One Million German POWs killed by US/UK?

[alsaco]

Germanica, you are right, revisionnism is the tool of historians.

But revisionnism adds new facts from discoveries, new ways of considering a situation, new documents stating things. It brings progress toward truth, but works only step by step.

What some people call revisionism is however negationnism. In this case the objective is to prove a concept to support an ideology. The negationnist does not wish to establish the truth, he discusses a fact at the light of prefabricated objectives.
The method is to deny one factor, and conclude that the main fact has to be negated because the factor can be false.

To refute a massacre, you do not deny the killing, but accumulate presomptions allowing to say that the killers did not kill. The graves are there, but the corpses are not killed people, but sick deaths.
Or the absence of graveyards shows that the victims have ressuscited, and the einsatzgruppen were just looters, arrived in an empty village.

Negationnists have to prove, historians have to find.
Negationnists demonstrate and affirm, historians revise, correct, complete to approach a possible truth

And in fact, historians cannot span the entire historical spectrum. They must accept to many details. Only negationnist can affirm an ideological system to explain history, past and future in the same time.

[Sokol]

A little more than 1,000,000 dead Soviets in captivity according to your source, Caldric? Most documents regarding this issue suggest a number more akin to 2,000,000-2,500,000 in the early war alone.

Regards,
Sokol

[David Thompson]

Sokol -- As I read Caldric's post, the figures referred only to German POWs held captive by other countries, and the million figure referred to one estimate of German POW deaths in Soviet custody rather than to deaths of Soviet POWs.

[Galicia]

Germanica,

But when Revisionism is taken to the extreame to the point where Historical fact is now denied by certain historians, one wonders what people will deny. For example:

I am currently in a fight with Oleg as to the historical accuracy of the Ukrainian Famine, which did occour from 1930-1932 as prooved by irrefutable journalistic accounts, eyewitness testimony, and official Soviet biographies. There are unlimited corpses, testimonies, etc. but unless he sees a hardcopy document, like a good historian would demand, he will refuse to believe my accounts.

The danger is when the documents, sites, testimonies, etc. are all there, but people now refuse to believe regardless of how much information is presented to them.

I am all for the revision of historical events, PROVIDED there is sufficient historical evidence for a revision to be neccesary. If there is not, then the current story stays. i.e. the Einsatzgruppen's purpose was only to loot and steal from the local populace.

David,

Where did the bodies go? Undoubtedly, there were war crimes on the allied side. I personally think the bodies were perhaps burnt in some cases, but mostly buried in mass shallow graves, or that the Germans in the local village burried them in the local graveyards. Just because there is no rank before their name doesn't mean they weren't soldiers when they died. I think it is a silly suggestion that over 1,000,000 German POWs were murdered by the Western Allies. Perhaps over 25,000-50,000 died as a result of Allied carelessness after the war, maybe more from starvation, etc.

I agree that there was over 250,000 killed by the Soviets however. Stalingrad's captives were less than 6,000, (although I may be wrong in that number), when released from an original number of 147,200 Enlisted Men, 2,500 Officers and 21 Generals.

[David Thompson]

Galicia -- There's no doubt but that soldiers serving with the allies committed war crimes. Every army has criminals in it. The more interesting issue is whether there was a criminal policy, or whether the war crimes were just "individual excesses." Sometimes too, people are hopelessly human and just blunder. Human error can have horrible and tragic consequences. There is a difference between a criminal act and a mistake, but a lot of people don't want to look at the issue that closely (since they're not the ones who are being accused).

I have no reason to doubt that German POWs died in allied camps, and that this was sometimes due to neglect or ill-treatment. As you can see from Caldric's post, the numbers are at issue, but a figure of one million is more than ten times greater than any official estimate.

No one can know everything about these WWII historical issues, so this forum has the distinction of being a clearinghouse for information and reasonable discussion among folks who are interested in the subject. The more information that's accessible here, the better-informed the reader will become.

[Caldric]

A little more than 1,000,000 dead Soviets in captivity according to your source, Caldric? Most documents regarding this issue suggest a number more akin to 2,000,000-2,500,000 in the early war alone.

Regards,
Sokol

Sokol as David pointed out those numbers are for POW's only, there is to pieces of work there.

[Xanthro]

Jewish eat in war time?
Luca

Just what is that supposed to mean?

You trying to say Jews were well feed?

Xanthro

[Xanthro]

Where did the bodies go? Undoubtedly, there were war crimes on the allied side. I personally think the bodies were perhaps burnt in some cases, but mostly buried in mass shallow graves, or that the Germans in the local village burried them in the local graveyards. Just because there is no rank before their name doesn't mean they weren't soldiers when they died. I think it is a silly suggestion that over 1,000,000 German POWs were murdered by the Western Allies. Perhaps over 25,000-50,000 died as a result of Allied carelessness after the war, maybe more from starvation, etc.

Really, massive numbers of POW bodies burned without a hint of evidence.

50,000 shallow graves that remain buried 50 years later.

Your accusation is idiotic and infantile.

That many German POWs didnt' die in English or US custody, from all causes.

Which is fairly amazing when you consider the state many of them were in when they surrendered. Wounded, hungary, often infestated and carrying disease. It's a wonder 100,000s didn't die. It's only a testament to US logistical capability, and tenacity on the part of the German soldiers and civilians that prevented massive numbers of deaths.

Xanthro

[David Thompson]

Xanthro -- Personal insults are not permitted here.

[Galicia]

Xanthro,

Trying to present a neutral side on this board is quite challenging. One one side people are trying to say that the Holocaust happened, and the other, who are also using my "Idiotic and Infantile" accusations, who are saying that it occured in a "different manner."

Your rather rude remarks do nothing to further a historical conversation, but to degrade this board to yet another forum ruined by such shallow-mindedness.

My point, Allied carelessness, which I believe is what ticked you off in the first place, was that after the war had FINISHED

after the war

There was starvation, loss of jobs, poor healthcare, etc. You cannot deny that. 25,000-50,000 from starvation, poor healthcare resulting from a war is NOTHING. After the Americans left Vietnam God knows how many died, (and before you start up on how anti-American, pro-Nazi, etc. I am, when my father attended school here he was drafted by the American Government). NO WHERE, have I suggested that they were in captivity.

Note:

after the war

Read carefully.

after the war

Got it?

after the war

Hope so.

[Caldric]

My point, Allied carelessness, which I believe is what ticked you off in the first place, was that after the war had FINISHED

after the war

There was starvation, loss of jobs, poor healthcare, etc. You cannot deny that. 25,000-50,000 from starvation, poor healthcare resulting from a war is NOTHING. After the Americans left Vietnam God knows how many died, (and before you start up on how anti-American, pro-Nazi, etc. I am, when my father attended school here he was drafted by the American Government). NO WHERE, have I suggested that they were in captivity.

Hardly can anyone blame the state of health for Europeans post WWII on the allies... The fact remains abundantly clear to me that without German invasion of most of Europe there would not be any of these issues to start with. The cause of starvation in Europe is from the war, a war Germany began. You cannot hold the US or UK responsible for food shortage. It is a miracle there was not much more starvation and death from sickness then there was, most of this due to the USA and even USSR. Yes the USSR, as much as I loath Stalin and Communism, sent in food in large quantity to help fight off large scale starvation. Many Red Army soldiers would complain that the Germans ate better then they did.

[Xanthro]

Xanthro -- Personal insults are not permitted here.

And the personal insult in question would be?

Xanthro

[Xanthro]

Trying to present a neutral side on this board is quite challenging. One one side people are trying to say that the Holocaust happened, and the other, who are also using my "Idiotic and Infantile" accusations, who are saying that it occured in a "different manner."

First, the people claiming that the Holocaust occured in a "different manner" are hardly arguing that there are bodies that were burned or buried. They argue the opposite.

Prehaps you confused the argumentative stances and meant to compare the evidence for the murder of Jews to your accusations of the deaths of 50,000 POWs.

Assuming that is true, it's an insult to the overwhelming evidence of the Holocaust, which includes mutually supporting evidence of a wide variety.

Compared to your evidence of what amounts to nothing.

Your rather rude remarks do nothing to further a historical conversation, but to degrade this board to yet another forum ruined by such shallow-mindedness.

Pointless unsupported slander does nothing to futher historical conversation.

25,000 to 50,000 deaths doesn't go unnoticed, yet the supporting evidence you supplied was, nothing.

My point, Allied carelessness, which I believe is what ticked you off in the first place, was that after the war had FINISHED

What point? You have an accusation that you haven't even tried to support.

A point would be, Eisenhower changed the status of POWs to allow for lesser amount of food to be given, this likely caused an increased number of deaths. You can find the document in question at XXX.

That would be a point, it would be supported. The context of it could be debated.

There was starvation, loss of jobs, poor healthcare, etc. You cannot deny that. 25,000-50,000 from starvation, poor healthcare resulting from a war is NOTHING. After the Americans left Vietnam God knows how many died, (and before you start up on how anti-American, pro-Nazi, etc. I am, when my father attended school here he was drafted by the American Government). NO WHERE, have I suggested that they were in captivity.

You didn't suggest it, you posted it.

I think it is a silly suggestion that over 1,000,000 German POWs were murdered by the Western Allies. Perhaps over 25,000-50,000 died as a result of Allied carelessness after the war, maybe more from starvation, etc.

There is no grammatical nor textual meaning to that other than the 25,000 - 50,000 were POW is the hands of Western Allies. Then you go on to say it could even be more.

No, it couldn't as it doesn't even come close to that amount.

While it may be possible that tens of thousands of civilians died, you would still be greatly in error because you blamed the deaths on a slanderous basis of Allied carelessness.

What carelessness? Your personal say so? The Allies sent as much food as could be sent, they cut their own rations, they stopped the spread of wartime disease.

Feeding a people isn't about growing food as much as it is distributing it. German rail systems, bridges, roads and most infrastructor was destroyed, some by the order of Hitler himself. Fuel needs to be shipped to transport food, that fuel itself must be transported. Food must be transported, as well as waste.

It's simply impossible to do all this overnight, as much food was sent and distributed as could humanly be done, that is not carelessness.

All this shipping of food happened.

Quote:
after the war

Read carefully.

Quote:
after the war

Got it?

Quote:
after the war

Hope so.

Really really got it now? AFTER THE WAR.

BTW, how does your father being drafted by the Americans make you somehow immune to being either anti-American or pro-Nazi?

Xanthro

[David Thompson]

Xanthro -- You asked, after being warned that personal insults were not permitted here: "And the personal insult in question would be?"

The personal insults were contained in the statement directed at Galicia:

"Your accusation is idiotic and infantile."

Idiotic and infantile are attributes of a person defective in intelligence and behavior. Your statement was calculated to insult and to offend. You've been warned about offensive remarks before. I will not quibble with you about the forum rules. Be civil or be gone.

[Luca]

Jewish eat in war time?
Luca

Just what is that supposed to mean?

You trying to say Jews were well feed?

Xanthro

Dear Xanthro,
No, i no want say that Jews prisoners were well feed.
Was simple question for Caldric that write : "Most of those that died was due to shortage of food."
In concrete i want know if exist some difference between a prisoner dead in captivity cause incredible bad life situations of captivity and a prisoner dead for bullet in the nek.
Appare that definition of "Murder" for Caldric cant be used for the first typ of dead prisoner and, sincerly, i no agree.
Best Regards
Luca