A Terrible Revenge

Vaterland · Post by **Vaterland** » Fri Jul 28, 2006 5:19 am

Hello all!

I recently finished reading A Terrible Revenge: The Ethnic Cleansing of the East European Germans book, written by Alfred-Maurice de Zayas. The thing I liked most about this book was the way in which the author presents the information, aswell as his overall messege. Basicly; If you think what the Germans did during the war was wrong, than you must acknowlage that what happened to the Germans at the end and after the war was just as wrong. Lots of first hand accounts and figures. I higly recommend it for anyone interested in German history.

Maus · Post by **Maus** » Sat Jul 29, 2006 12:04 am

I agree. Although it has been many years since I read that book, it tells the story of what happened to the eastern Germans at the hands of the Russian armies very well. At times I almost had to put the book down, do to the brutal stories which Mr. De Zeyas relates. I believe he is one of the most objective people to write on the crimes of the Russian armies in Eastern Germany. If I am not mistaken, I think he used to be head of the UN agency on refugees.

Benoit Douville · Post by **Benoit Douville** » Sat Jul 29, 2006 6:40 pm

Vaterland,

I want to read this book, I appreciated your review. Of course,the Soviets did terrible things to the German population at the end of the War.

Regards

pzrmeyer2 · Post by **pzrmeyer2** » Sun Jul 30, 2006 6:51 am

Others in the same genre include:

De Zayas' Nemesis at Potsdam

Fires of Hatred by Norman Naimark

Armageddon by Max Hastings

and the somewhat contoversial Crimes and Mercies by James Bacque

and some great first person accounts:

Valley of the Shadow by Erich Anton Helfert

German Boy by Wolfgang Samuel

Helga by Helga Gerhardi

Opa · Post by **Opa** » Tue Aug 01, 2006 6:28 pm

Nemesis at Potsdam is more detailed, and has more pictures, often very awful ones. There is a fairly recent reprint of Nemesis by an English publisher, I think.

sid guttridge · Post by **sid guttridge** » Fri Aug 04, 2006 9:52 am

Hi Vaterland,

"What happened to the Germans at the end of the war" covers a lot of things. What, specifically, do you think was wrong about what happened to the Germans after the war?

There is no defence for mass murder or rape of Germans.

However, on another level, the disproportion of damage that Germany inflicted in a war of aggression compared with what it suffered in defeat ("only" about 20% of all dead were German), inevitably meant that some form of punishment was almost inevitable. In particular this meant loss of territory in the East, where Germany inflicted most damage.

Was this loss of territory necessarily wrong?

Cheers,

Sid.

Jan-Hendrik · Post by **Jan-Hendrik** » Fri Aug 04, 2006 10:14 am

Is there any way to justify genocide ?

Jan-Hendrik

M.H. · Post by **M.H.** » Fri Aug 04, 2006 10:34 am

Was this loss of territory necessarily wrong?

Yes!

(I tend to be similiar indifferent to the ME quagmire as Sid is to german land losses ...it is always something else if it is YOUR land which got lost)

sid guttridge · Post by **sid guttridge** » Fri Aug 04, 2006 10:46 am

Hi J-H,

It depends what one thinks genocide is.

If the attempt by the Nazis to exterminate every last living Jew and all their works was genocide (and, in the literal sense of attempting to wipe out an entire race, it certainly was), then what happened to the Germans after the war fell a very long way short, even in the East. What is more, it came nowhere close to matching the level of fatalities suffered by Poland and the USSR.

Historically, countries losing wars expect to lose territory. It is the currency of defeat. Prussia and Germany expected to take territory in every war they ever fought. Some loss of territory after WWII was almost inevitable given historical precedent. What was not in accord with historical precedent was that none of the Western Allies took any territory off Germany.

I would suggest that the unfairness was less that Germany lost territory, but that that burden fell almost entirely on just one section of the German population. It is possible to feel sorry for the over-punished individuals concerned without feeling particularly sorry for Germany collectively.

Cheers,

Sid.

sid guttridge · Post by **sid guttridge** » Fri Aug 04, 2006 10:48 am

Hi MH,

Why?

Cheers,

Sid.

Jan-Hendrik · Post by **Jan-Hendrik** » Fri Aug 04, 2006 10:56 am

Interesting , dear Sid , that you concentrate your statement on the territorial losses , but I asked about the genocide that had happened East of the River Oder

Is there really any possibility to justify a genocide ??

Jan-Hendrik

M.H. · Post by **M.H.** » Fri Aug 04, 2006 10:59 am

sid guttridge wrote:Hi MH,

Why?

Cheers,

Sid.

Why what?

Helmut Von Moltke · Post by **Helmut Von Moltke** » Fri Aug 04, 2006 12:23 pm

hi,

Not again.

What was not in accord with historical precedent was that none of the Western Allies took any territory off Germany.

'Alsace Lorraine'.

Some of it's people thought of themselves as Germans. And, the huge numbers of dead resulting from these cleansings are proof that Germany's enemies are hyprocrites, when they claim they are fighting against cruelty and they are cruel themselves. A very grey area Sid, and not the shining white knights of WWII as you try to make them seem like. And how is loss of German territory have anything to do with a book about ethnic cleansing of Germans?

To get back on subject. The book is available at Amazon for a reasonable price.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/031212 ... 16?ie=UTF8

Kevin

pzrmeyer2 · Post by **pzrmeyer2** » Fri Aug 04, 2006 5:47 pm

Cheers,

then what happened to the Germans after the war fell a very long way short, even in the East.

great, then lets call it it by its new catchy name of "ethnic cleansing".

What is more, it came nowhere close to matching the level of fatalities suffered by Poland and the USSR.

ohh, so that makes it ok then. maybe you'd have preferred an eye for an eye? and how do we measure it anyway? every city larger than Bamberg was reduced to rubble, 8+ million of its soldiers and citizens dead, and millions more were impressed into hard labor in the USSR, some for many years, and some never came home. 14+ million, including by the way anti-nazis, Jews, clergy, elderly, infirm, and children lost their possessions, homes and their land forevermore.

Some loss of territory after WWII was almost inevitable given historical precedent.

not for an Allied effort pillared on tenets of morality, righteousness, human rights, the Atlantic Charter and the United Nations. "Making the world safe for democracy".

What was not in accord with historical precedent was that none of the Western Allies took any territory off Germany

Semantics. What were they gonna do, expel Germans from the Rhineland? They conspired and approved to the events in the east, peeled off the Saar for 15 years, turned over thousands of Germans, Cossacks, and other eastern peoples to certain deaths, and evacuated territories in Germany (Magdeburg, Leipzig, Thuringia) and Western Bohemia that abandoned thousands of people to Soviet oppression.

It is possible to feel sorry for the over-punished individuals concerned without feeling particularly sorry for Germany collectively.

splitting hairs. I don't see any "feeling sorry" for them in your inflammatory comments.

If the attempt by the Nazis to exterminate every last living Jew and all their works was genocide

Just as the Poles. Czechs, and Soviets extinguished all traces, living and material, of hundreds of years of German culture and settlement from Stettin to Konigsberg to Prague to Breslau to the Banat to the Siebenburgen and beyond.

sniper1shot · Post by **sniper1shot** » Fri Aug 04, 2006 8:09 pm

Sorry Troops, This thread is locked because you can not talk like "adults"
This is the book forum, not the beer tent and I see some nasty crap starting here........same arguements, different Forum.

Feldgrau.net