Why the Waffen-SS

[alycatz]

Secondly, the reason why the Waffen-SS receives far more threads than the far more important German Army is because so many naive people have bought into the propaganda and publishing myths around it. This we have already discussed at length here and elsewhere.

Hello sid,

Yes correct. Winners propaganda. 24/7 around the clock history channel.

There is no myths about waffen ss, they did exists and did change how modern combats were fought on the battlefield.

[Rob - wssob2]

Yes correct. Winners propaganda. 24/7 around the clock history channel.

I think alykatz is bringing up a salient point about "The Hitler Channel" and the titillation factor inherent in its endless WWII documentaries. (There is a great spoof on the channel at http://www.cracked.com/funny-5720-the-history-channel/)

However, alykatz, if you are getting you "facts" from the history channel, I think you have to realized that the History Channel is more about entertainment and selling ads.

There is no myths about waffen ss, they did exists and did change how modern combats were fought on the battlefield.

Give me an example of how they changed "modern combats"...

[dshaday]

Hi Sid

I have to comment on just the last part of your post. For for the sake of correctness than for the intention that you are trying to encourage.

Please note that nobody here has described the Waffen-SS as universally useless. What the sceptics want is for the Waffen-SS to be viewed with more analytical detachment ... Sid.

Two posts in this thread are along those very type of negative lines:

"The Waffen-SS held nothing in the end. They were about as tactically proficient as giving a redneck trailer park guns. Dangerous for sure but completely inept." (post #530 )

"And I am arguing that when you study the actual combat performance of Waffen-SS units, it varies - in other words, the performance was sub-par compared to regular army units. " (post #683 )

Dennis

[BillHermann]

Hi Sid

I have to comment on just the last part of your post. For for the sake of correctness than for the intention that you are trying to encourage.

Please note that nobody here has described the Waffen-SS as universally useless. What the sceptics want is for the Waffen-SS to be viewed with more analytical detachment ... Sid.

Two posts in this thread are along those very type of negative lines:

"The Waffen-SS held nothing in the end. They were about as tactically proficient as giving a redneck trailer park guns. Dangerous for sure but completely inept." (post #530 )

"And I am arguing that when you study the actual combat performance of Waffen-SS units, it varies - in other words, the performance was sub-par compared to regular army units. " (post #683 )

Dennis

Indeed these comments are negative and can be considered a bold generalization but so can the positive elite comments. The Waffen-SS was a big organization and not just the core frontline divisions that are often discussed. Much of the lesser groups are ignored by the individuals that state they were elite.

When you consider the conscripts, ragtag and penal units in the Waffen-SS and some of the behaviour by these units "mutinies, pillaging, drunk and disorderly" less than honourable "elite" behaviours one can make comments questioning blanket statements that they were the best. Even go further.

Frankly I do not understand the need to defend this organization with such emotion.

I would suggest you read a little more about the organization, not just the positive but the early performances, make up of the organization and sub units.

[BillHermann]

Secondly, the reason why the Waffen-SS receives far more threads than the far more important German Army is because so many naive people have bought into the propaganda and publishing myths around it. This we have already discussed at length here and elsewhere.

Hello sid,

Yes correct. Winners propaganda. 24/7 around the clock history channel.

There is no myths about waffen ss, they did exists and did change how modern combats were fought on the battlefield.

Please do tell us how they changed "modern combats"

Enlighten us.

[dshaday]

Hi Bill

Indeed these comments are negative and can be considered a bold generalization but so can the positive elite comments. The Waffen-SS was a big organization and not just the core frontline divisions that are often discussed. Much of the lesser groups are ignored by the individuals that state they were elite.

Very true. There were both elite and less than ordinary units in the Waffen SS (Just as I have always said).

Blanket "glory statements" about the whole Waffen SS are unrealistic.
So are blanket statements deriding the military contributions of the better/best divisions of the Waffen SS.

Frankly I do not understand the need to defend this organization with such emotion.

While I do not agree with the unbridled "enthusiasm" for the Waffen SS as described by poster alycatz for many obvious reasons, I am also amazed by the vigour shown to malign the whole Waffen SS in various threads. Sometimes it is corrected by posters, sometimes not. Some like to regularly favour all manner of negative tid-bits and spin/exaggeration. These are not always challenged. Sometimes I challenge that bias/generalisation.

I would suggest you read a little more about the organization, not just the positive but the early performances, make up of the organization and sub units.

I am quite aware of the early performances, make up of the organization and sub units of the Waffen SS. I have done some reading in my time. If I have posted an incorrect fact/statement, please feel free to correct me with facts. Otherwise if our interpretations differ, then mutual respect implies we should not "talk down" to other posters. I hope you get my drift.

Dennis

[j keenan]

I am quite aware of the early performances, make up of the organization and sub units of the Waffen SS. I have done some reading in my time. If I have posted an incorrect fact/statement, please feel free to correct me with facts. Otherwise if our interpretations differ, then mutual respect implies we should not "talk down" to other posters. I hope you get my drift.

Dennis

Most of your posts have been corrected

[BillHermann]

"Hoping to catch my drift " ?

That is not very polite and is talking down, so before you continue, think.

My comment had little to do with your factual understanding of the topic but your comment about negative comments towards the Waffen-SS.

I hope made myself clear.

Best regards,

Bill

[dshaday]

Hi j keenan

You commented about my posts re the Waffen SS.

Most of your posts have been corrected

Yes, my posts have been commented on. In my opinion, most have not been convincingly corrected/disproven. Some posters have had opposing opinions to mine - that is OK with me.

Dennis

[Annelie]

After all these pages it makes me wonder why none of our
serious researchers and credited authors on the subject of the Waffen-SS have yet to respond.
We have quite a few at the forum.

I would like to read one of their opinions on the subject.

[dshaday]

Hi Bill

"Hoping to catch my drift " ?

That is not very polite and is talking down, so before you continue, think.

My comment had little to do with your factual understanding of the topic but your comment about negative comments towards the Waffen-SS.

I hope made myself clear.

Best regards,

Bill

I am referring to your last paragraph, which is condescending and insulting.
You clearly referred to my factual understanding by advising me to read more books (knowledge on organisation, sub-units and performance). You were talking down to me, implying that your opinion is superior to mine because I have not read enough.

If you did not mean to be condescending, then you phrased things badly.

I play nice until prodded. I hope I have also made myself clear.

Dennis

[j keenan]

Hi Bill

"Hoping to catch my drift " ?

That is not very polite and is talking down, so before you continue, think.

My comment had little to do with your factual understanding of the topic but your comment about negative comments towards the Waffen-SS.

I hope made myself clear.

Best regards,

Bill

I am referring to your last paragraph, which is condescending and insulting.
You clearly referred to my factual understanding by advising me to read more books (knowledge on organisation, sub-units and performance). You were talking down to me, implying that your opinion is superior to mine because I have not read enough.

If you did not mean to be condescending, then you phrased things badly.

I play nice until prodded. I hope I have also made myself clear.

Dennis

You show very little understanding of the subject,as most of your post's descend into this pointless point scoring with out anything new been said on the subject.

[j keenan]

After all these pages it makes me wonder why none of our
serious researchers and credited authors on the subject of the Waffen-SS have yet to respond.
We have quite a few at the forum.

I would like to read one of their opinions on the subject.

Serious researcher ? Think Harro, Rob and Sid are up there with the best of them !!

[dshaday]

Hi

You show very little understanding of the subject,as most of your post's descend into this pointless point scoring with out anything new been said on the subject.

Not surprisingly, I disagree with this assessment.

Dennis

[BillHermann]

After all these pages it makes me wonder why none of our
serious researchers and credited authors on the subject of the Waffen-SS have yet to respond.
We have quite a few at the forum.

I would like to read one of their opinions on the subject.

Serious researcher ? Think Harro, Rob and Sid are up there with the best of them !!

Indeed, i was baffled by the comment above, well said, j keenan