crimes comitted by Waffen-SS units and their entries on the

[Caranorn]

Hello,

Today a problem was raised at french language wikipedia concerning Feldgrau as a source. Mainly because the brief unit histories of Waffen-SS units seemingly never list warcrimes committed by these units. So the question is, could such material be added to the site, like for instance including a few sentences about the Malmedy Massacre in the article on 1.SS-Panzer-Division Leibstandarte Adolf Hitler < http://www.feldgrau.com/1ss.html >, mention of the Oradour-sur-Glane Massacre in the 2.SS-Panzer-Division Das Reich < http://www.feldgrau.com/2ss.html > article etc.

Marc aka Caran...

[phylo_roadking]

Marc, there is a policy about the discussion and handling of war crimes on the site; a query such as this should be referred directly to the site owner, Jason Pipes, rather than handled by way of a thread.

[Caranorn]

Ah, unfortunatelly I didn't find a link to send an email on the site, which is why I chose to subscribe here. I will then try to track down Jason Pipes via the forum's PM system.

Thanks for the reply,

Marc aka Caran...

[Jason Pipes]

I don't see anything wrong with this suggestion, keeping in mind of course that any warcrime not mentioned isn't because of a political move, but simply because there isn't a LOT of stuff mentioned in the various units histories. It takes volumes and volumes to fully describe the complex and involved operational histories of German units during WWII. What I hope to accomplish in a few pages or less on Feldgrau.com can't possibly cover every detail a unit was involved in. It's agreed that some major (or well known) warcrimes should be indeed included, but there are some who feel all a unit history should consist of is a retelling of their real or imagined criminal acts during the war. I happen to disagree with that notion and that is why, so far, many of the unit histories here have focused on operational combat details. Not because I deny that certain crimes have taken place or that I wish to downplay their importance, but because, on the whole, there are numerous resources available that detail those events and I wanted Feldgrau to cover details not readily available elsewhere.

I hope that gives some idea as to my thinking on this subject for the time being.

[haen2]

Hello,

Today a problem was raised at french language wikipedia concerning Feldgrau as a source. Mainly because the brief unit histories of Waffen-SS units seemingly never list warcrimes committed by these units. So the question is, could such material be added to the site, like for instance including a few sentences about the Malmedy Massacre in the article on 1.SS-Panzer-Division Leibstandarte Adolf Hitler < http://www.feldgrau.com/1ss.html >, mention of the Oradour-sur-Glane Massacre in the 2.SS-Panzer-Division Das Reich < http://www.feldgrau.com/2ss.html > article etc.
Marc aka Caran...

I think it would be a good idea; PROVIDED that the Waffen SS (as usual) is NOT singled out for war crimes.
Perhaps the section should just read "WARCRIMES WWII" and ALL criminal army activities should be allowed to be posted; including ALLIED units warcrimes.
I can think of a few in the Battle of the Bulge, where Malmedy is played to the hilt, but Allied crimes are either downplayed or whitewashed.
OK, let the bullets fly
HN

[Jason Pipes]

I have no intention of creating a warcrimes section on this site. Also to make it clear I have no problem discussing warcrimes on the forum provided that some key elements are met - 1) Rants and uncivil debates are not allowed; 2) personal attacks are not allowed; 3) questions and answers should be posted in the context of facts, names, dates, units, and locations, and that's about it. There are plenty of places you can discuss warcrimes until you are blue in the face, Feldgrau just isn't one of them. There are also plenty of resources available that chart out the various warcrimes committed by German units during WWII. I don't suggest those resources are biased because they don't provide operational combat details and orders of battle of German units so why should Feldgrau even remotely be considered biased because we don't chart out every warcrime that occuring during WWII? It's all about focus.

I think what the original poster was suggesting was to include mention of various warcrimes within specific unit histories. I don't disagree with this, as per my general thinking outlined above. Also keep in mind the context of unit histories on Feldgrau.com are designed to focus on operational details and not the tactical specifics (including warcrimes) that took place during WWII. To do so would either require hundreds of pages per unit or that certain tactical events were entirely left out. What is the justification from an operational point of view of including details of, for example, a massacre of PoWs in a certain battle but not discussing any other tactical details from that same or hundreds of other battles that unit took part in? Just something to consider. Again, I don't disagree that major or significant war crimes should indeed be included, just keep in mind this site and the unit histories found here are not designed to provide every possible detail. To attempt to do so would be impossible regarless if we're talking about warcrimes or battalion frontages and engagements.

[Caranorn]

I agree, my intent was for inclusion of some of the more major warcrimes within the individual unit histories not a separate section. And yes, I understand the main purpose of Feldgrau is orders of battle (my own area of expertise) and unit histories and have no problem that it doesn't focus on warcrimes. It was just that the issue was brought up and I found I had to agree that absence of any mention of warcrimes seemed like a bad idea. A short sentence here and there within a unit history would be a relatively simple means to overcome this problem.

And yes, Waffen-SS need not be singled out, if a well documented case exists for a Wehrmacht unit it should be included in it's unit history as well.

Marc aka Caran...

[Jason Pipes]

Agreed. Thanks for your input on the subject!