest and value had, also French troops am in it in the south master to have been.
But by instruction places for plundering by the troops release, have it such a thing in the west more frequently given, perhaps also by the Wehrmacht 1940/41 already? Owing to and greeting

Theo

[Jacky]

Hi Theo

Sean Longden has written a book To The Victor The Spoils which covers looting in Germany. He states more damage was done than necessary because the soldiers were so pleased to have nearly won the war they called in airpower and used tanks to destroy buildings that could contain the enemy without risking their own lives. As for the looting they regarded it had been stolen from other people so took it away. More thought the Germans deserved it for all the trouble they had caused and some wanted souvenirs.

Jacky

[Andy H]

Hi Theo

Further to Jackies post, Longdens books deals with the actions undertaken by the 21st AG which is to say mainly British & Canadian soldiers. It does give details of not only the looting undertaken by these nations soldiers against Germans but also against liberated civilians from the liberated countires in its path.

Regards

[nigelfe]

I don't have a copy of the Army Act 1944 to hand. However, looting of any sort was an offence under this Act (which was the British Army's disciplinary code). This also means that ordering it was an unlawful command, and tacitly permitting it was condonation of an illegal act. It was therefore a duty to prevent it and impossible to legally allow it. It's possible that Canadian troops were subject to the same Act while on active service outside Canada. If they weren't then there would have been very similar Canadian legislation.

Plundering, etc, was permitted by the old Articles of War, but only after a town, etc, had been besieged, refused to surrender and was taken by storm. The last legal storming of this sort by Britsh troops was at Delhi in 1857.

Under military government by occuppying forces it was permissable to commandeer premises and facilities for military use. This was entirely legal and I think there had to be some form of compensation paid to the owners (not the same thing as the occupants).

Of course despite the law soldiers still looted (just as civilians still steal motor cars) but mostly on a small scale and no doubt there was theft from commandeered properties. These were military crimes and could not be legalised without an action by Parliament.

[Andy H]

This was entirely legal and I think there had to be some form of compensation paid to the owners (not the same thing as the occupants).

The British certainly did run a compensation scheme for those 'wronged' by British Army etc

Regards

[nigelfe]

having property commandeered under military government was not being 'wronged', it was legitimate, like billeting.

[Andy H]

having property commandeered under military government was not being 'wronged', it was legitimate, like billeting.

Hi Nigel

Its my understanding that the compensation was given to those, whose belongings etc were either wilfully or accidently damaged. My use of the word 'wronged' may be inappropriate but the basic meaning was within it.

Regards