Relations between Wehrmacht and Waffen SS soldiers in battle

[Warager]

3. The lack of education of the SS-Officers didn't prevent the propaganda from reporting about their unbelievable deeds, as you can notice so well that some still belive it was an "elite". It NEVER was in the militarical way but in the IDEOLOGICAL(from NAzi point of view).

Some SS divisions where considerated elite even by the wehrmacht officers.As General Eberhard von Mackensen wrote : " Every division wishes it had the Leibstandarte as its neighbour, as much during the attack as the defence. Its inner discipline, its cool daredevilry, its cheerful enterprise, its unshakeable firmness in a crisis ... its exemplary toughness, its camaraderie (which deserves special praise), all these are outstanding and cannot be surpassed it is a genuine ELITE formation "

[HaEn]

The Officers of the Wehrmacht generally disobeyed the SS.
There were several reasons for this:
1. The Majority of Wehrmacht Officers didn't accept any militarical structures (also SA)beside the official Wehrmacht and view them as paramilitairs. If you read books about the founding of SA and SS you'll often find that they were established to unsolder the Wehrmacht by a 100% NSDAP-loyal SS/SA(As Rhöm wanted the SA). Besides this is one reason why the SS was declined as criminal organisation after WW-II.
2. The personal that was chosen for SS-positions often was taken for ideological reasons with a high grade of corruption. The performance and qualification was secondary, what was not acceptable to.
3. The lack of education of the SS-Officers didn't prevent the propaganda from reporting about their unbelievable deeds, as you can notice so well that some still belive it was an "elite". It NEVER was in the militarical way but in the IDEOLOGICAL(from NAzi point of view).
4. In the later years of war the corruption lead to that the SS was precedented with supplies.
5. SS-Officers often supportes Hitlers strategic ideas(who had ANY militarical education) and made it hard for the Wehrmacht to establish useful plans.
6. SS-Officers were introduced to monitor Wehrmacht-Officers after the Stauffenberg-asassination.

Wow, Pigelsteiner; From whence came that piece of wisdom ?
If I were you I would read real history, rather than the "feel good" stuff that is peddled nowadays.
The Waffen SS was an integral part of the "Deutsche Wehrmacht", and orders from ANY superiors were followed as in all armies. Meaning Heer- Luftwaffe- Kriegsmarine- and auxcillary forces would obey orders given by superiors, even when they were Waffen SS.
Also "the lack of education" statement is questionable. Which education ? Kadett Schule ?
Waffen SS officers were selected from the ranks, and next sent to a "Führerschule", what now would be a "Military Academy".
There were a few exeptions, as also within the rest of the Wehrmacht, where one could get a field promotion.
Most other Wehrmacht units were pretty damn happy when we were their next door neighbor, and covering their flanks.
Just had to get this off my chest.
HN

[Reader3000]

Äh, Waffen-SS officers had not to have made their Highschool diploma (Abitur), Heer officers had to have it. And the kind of stuff taught on the Junkerschule was not the same than on Highschool. Most early Waffen-SS officers had their Highschool diploma though. Like Gerd Bremer for example, or Gustav Knittel. Others - or most - did not have. Like Kurt Meyer (did not went to Führerschule, because there was non in 1934. He was "drilled" in Jüterbog and then was already Untersturmführer because he was police man before and in the Allgemeine SS) or many many others. So this could be meant with lack of education in the common sense.
Of course, the guys with Abitur (at least in peacetimes) were also sent to Junkerschule for being taught the military stuff for becoming SS-Führer (no matter where they went after that course. They were to be sent to SD, Allgemeine SS, police and Waffen-SS units. All got the same "education" on the Junkerschule - in peacetimes.)

The Kriegs-Junker-Lehrgänge (courses for future SS-Führer in the war) are a different cup of tea. My 2 cents.

[Pichelsteiner]

The Waffen SS was an integral part of the "Deutsche Wehrmacht", and orders from ANY superiors were followed as in all armies.
HN

This is false. Watch this flip-chart of the SS-structure. It's true that the "Verfügungs-Division" was assignet to the Heer.
But also the Waffen-SS was autonomous and only subordinated on the tactical and operative level, in all other relations it was committet to the SS-Structure.
Already in the Poland-campaign SS-Obergruppenführer Paul Hausser complained that his Troops were split up by the wehrmacht and not used in unity. A measure of the Wehrmacht to weaken the SS-influence.
for good reasons because the first problems raised fast. E.g. the conflict about the SS-settlement-policy, like about the "Prätorianergarde der Bauern".

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/d ... _Reich.PNG

Meaning Heer- Luftwaffe- Kriegsmarine- and auxcillary forces would obey orders given by superiors, even when they were Waffen SS.

But the wehrmacht took commands by the OKH. The SS had also to take commands by Himmler and his staff.
But it's true that there were far more conflicts between "Police"-SS and Wehrmacht, than Waffen-SS and Wehrmacht wich had a more concrete position in the chain of command.

Also "the lack of education" statement is questionable. Which education ? Kadett Schule ?
Waffen SS officers were selected from the ranks, and next sent to a "Führerschule", what now would be a "Military Academy".

The SS had several own schools(first2, later 4 Junkerschulen for Officers), additionnally their personal-policy was of ideological and rassistic nature. This is no proceeding to get the "best" men. To become officer the NSDAP-engagement and SA-status could weigh more than skills.
Finally not even the SS believed in its own criterias, in 1944 only 50% of the members were "Reichsdeutsche".
Additionnaly it has to be mentioned that the unusual high losses of the Waffen-SS in the early years of war rooted in the fact that they had nearly no Officers of the General-Staff-quality, what ment a serious lack of operative understanding. This fact has never been controverted before. Their high losses of Officers due to the concept of "leading from the front" didn't imrpove the quality either.

Also it has to be mentioned that the leader of the SS "Himmler" himself:
- was declined to service in the WW-I navy in WW-I for physical reasons.
- had to cancel his education as a Infanterie-officer on the level "Fahnenjunker".
- was never used at the front in WW-I.
- was declined to serve for the Reichswehr
This is the "education" the SS-leaders first row were made of. It's also no secret that the experienced and educated SS-Officers like Hausser(who also founded the SS-Junkerschulen) denied several times to execute commands of the SS-HQ himself.

Note: So before you critisise further, i'd recommend that you read the reasons why the allies declined SS as criminal and the Wehrmacht not, and why the SS was declined as paramilitairs and not militairs. Or found a paramilitaric Organisation in the US and experience how "happy" the US-Army will be about it.

[Qvist]

Hello Pichelsteiner

The Officers of the Wehrmacht generally disobeyed the SS.

I wonder, is there a language issue here? Do you mean that in situations where SS officers were in a position to issue a command to a Wehrmacht officer, the latter normally, usually, in most cases refused to carry out the order? If so, you are making a generalisation which you would find it exceedingly hard to source...

There were several reasons for this:
1. The Majority of Wehrmacht Officers didn't accept any militarical structures (also SA)beside the official Wehrmacht and view them as paramilitairs. If you read books about the founding of SA and SS you'll often find that they were established to unsolder the Wehrmacht by a 100% NSDAP-loyal SS/SA(As Rhöm wanted the SA). Besides this is one reason why the SS was declined as criminal organisation after WW-II.

This is okay as a general description of the basic Heer attitude to the SS during the thirties, but it does ignore that the perception of the W-SS underwent changes as the organisation acquired a certain battlefield reputation. I don't think any WH officer would think of the W-SS as "paramilitaries" in 1943.

3. The lack of education of the SS-Officers didn't prevent the propaganda from reporting about their unbelievable deeds, as you can notice so well that some still belive it was an "elite". It NEVER was in the militarical way but in the IDEOLOGICAL(from NAzi point of view).

A valid point, to an extent. But also, one should not fall into the the usual trap of de-mythologisation - namely to automatically assume that because something has been propagandised, the truth is neccessarily the opposite of the propaganda. It is clear enough IMO that a part of the foundation for the W-SS' reputation during the later war years was also the well-documented good performance (contrary to the expectations of most officers) of several W-SS divisions from the Balkans campaign and onwards.

4. In the later years of war the corruption lead to that the SS was precedented with supplies.

This has been discussed many times, and the problem is that it is difficult to find any actual traces of this frequently alleged priority.

5. SS-Officers often supportes Hitlers strategic ideas(who had ANY militarical education) and made it hard for the Wehrmacht to establish useful plans.

This is not a very good point. Firstly, it was very rare that any W-SS officers were involved in the discussion of Hitlers strategic plans at all. Secondly, to the extent Hitlers idead found support, that support neccessarily came from te Ewehrmacht officers who constituted the staffs surrounding him. Thirdly, there are also examples of W-SS officers disobeyeing direct Fuhrer orders.

6. SS-Officers were introduced to monitor Wehrmacht-Officers after the Stauffenberg-asassination.

Well, this was with scarcely 9 months left to go on the war (and I think the political officers were in fact not SS, though I may be wrong here). It can hardly have been a very influential factor in the general relations between the two services in a conflict that took place 80% before this time.

In brief - you need to moderate some of your points, AFAICS. Things are not as clear-cut as you assume.

cheers

[Pichelsteiner]

I wonder, is there a language issue here?

Yes I ment disobeye in the meaning of disfavour. I also took generally to show that there were Officers who had an pro-SS attitude. But I wanted to dwell that there were some elementary conflicts between wehrmacht and SS even besides the noble reasons of the resistance. It's important to say that teh background is a highly militarised(already under the emperor) Germany in which militarical service was proudly mentioned in applications and soldiers were used to go out in their uniforms. E.g. realize how Hindenburg is joking about "the bohemian private" Hitler, still believing that Hitler would never manage anything while he in fact already gave the power to him. This was not a rare attitide in the wehrmacht, but in fact no official document touches this, also it explains the outbursts of fury by Hitler. You'll find several utterances by H., jelling about the arrogant wehrmacht-officers who "think they knew something only because they were some years on militair academy".

This is okay as a general description of the basic Heer attitude to the SS during the thirties, but it does ignore that the perception of the W-SS underwent changes as the organisation acquired a certain battlefield reputation. I don't think any WH officer would think of the W-SS as "paramilitaries" in 1943.

Well I would say that an Officer thinking "loud" in such a concrete way would have diappeared very fast. But the Wehrmacht idea of an absolute inpolitical institution was opposite to the SS. Remember the NSDAP-members-soldiers who sould have been judged and who were protected by Oberst Beck. The heads who developed this concept could barely agree with the SS-system.

A valid point, to an extent. But also, one should not fall into the the usual trap of de-mythologisation - namely to automatically assume that because something has been propagandised, the truth is neccessarily the opposite of the propaganda. It is clear enough IMO that a part of the foundation for the W-SS' reputation during the later war years was also the well-documented good performance (contrary to the expectations of most officers) of several W-SS divisions from the Balkans campaign and onwards.

Well you're right that there were militarical successes on the Waffen-SS side and that some units were highly respected by the allies. But this doesn't make it a round about Elite. This statement is false because the SS units were too different in equipment and personal to talk about "the successes of the Waffen-SS". Also i want to mention that high losses in the own troop never were, and aren't today militarical or operative aims. The statements that the Waffen-SS was of high quality or admired because it could take high losses is the typical cynicism of NS-propaganda. They made disability combined with cruelty a virtue.
Also the often high praised "fighting spirit and comradeship" has to be shown in the context. E.g. that you needed three things to become promoted to an officer:
1. Aric background and Nazi-attitude
2. 2 Years of service in the Waffen-SS
3. A "friend" in the SS-Officerships who suggested your promotion.
So with other words they praise "the corruption of the narrow minded".

This is not a very good point. Firstly, it was very rare that any W-SS officers were involved in the discussion of Hitlers strategic plans at all.

The problem lied in the interpretation of commands. A wehrmacht-officer exhausting the interpretation for good reasons could fast get in troubles by an ideological trained SS-Officer.
Why do you think to the Waffen-SS is so much more war-crimes assigned to than Wehrmacht? Sometimes both had nearly the same, or the same orders. But when the command was "defend from partisans" some SS-fanatics ment to have to burn down some villages(and also waffen-SS). You can't ignore this different share to the war-crimes burdon.
I think it's quite naive to believe Hitler wouldn't have (mis)used the Wehrmacht in the same way he did with the Waffen-SS.
The difference here IS only the different view of Wehrmacht-Officers.

. Thirdly, there are also examples of W-SS officers disobeyeing direct Fuhrer orders.

I mentioned this.

[Qvist]

Hello Pichelsteiner

Well I would say that an Officer thinking "loud" in such a concrete way would have diappeared very fast. But the Wehrmacht idea of an absolute inpolitical institution was opposite to the SS. Remember the NSDAP-members-soldiers who sould have been judged and who were protected by Oberst Beck. The heads who developed this concept could barely agree with the SS-system.

The problem with this is that you are speaking as if the Wehrmacht of, say, 1943 was identical to the small Reichswehr of the thirties - and while the latter upheld strict standards of apoliticalness, the former was by this time not a force characterised by such ideas. On the contrary, the rank and file of the Wehrmacht, as well as a large part of its officer corps, was becoming increasingly politicised, quite inevitably as a mass force in the service of a totalitarian regime with a firm grip on German society as a whole. Again, your idea, while not wrong, is just too simple.

Well you're right that there were militarical successes on the Waffen-SS side and that some units were highly respected by the allies. But this doesn't make it a round about Elite.

Of course not - nor have I claimed that it did. My point is that the reputation the Waffen-SS acquired among Germans in 1941-42 did not rest only on good marketing, but also on good combat performance by such units as LAH, DR and TK. Obviously, this had an effect on the attitude of Wehrmacht officers to the Waffen-SS, which is the point in discussion.

This statement is false because the SS units were too different in equipment and personal to talk about "the successes of the Waffen-SS".

No such generalisation has been made.

Also I want to mention that high losses in the own troop never were, and aren't today militarical or operative aims. The statements that the Waffen-SS was of high quality or admired because it could take high losses is the typical cynicism of NS-propaganda. They made disability combined with cruelty a virtue.

Well , again, I do not believe I have claimed this? And incidentally, the notion of high losses appears to be another SS myth - as far as I can make out, there's not anything very extraordinary one way or the other about them.

The problem lied in the interpretation of commands. A wehrmacht-officer exhausting the interpretation for good reasons could fast get in troubles by an ideological trained SS-Officer. Why do you think to the Waffen-SS is so much more war-crimes assigned to than Wehrmacht? Sometimes both had nearly the same, or the same orders. But when the command was "defend from partisans" some SS-fanatics ment to have to burn down some villages(and also waffen-SS). You can't ignore this different share to the war-crimes burdon.
I think it's quite naive to believe Hitler wouldn't have (mis)used the Wehrmacht in the same way he did with the Waffen-SS.
The difference here IS only the different view of Wehrmacht-Officers.

In your previous post, you were talking about disagreement with Hitlers "Strategic ideas", which is what my comments were directed towards. So what does any of the above have to do with that?


cheers

[Tom Houlihan]

Pichelsteiner, I respectfully recommend you formulate your opinions on something other than Wikipedia. That's not the most authoritative source one can find.

I would further recommend you read some of the recent memoirs by W-SS veterans. I think you might find that some of the things you are espousing here will be shown to be rather less than correct.

[Pichelsteiner]

Qvist:
Well your hint about the simplicity is true. But noone of us can create a whole image of the historical situation in a post.
So it's my contribution to the discussion and I doubt everyone knew. Assuming your writings I don't think that our opinions differ strongly.

would further recommend you read some of the recent memoirs by W-SS veterans. I think you might find that some of the things you are espousing here will be shown to be rather less than correct.

I have the advantage to know former SS-Veterans and/or their ancestors.
And your comment lacks of someting:arguments.
Besides i hope you don't mean those self-heroic books of some former SS-members who aren't even accepted among ex-SS-men or their families(at least those who didn't have to travel the ratline).

P.S.:
Generaloberst der Wehrmacht Johannes Blaskowitz: „Die Einstellung der Truppe zur SS und Polizei schwankt zwischen Abscheu und Hass. Jeder Soldat fühlt sich angewidert und abgestoßen durch diese Verbrechen, die in Polen begangen werden.“

Generaloberst of Wehrmacht Johannes Blaskowitz:"the attitude of the Wehrmacht towards SS and Police is dithering between abhorrence and hate. Every Soldier feels disgusted and rejected by the crimes which were committed in Poland."

(Part of a memoir sent to the Oberbefehlshaber des Heeres Walther von Brauchitsch closely after the surrender of Warsaw.)

[Andreas]

Two Off-topic posts were removed by me. Everybody, the topic is on the relation of Wehrmacht and Waffen-SS during the war, not on whether anyone got shafted after the war.

Thanks.

Andreas

[kevin1261]

Would be like the military today,we could fight between ourself's Marine vs Army vs Navy an so on,but have a outsider mess with any branch,and watch out were all coming at you at once........

[TISO]

Relations between soldiers of Heer and SS depended mostly on time and place. Generaly on the front there was more or less degree of respect and cameraderie among combat units (heer, waffen-SS), but this didn't apply on SS rear echalon units (einsatzgruppen, blocking detachments), that were viewed by most soldiers as band of murderers (most of solders knew what happened during antipartisan operations).

According to memoars one heer veteran (a mobilised Slovene: Pod Marijinim varstvom - Spomini Slovenca, nemškega vojaka (Žibert, A.) 1995 ):

During retreat in winter (with uniforms and boots in taters) they came upon one truck of supplies (uniforms, boots) of SS. SS men were trying to destroy truck and were pouring petrol on it. Heer officiers were trying to persuade them that thier men need those supplies, but SS men said that they will destroy them as they were ordered so. Officers failed and said to their men to deal with the SS men by themselves. Men drew wepons and asked SS men to leave the truck, they didn't budge and were consequently shot. He also remarked that he made the mistake by changing his old boots for new as new boots gave him blisters.

There were also some reports during late war when SS blocking detachments were hanging deserters (or retreatig soldiers) , that old hands were paying tooth for tooth and eye for eye.
From my memory as i can't find the magazine right now:
According to one navy man during battle of Berlin (he was attached to one of the ad-hoc formations on Olympic stadion).
After one tank was knocked out, crew retreated and was intercepted by SS blocking detachment. They were accused of desertion, crew commander and one NCO were hanged and rest of the crew was send to olympic stadion to his detachment. After some remeniscance of their commander (and battles around Harkov), crew dissapeared for an hour. Next day SS oficers were asking if someone knew anything about 4 SS men that were stabed during the night. According to him crewmembers just exchanged knowing smiles.

[Johnny_H]

It was my understanding that certain units were despised by not only Heer units but other Waffen SS units.
I remember reading a account where it cited that the "Totenkoph" were regarded as murderers and criminals.

Same with the Feldgendermerie units they were not liked all that much ethier, if I recall correctly.

[frcoplan]

I just finished reading a book TISO was quating above and unfortunately i do not have it by me at the moment, but it was an interesting insight into SS-regular troops relation, one of the reasons, i started looking around and found this topic. Apart from open confrontation described in TISOs post, where Wehrmacht soldiers shot SS which would not give them needed equipment (basically they had to run from advancing Soviets, barefooted, found the trucks with boots etc and SS refused to give it to them and wanted to burn them, which in the end resulted in regular troops killing most of the SS, getting the needed equipment only to be further damaged by it), there are also other cases, like SS being used to take the trenches after regular troops attacked and they would shoot any of the soldiers that would run back, a practice people normaly associate with Soviets, but there are several references to that in the mentioned book. It also gives an opinion that SS units prefered to stay back and push regular troops in combat and later take credits for what regular troops did etc.

[Sid Guttridge]

Hi Guys,

I would imagine that relations were usually fairly cordial and that Army units were delighted to see the senior W-SS divisions on their front, largely because they were motorized or armoured. I suspect the the presence of Freiwillige formations was less valued.

However, I would suggest that in one way the Reich-raised senior W-SS formations might have been viewed more favourably than the equivalent Army motorized or armoured division - their presence implied a political interest in the local front at the highest national level.

The only W-SS division of which I am aware Army units were definitely wary was the 5th Wiking Division on the Mius front in early 1942. When the Slovak Rapid Division was changing commanders, both men, Generals Malar and Turenec visited their immediate neighbours - 1st or 4th Mountain Division and the Wiking Division. In his diary, Turanec reported that General Eglseer, of the German mountain corps, confided his dissatisfaction with the Wiking's indiscipline in rear areas.

If any German Army men did have a jaundiced view of the W-SS it was probably of the "they-may-be-bastards-but-at-least-they're-our-bastards" variety.

Cheers,

Sid.