• We will be taking the forum down for maintenance at [5:15 am CDT] - in 15 minutes. We should be down less than 1 hour.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The Dark Secret of America’s WWII German Death Camps

Alfons

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 13, 2008
Messages
3,300
Reaction score
244
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
The question to forum: who was more human to Germans in after-war Germany: Sowjets who probably raped 100,000 german girls or US - soldiers who verifiable killed by starvation, cold and inhuman conditions millions of Germans.

[h=2]At the end of World War II, the U.S. opened camps of its own, where perhaps a million German prisoners died in secret.[/h]
What has largely escaped the victors’ history books, however, is that another program of internment and mass murder was put together at the end of the war by Allied forces, who took in millions of German prisoners in the summer of 1945 and deliberately starved roughly one in four of them to death.
The story of the Rheinwiesenlager, or “Rhine Camps,” was then covered up and obfuscated by professional historians for decades after the war while the survivors grew old and the prisoner records were destroyed.

https://allthatsinteresting.com/rheinwiesenlager

rheinwiesenlager-guard.jpg
 
As early as 1943, at the Tehran Conference, Roosevelt and Stalin had famously toasted to the shooting of 50,000 German officers after the war.

Somehow I get the impression that the author is nuts.
 
Somehow I get the impression that the author is nuts.

Yes heres what really happened in that quote from the memoirs of Winston Churchill

Stalin was our host at dinner. The company was strictly limited – Stalin and Molotov, the President, Hopkins, Harriman, Clark Kerr, myself and Eden, and our interpreters. After the labours of the Conference, there was a good deal of gaiety, and many toasts were proposed.

Presently Elliott Roosevelt, who had flown out to join his father, appeared at the door, and somebody beckoned him to come in. He therefore took his seat at the table. He even intervened in the conversation, and has since given a highly coloured and extremely misleading account of what he heard.

Stalin, as Hopkins recounts, indulged in a great deal of “teasing” of me, which I did not at all resent until the Marshal entered in a genial manner upon a serious and even deadly aspect of the punishment to be inflicted upon the Germans.

The German General Staff, he said, must be liquidated. The whole force of Hitler’s mighty armies depended upon about fifty thousand officers and technicians. If these were rounded up and shot at the end of the war, German military strength would be extirpated.

On this I thought it right to say: “The British Parliament and public will never tolerate mass executions. Even if in war passion they allowed them to begin, they would turn violently against those responsible after the first butchery had taken place. The Soviets must be under no delusion on this point.”

Stalin however, perhaps only in mischief, pursued the subject. “Fifty thousand,” he said, “must be shot.” I was deeply angered. “I would rather,” I said, “be taken out into the garden here and now and be shot myself than sully my own and my country’s honour by such infamy.”

At this point the President intervened. He had a compromise to propose. Not fifty thousand should be shot, but only forty-nine thousand. By this he hoped, no doubt, to reduce the whole matter to ridicule. Eden also made signs and gestures intended to reassure me that it was all a joke.

But now Elliott Roosevelt rose in his place at the end of the table and made a speech, saying how cordially he agreed with Marshal Stalin’s plan and how sure he was that the United States Army would support it.

At this intrusion I got up and left the table, walking off into the next room, which was in semi-darkness. I had not been there a minute before hands were clapped upon my shoulders from behind, and there was Stalin, with Molotov at his side, both grinning broadly, and eagerly declaring that they were only playing, and that nothing of a serious character had entered their heads.

Stalin has a very captivating manner when he chooses to use it, and I never saw him do so to such an extent as at this moment. Although I was not then, and am not now, fully convinced that all was chaff and there was no serious intent lurking behind, I consented to return, and the rest of the evening passed pleasantly.
 
Yes heres what really happened in that quote from the memoirs of Winston Churchill

Crazy Churchill and his enormous hate against Germany was one of causes for WWII
He was a liar

Together with Morgentau he was one of those who wanted complete annihilate German folk

He approved one of the most terrible atrocities of the post WWII time

 
Last edited:
Alfons:

That the Western Allies created detainment camps in which former German soldiers, sailors, airmen and SS died is not in doubt. It happened and that is a matter of established fact in the West. What is in dispute is the scale of the death toll. James Bacques argued that between 800,000 and 1.2 million Germans died in camps run by Americans, British and French post-war authorities. Peer review of his research and arguments contained in his book, "Other Losses" found that he had grossly overstated his claims and had also tried to cast deaths caused by mismanagement and negligence as premeditated acts of killing on the part of the Western allies. It is true that many died but not the huge numbers which Bacques had argued for.

During the same period of time the Soviet Union was, with the explicit approval of the leaders of the Western allies, engaged in a truly massive programme of ethnic cleansing of Getman civilians from non-German lands in Eastern Europe. Between 11 and 14 million civilians of German ethnicity were forcibly removed from Eastern Europe and driven back west into Germany proper. There was no way that either ruined Germany nor the Western Allies could support such a wave of refugees and so widespread starvation and exposure both enroute and in Germany proper occurred. The deaths mounted and between 750,000 and 2,000,000 ethnic Germans died as a result of this massive programme of ethnic cleansing conducted by Soviet forces at all of the allies behests. One of the tools to drive these ethnic Germans (mostly women, children and males too old or too young for military service) out of the east was mass rape of women and that is why the behaviour is decried in the West as such a crime against humanity.

Post-war policy towards the Germans, both former military and civilians, was brutal and callous from both the Western Allies and the Soviets but in terms of the scale of death and suffering the Soviet actions exceeded Western crimes and mismanagement/negligence in scope and brutality. While generally discounted today, the deaths at the time were viewed as unavoidable and also as just consequences and justice for German militarism which had just killed about 60 million people between 1933 and 1945, the majority being Soviet solders and civilians and the Germans themselves. This vengeful mood passed in the West far more quickly than in the East, understandably given the far lower numbers of war dead, other casualties suffered and material destruction in the West. Plans like the vengeful Morgenthau plan were quickly abandoned and the very generous Marshall Plan was implemented to rebuild Europe and to try to give it some measure of long-term economic and political stability into which a culture of peace could be inculcated and entrenched.

So yes, the allies presided over policies which through mismanagement, negligence and design killed hundreds of thousands to millions of Germans in the post-war period and all allies share in the responsibility for those deaths and the attendent misery caused to survivors. The majority of these deaths can be attributed to Soviet actions, with the consent of the Western allies. But unlike in the East those policies were short-lived affairs and were soon reversed and replaced by more constructive and supportive policies in order to improve conditions in war-ravaged western Germany and in Western Europe, despite the crippling war-debt which most Western Allies found themselves in during the post-war period.

Cheers.
Evilroddy.
 
Yes heres what really happened in that quote from the memoirs of Winston Churchill

Should we truly trust Winnie's remembrances? This is the same man who ordered the deaths of millions of Indians by starvation out of convenience, stating "there are plenty more wogs."

The NYT was at the bastion of protecting the American war images during and after the war. No American journalist or media would dare the opposite.

Bacque's work is filled with hyperbole, lies, propaganda, misinformation and elements of truth. He wasn't crazy, he had in many respects a more realistic viewpoint.

No nation, no political force, emerged from this war unsullied, without skeletons in the closet. Arguing over who was more evil is a waste of time.

The truth lies somewhere in between and we will never know the details for sure.

My uncles who survived combat during the war, after Hitler's announced death and the end of the war, were stationed in Germany and wherever Americans occupied territory. At night, with pistol and knives in hand, they took up the sports of torturing and killing German males, regardless of age. And they would arm camp survivors to do the same. This was common. It was never reported on the American home front, where prosperity lurked around the corner and the war waited to be forgotten. My father never said word, he'd quietly smile as he sharpened his knife on a small whetstone. They didn't rape. They had plenty of chocolate bars, cigarettes, extra k rations, to buy what they wanted.

No one wins wars by being nice guys. And no can shut off the hate, and hormones built to fight that war with a treaty or pretense.
 
Should we truly trust Winnie's remembrances? This is the same man who ordered the deaths of millions of Indians by starvation out of convenience, stating "there are plenty more wogs."

The NYT was at the bastion of protecting the American war images during and after the war. No American journalist or media would dare the opposite.

Bacque's work is filled with hyperbole, lies, propaganda, misinformation and elements of truth. He wasn't crazy, he had in many respects a more realistic viewpoint.

No nation, no political force, emerged from this war unsullied, without skeletons in the closet. Arguing over who was more evil is a waste of time.

The truth lies somewhere in between and we will never know the details for sure.

My uncles who survived combat during the war, after Hitler's announced death and the end of the war, were stationed in Germany and wherever Americans occupied territory. At night, with pistol and knives in hand, they took up the sports of torturing and killing German males, regardless of age. And they would arm camp survivors to do the same. This was common. It was never reported on the American home front, where prosperity lurked around the corner and the war waited to be forgotten. My father never said word, he'd quietly smile as he sharpened his knife on a small whetstone. They didn't rape. They had plenty of chocolate bars, cigarettes, extra k rations, to buy what they wanted.

No one wins wars by being nice guys. And no can shut off the hate, and hormones built to fight that war with a treaty or pretense.

So in other words you are saying your uncles were serial killers and war criminals? I hope you know that your uncles were psychopaths.

Can you find a verifiable source of these killings?

Bacque is a proven liar, he is no better than holocaust denialist. You cannot believe anything he says. Why should we trust a proven liar who was not there over Winston Churchill?
 
Last edited:
So in other words you are saying your uncles were serial killers and war criminals? I hope you know that your uncles were psychopaths.

Can you find a verifiable source of these killings?

Bacque is a proven liar, he is no better than holocaust denialist. You cannot believe anything he says. Why should we trust a proven liar who was not there over Winston Churchill?

No, my uncles were not psychopaths. No easy out for you. They were regular American boys, with 3 years of experience fighting Nazis who shot, exploded, tortured and murdered the men they fought alongside, boys who became men who wanted and took vengeance, while you sat on the huge pimply, stinking unwashed derriere of yours and accused those who did the job while you hid. The victors determine who are war criminals, not a coward like you.

Please do tell about your war experiences. Don't tell me what you think you would do. Speak only about what you have done.

Winston Churchill was a psychopathic war criminal who ordered the murder of millions by starvation thanks to his racial bigotry. I won't bother to bring up Gallipoli.

How do I know you aren't a psychopathic murder who has murdered and raped little boys. Prove you are not with verifiable sources. I have no reason to trust you without verifiable documented proofs.

Civilization is a very thin veneer.
 
Somehow I get the impression that the author is nuts.

Actually, the original Allied plan for the Germans once the latter lost the war was to just line up their leaders and shoot them. Nuremberg and war crimes trials only came about later on.
 
No, my uncles were not psychopaths. No easy out for you. They were regular American boys, with 3 years of experience fighting Nazis who shot, exploded, tortured and murdered the men they fought alongside, boys who became men who wanted and took vengeance, while you sat on the huge pimply, stinking unwashed derriere of yours and accused those who did the job while you hid. The victors determine who are war criminals, not a coward like you.

Please do tell about your war experiences. Don't tell me what you think you would do. Speak only about what you have done.

Winston Churchill was a psychopathic war criminal who ordered the murder of millions by starvation thanks to his racial bigotry. I won't bother to bring up Gallipoli.

How do I know you aren't a psychopathic murder who has murdered and raped little boys. Prove you are not with verifiable sources. I have no reason to trust you without verifiable documented proofs.

Civilization is a very thin veneer.

Really? Because those are the acts of a psychopath whether you are German or American. Whether you like it not butchering civilians in cold blood is a war crime, especially after the war has ended, that is the very definition. How can you justify that?

Churchill had no reason to lie and he was actually there.
 
Last edited:
Really? Because those are the acts of a psychopath whether you are German or American. Whether you like it not butchering civilians in cold blood is a war crime, especially after the war has ended, that is the very definition. How can you justify that?

Churchill had no reason to lie and he was actually there.


Where is your proof you are not a psychopath?

I don't have to justify anything. Least of all to you.

You really know nothing. Neither German nor American militaries had any definitions of psychopaths, or their sometimes synonym sociopaths. Even today, psychiatrists argue the true meaning of "psychopath," but you lay claim to knowing that meaning. Prove it so and I will be so impressed. :rofl:rofl And here's a little kicker, being a psychopath has nothing intrinsically to do with killing or murder, tho killers and murderers may be acting out of psychopathic mind set. Psychiatrists recommend hiring CEO's and CFO's who are psychopathic, because they are task focused, their id and ego resistant to emotional decision making. The US military, all militaries seek the same from soldiers, a separation from emotions which can negatively effect the job needed accomplished.

"Butchering civilians" after a war is over, is not a war crime. You might not like it, you might not approve, but no court in the US has convicted anyone of murder who killed former enemies after a war had ended for war crimes. No war, no war crime. Maybe Murder, maybe not, maybe manslaughter, maybe not, maybe PTSD or "shell shock" leading to temporary insanity. Yes, and no prison sentences. Of the 78 American soldiers executed or convicted of murders of Germans during the occupation during the first two years, not one of the perps had participated in combat during the war, and each capital crime was committed simultaneously with other non-war related crimes, usually rape while intoxicated.

Get your timelines straight before opening that huge mouth of misinformation. Your propaganda means nothing.

Where was Churchill? Where was he when he ordered the deaths of more than 2 million Indians in India? Where was he when he denied assistance to Jews and Roma in concentrations camps when his position was clearly stated, "a favor in ridding Europe of undesirables, Jews, Gypsies, the dimwitted, the feeble minded, those we must support because they cannot support themselves?" Trust that elitist white power bigoted piece of crap, not on my life or even yours.
 
No, my uncles were not psychopaths. No easy out for you. They were regular American boys, with 3 years of experience fighting Nazis who shot, exploded, tortured and murdered the men they fought alongside, boys who became men who wanted and took vengeance, while you sat on the huge pimply, stinking unwashed derriere of yours and accused those who did the job while you hid. The victors determine who are war criminals, not a coward like you.

Please do tell about your war experiences. Don't tell me what you think you would do. Speak only about what you have done.

Winston Churchill was a psychopathic war criminal who ordered the murder of millions by starvation thanks to his racial bigotry. I won't bother to bring up Gallipoli.

How do I know you aren't a psychopathic murder who has murdered and raped little boys. Prove you are not with verifiable sources. I have no reason to trust you without verifiable documented proofs.

Civilization is a very thin veneer.

Actually, there's this thing called the "Geneva Convention" which makes it pretty ****ing clear that randomly torturing and murdering civilians is a war crime.

You literally just admitted they targeted(if anything you say is actually true, which, since we only have your word for it, is questionable) people indiscriminately. They apparently didn't go hunting for SS officers. They picked out, say Johann Schmuck, age 50, as he walked down the street--- who might have done some nasty things......and far more likely, whose only "crime" was putting on a uniform instead of taking a prison sentence or bullet.

Interestingly enough, millions of Americans have engaged in combat without committing war crimes.

Your argument is downright ludicrous..... much like the claims of both the author, and the OP, who conveniently ignores the gulags all those Germans got shoveled into when he starts whining about how awfully he thinks the US acted.
 
No, my uncles were not psychopaths. No easy out for you. They were regular American boys, with 3 years of experience fighting Nazis who shot, exploded, tortured and murdered the men they fought alongside, boys who became men who wanted and took vengeance, while you sat on the huge pimply, stinking unwashed derriere of yours and accused those who did the job while you hid. The victors determine who are war criminals, not a coward like you.

Please do tell about your war experiences. Don't tell me what you think you would do. Speak only about what you have done.

Winston Churchill was a psychopathic war criminal who ordered the murder of millions by starvation thanks to his racial bigotry. I won't bother to bring up Gallipoli.

How do I know you aren't a psychopathic murder who has murdered and raped little boys. Prove you are not with verifiable sources. I have no reason to trust you without verifiable documented proofs.

Civilization is a very thin veneer.

We're tired of hearing about your uncles. It doesn't make you one of some kind of aristocracy, being related to someone who fought in WW2. Everyone in North America and Europe has relatives that fought in WW2. See if you can discuss WW2 without mentioning your uncles, okay?
 
Actually, there's this thing called the "Geneva Convention" which makes it pretty ****ing clear that randomly torturing and murdering civilians is a war crime.

You literally just admitted they targeted(if anything you say is actually true, which, since we only have your word for it, is questionable) people indiscriminately. They apparently didn't go hunting for SS officers. They picked out, say Johann Schmuck, age 50, as he walked down the street--- who might have done some nasty things......and far more likely, whose only "crime" was putting on a uniform instead of taking a prison sentence or bullet.

Interestingly enough, millions of Americans have engaged in combat without committing war crimes.

Your argument is downright ludicrous..... much like the claims of both the author, and the OP, who conveniently ignores the gulags all those Germans got shoveled into when he starts whining about how awfully he thinks the US acted.

"Johann Schmuck" was as guilty as any SS officer. He enabled that SS officer.

I didn't admit anything. I bragged.

BS hyperbole. Less than a million Americans saw combat during the war. You assume because some old men wrote some laws that any soldier during combat gave a crap. Again, these men committed no war crimes, the war was over. Merely because what happened was purposefully omitted from the victor's history books, you have no knowledge, one way or another of what any men did during war and afterwards,

Any German who disappeared into the gulags, got what was deserved.
 
We're tired of hearing about your uncles. It doesn't make you one of some kind of aristocracy, being related to someone who fought in WW2. Everyone in North America and Europe has relatives that fought in WW2. See if you can discuss WW2 without mentioning your uncles, okay?

No. It isn't up to you to tell me what to think or what to write. I don't give an iota of concern for anything you request or demand. You don't like what I write, don't read me. No one is twisting your arm behind your back.

Not okay.
 
"Johann Schmuck" was as guilty as any SS officer. He enabled that SS officer.

I didn't admit anything. I bragged.

BS hyperbole. Less than a million Americans saw combat during the war. You assume because some old men wrote some laws that any soldier during combat gave a crap. Again, these men committed no war crimes, the war was over. Merely because what happened was purposefully omitted from the victor's history books, you have no knowledge, one way or another of what any men did during war and afterwards,

Any German who disappeared into the gulags, got what was deserved.

By that same “logic”, every American is “guilty” for the Confederacy. You making weak excuses to justify war crimes does not absolve those who committed them.

You bragging about your relatives supposedly committing war crimes says a lot about you.

Oh really? So now World War Two is the only war where Americans saw combat?

Yes, actually, the vast majority of combat soldiers clearly did give a ****, because incidents like your psychotic relatives carving up random civilians were not common.

So in other words instead of it being a war crime it’s “just” murder......and that somehow is supposed to make it okay?

No, in reality sadisticly murdering random civilians was not as common as you claim. You making excuses for war crimes is no surprise, but you smearing the name of numerous good men by trying to legitimize such crimes is sickening.

But hey, on the plus side we’ve confirmed that you think war crimes are just a-ok.
 
We're tired of hearing about your uncles. It doesn't make you one of some kind of aristocracy, being related to someone who fought in WW2. Everyone in North America and Europe has relatives that fought in WW2. See if you can discuss WW2 without mentioning your uncles, okay?

No, see, his uncles were supposedly psychotic and supposedly commited war crimes, so that makes him “special”
 
complete bull****

my dad is was born 31, my mum 38 in different regions of Westphalia - the american soldiers where very poular, because they came with food and chocolade for the kids - in the east at best they got beaten. And actually I can understand that because the russians suffered much more under the war
 
What's about the war crime committed in 1945 against refugees from the East?
It were brutally murdered more as 0.8m innocent women with kids in Dresden.
The were no troops in Dresden.
Why presstitute MSM are strongly keeping silence about this abhorrent murder?


 
complete bull****

my dad is was born 31, my mum 38 in different regions of Westphalia - the american soldiers where very poular, because they came with food and chocolade for the kids - in the east at best they got beaten. And actually I can understand that because the russians suffered much more under the war
Under the war isn’t the reason Russians suffered. Under Ioseph is why they suffered........ that and the malarkey about a popular revolt.
 
Back
Top Bottom