As a result of having lost the first World War and thanks to the brutal provisions of the VersailleTreaty, Germany in the 1920s and early30s got into ever increasing political and economic difficulties. Under the Weimar Republic the german people had accepted a constitution that was incapable of dealing with internal dessension ,a fast growing communist party, unemployment and economic collapse. Germany was on the road to dictatorship. Germany had become impossible to rule without emergency measures. By the 1930s the choice had narrowed down to that of a Bolshevist state or an anti bolshevist dictatorship. To say that one preferred democracy is fine and dandy now,but in light of the times was not an available option.
The legacy left by Clemenceau, Wilson,George as the drew new boundaries through countries they new zilch about as they drank their tea and macaroons at Versaille paved the way for future disasters. So what if these old foggies had had a little more "Fingerspitzgefuhl" ?
The Legacy of Versaille
Moderator: Commissar D, the Evil
Was the democratic weimer government not undermined by the nationalists and freikorps militarists who kept talking about "the stab in the back" of 1918, and was Hitler not supported by the industrialists (who paid the huge debts of the NSDAP in 1932) and the army because he promised to restore the military, and was the reason for the falling unemployment after the nazi takeover not based in the fact that the army was expanded (yesterday you were unemployed, now you are in the army) and the industries got huge arms-contracts which revitalised the economy, but the outcome of this policy could only be war.
-
Eric Ertman
- Member
- Posts: 20
- Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2002 3:03 am
Was unconditional surrender necessary ?
Could the taking prisoner of millions of Germans on the eastern fronts, the overunning of eastern Germany and the subsequent murder of ethnic Germans by the Russians and their Czech and Polish sidekicks and the , what we would term today, "terror bombing" of German cities have been avoided if the allies had not insisted on Germanys unconditional surrender? Would not the loss of life have been greatly reduced on both the allied and axis sides? Was it not this unconditional surrender that motivated or forced Germany to continue the fight?
What would be the alternative to unconditional surrender ? (from a 1940´s point of view, not a post-coldwar 2002 point of view), the russians had suffered to much to ever accept it, 1944 saw the V1 and V2´s launched at Britain and Holland which meant a new turn of terror-bombing by the germans, the allies were beginning to liberate the KZ camps and this added just more to the hatred towards germans, and if the western-allies sued for a separate peace it would mean betraying the russians (and during WW II soviet Russia and communists was quite popular amongst the populations of Europe, due to their stubbornness in opposing the Nazi´s), that would mean the loss of Russian support in fighting Japan (as promised by Stalin at Jalta), and it might mean the start of a war between Russia and the west.
Besides, at the time, after 6 years of war and occupation, most western leaders and their people wanted to see Hitler and his Nazi´s dead and gone, if the germans had been successfull in rebelling against the Nazí´s and set up an alternative government it might have changed the situation.
Surely the terror-bombing of Hamburg, Dresden and Berlin were war-crimes, and millions of germans were ethnically cleansed from the eastern part of germany, but germany was locked in the grip of the Nazi-state and that had to be destroyed first, regrettably it meant destroying a large part of germany and germans as well.
Besides, at the time, after 6 years of war and occupation, most western leaders and their people wanted to see Hitler and his Nazi´s dead and gone, if the germans had been successfull in rebelling against the Nazí´s and set up an alternative government it might have changed the situation.
Surely the terror-bombing of Hamburg, Dresden and Berlin were war-crimes, and millions of germans were ethnically cleansed from the eastern part of germany, but germany was locked in the grip of the Nazi-state and that had to be destroyed first, regrettably it meant destroying a large part of germany and germans as well.
Last edited by lennardg on Tue Oct 22, 2002 4:36 am, edited 2 times in total.
-
Eric Ertman
- Member
- Posts: 20
- Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2002 3:03 am
Makes some sense, but I see no alternative than for Germany to have fought on. Had they surrendered earlier it would have meant that all movements of troops would cease the moment the capitulation was signed. Had germany capitulated between the winter months of 44-45 some three and a half million soldiers on the eastern front,which was still a long way from the Anglo-American front in the west would have fallen into the hands of the Russians. Even in the mild month of May on the Western front , the allies found it impossible adequately to provide for all the german prisoners, with the result that a large number of them died. I can not begin to imagine what the fate of some 3.5 million Germans would have looked like... . The evacuation of the German minorities was also an inscentive for Doenitz to prolong the war.
Regards,
Eric
Regards,
Eric
I can only agree, it´s only within recent years the scale of the german fligtht from ancient german territories in the east is brought to our attention, I read about it , in Der Spiegel I think it was, this summer.
At a cemetary not far from where I live in Copenhagen there´s a graveyard for German refugees who came to Denmark from East Prussia in 1945.If you study the dates af birth and death closely you will notice that the majority of the deceased are children 3-4 months old, a tragedy.
At a cemetary not far from where I live in Copenhagen there´s a graveyard for German refugees who came to Denmark from East Prussia in 1945.If you study the dates af birth and death closely you will notice that the majority of the deceased are children 3-4 months old, a tragedy.
-
Eric Ertman
- Member
- Posts: 20
- Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2002 3:03 am
I find this a very upsetting issue and feel it is a great shame that the younger generation and actually quite a number of the older generation do not realize the horrors that took place east of the Oder between '45-'48. It is a chapter few care to hear about. BTW being that you are presumably a Dane, may I ask about an article I read in a leading Norwegian newspaper a good while back. I believe it was a review of a book written by a Dane in which claims are made that hundreds or thousands of children died from treatable diseases due to the refusal of Danish doctors treating them (take no offence, I was born in Denmark...). Are you familiar with this case?
Eric
"Let no man denigrate the fighting men of this last war. To do so is to besmirch the honor of those who gave their lives in the execution of their duty".
Eric
"Let no man denigrate the fighting men of this last war. To do so is to besmirch the honor of those who gave their lives in the execution of their duty".
I´m not familliar with the case, but I doubt it was "hundreds of thousans" as "only" 250.000 german refugees passed through Denmark 1945-49.It seems most of them were given only the most basic medical care, shelter and food, which ment that in some cases seriously ill or starved people were left to die, danes had little love for germans at this time - perhaps to make up for a bad consciense about the more friendly attitude of many danes in the early war years (when Germany was victorious)
-
Eric Ertman
- Member
- Posts: 20
- Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2002 3:03 am
Sorry 
, I read that wrong about hundreds and thousans, anyway children with German fathers were treated equally bad here in Denmark, and the mothers usually had their hair cut off in the first days of liberation as a sign of shame, but most of the politicians who did the REAL collaboration with the Nazi´s were re-elected, that´s how it goes...
, I read that wrong about hundreds and thousans, anyway children with German fathers were treated equally bad here in Denmark, and the mothers usually had their hair cut off in the first days of liberation as a sign of shame, but most of the politicians who did the REAL collaboration with the Nazi´s were re-elected, that´s how it goes...