Stalingrad 23 Aug 1942: Tactics or Spoliation?

Discussions on the Holocaust and 20th Century War Crimes. Note that Holocaust denial is not allowed. Hosted by David Thompson.
Post Reply
tonyh
Member
Posts: 2911
Joined: 19 Mar 2002, 13:59
Location: Dublin, Ireland

-

#61

Post by tonyh » 14 Mar 2005, 23:28

Curioso
So you are defining the Battle of Britain, the ongoing Blitz on London, the "Baedeker" raids as "tactical level"? I am sure you know better.
Sure, the Luftwaffe carried out, over the course of the war, a lot of direct-support missions (and BTW, it is misleading to compare the Luftwaffe with Bomber Command - the equivalent of the Luftwaffe is the RAF) aimed at helping the German ground troops. This does not mean that the Luftwaffe did not carry out non-direct-support missions, nor that the RAF did not carry out direct-support missions. Both did both, and both did what was needed.
Hmmmm....you didn't really read my earlier post carefully did you. I said quite clearly that on occasion that the Luftwaffe departed from its strict doctinal application, most notably over London, Lenningrad to an extent and over Moscow. But the vast majority of ops were carried out according to the tried and tested tactical doctrine. The mediums of the Luftwaffe were just unsuitable to strategic level bombing as applied by the Allies.

Also, perhaps it can be construed as misleading to compare the Luftwaffe to Bomber Command, that is not my intention. It is however ligitimate to compare them in the context of the present discussion, ie 'city bombing'. A strict comparison if you wish, would be Bomber Command to the mediums of the Kampfgeschwader, but seeing as a huge number of bombing attacks over Stalingrad were carried out by fiebig's Stukageschwader, this would limit the number of aircraft that we can discuss in the conversation even further.

Curioso
You "suspect" that the Allies justified the Dresden bombing with the support to an Allied advance "after the deed was done"? My advice to you is that you could and indeed should study the documents, rather than relying on your own "suspects". Mr. Thompson recently posted to this very forum an article titled "Dresden 1945 - Just Another Raid?". It quotes from the original documents of the time, which, mind you, have dates _prior_ to the bombing.
And it remains my suspicion. The record as far as I am aware says nothing about the Russians asking for Dresden to be obliterated. I am well aware that Dresden was 'just another raid' as I have pointed out in my previous post. It simply followed the strategic doctrines of the Allied air forces attacking the City. If the RAF were truely interested in carrying out an attack "b. By air action on communications (to) hinder the enemy from carrying out the shifting of his troops to the East from the Western Front, from Norway, and from Italy (In particular, to paralyze the junctions of Berlin and Leipzig)" Then they could simply have targeted the three rail bridges that lead into the City in a limited tactical strike, instead of frying the entire centre of the town. The Allies had complete control of the airspace and had carried out limit tactical strikes before, notably in France. As it stands, Dresden continued to be a rail hub after the attack, up until the Soviets actually took the City.

Curioso
The quotes above, coupled with your quote from Irving, shows that if many people have problems with Irving, there are rock-solid reasons.
Thats a wonderful statement, but it means nothing at all. The quote actually comes from Saundby, not Irving. If you have a problem with it, thats up to you.

At the end of the day, while the RAF may ostensibly claim that they were targeting "rail hubs" and "communication", they were really carrying out "Just another raid" according to Directive 22.

Curioso
the moderator shifted the attention to "spoliation", which I will define, for ease of reference, as "destruction with no good reason". And, in this thread, to the supposed spoliation of Stalingrad.
Will the title is not a very good one, sorry David as there weren't any attacks carried out purely for the purpose of Spoilation by any Nation. There were always other motives. Even the RAF's directive 22 stated very clearly the main strategic purpose for Bomber Commands night campaign and targeting civilians is not necessarilly "spoilation". But its the title and there it is.

Curioso
As to the rest, I do take notice that you have no evidence whatsoever that the Luftwaffe did not engage in general destruction at Stalingrad. According to this forum's rules, then, your claim is unsupported and can then be disregarded. We have thus cleared that you cannot claim that the Luftwaffe only attacked limited, tactical, military-industrial targets in Stalingrad, because you have no proof of that. Of course, if in the future you will be able to dig up any evidence, I'll be curious to look at it. Thank you.
Hmmmmm....well then you have CLEARLY demonstrated that you have either neglected to read or completely misunderstood my previous post, which contained many quotes from Haywards "Stopped at Stalingrad" regarding the tactical targets defined by the Luftwaffe in and around Stalingrad.

I suggest that you read it again and then read the book in question to help you get a clearer picture as your statment leaves me somewhat foggy.

Also Curioso, YOU haven't 'cleared' anything at all. You have simply taken up a contrary position. However a reasonable deduction based on the study of the contexts involved is thus...

1. 40.000 civilians did not die in the heavy attack of the 23rd.

2. The Luftwaffe did not carry out attacks in the strategic sense al la the RAF over Dresden.

3. The Luftwaffe did not set out to attack civilian or purely civilian areas.

4. The Luftwaffe simply did not possess either the time or the number of aircraft required for such a mission type and engaging in such over Stalingrad would have been real folly. On the 20th of August Luftflotte had 58% of its strength on hand, the same as July.

I have not seen one single shred of evidence to convinve me otherwise yet and I am willing to accept a reasoned argument.

Again, I'll leave with a very simple echo...

the choice between attacking the residential area or the Red Army HQ is no choice at all. One will aid the advance and the other will do nothing for the troops on the ground.

Can you guess which one it is? ;)

The rest of your post I can take or leave and I agree with some of its content. However the...
"So if I drop tons and tons of bombs on a factory in Stalingrad, held and used by the enemy to produce tanks, and kill a few hundreds of civilians in it, I'm not destroying it with no good reason. If I drop the bombs all over Stalingrad, the same holds true, because the enemy can make military use of every building, every street, every workshop, every warehouse, every utility. Regardless of the numbers of victims, regardless of the huge means employed."
...is a mistake. Given the limitations the Luftwaffe faced in the latter half of 1942 and the military objectives asked of it, "dropping bombs all over Stalingrad" and thus leaving the defined tactical objectives undamaged would have been absolutely pointless. It would make great Allied propaganda, but wouldn't help the average landser advancing into the defended City one iota. No... tactical targets had to be clearly defined and hit, but again that doesn't mean that civilian structures, especially the old town's wooden areas in the South and buildings near the administrative Red Square sector, would have escaped damage.

Such a hope is impossible even today.

But if the Luftwaffe were simply intrested in engaging in the destruction of Stalingrad, then they would have carried out night attacks from the airfields equiped for such actions, al la the Blitz or over Moscow.

The attack on teh 23rd was undoubtedly hard a certainly did leave "...houses, schools and factories wildly burning." But this still doesn't suggest that that Luftwaffe departed from its tactical doctrine. I have seen nothing either to suggest that the 40.000 (which started this discussion between myself and Walter two Months ago) is reality either, there is too much against it, but some people wish to be the truth.

Hayward is correct in saying that "estimating fatalities is difficult because of a paucity of realible statistical data".

That some KG units may have attacked residental areas is possible, but doubtful, given the urgency of the tactical situation. That they sustained damage (from a variety of violent methods) is a given. But what is not in doubt at all is that 40.000 civilians didn't die from Luftwaffe bombing on the 23rd or August 1942.

Curioso
On the contrary, bombing Belgrade is spoliation, for the reasons explained above.
Well...Eric Mombeek would disagree with you. In his Jagdwaffe series he talks about the Luftwaffe's bombing of Belgrade.

"By the end of the first day, the main targets in Belgrade had been destroyed. In his post-war memoirs, British Prime Minister Winston Churchill described the German raids as terror attacks and claimed a greatly inflated figure of 17.000 civilians had been killed by the Luftwaffe bombs, but when Generaloberst Alexander Lohr, the former commanding officer of Luftflotte IV, came before a Titoist court in 1946, the prosecution mentioned a figure of 1,500 Yugoslavs killed. It is believed, however, that the main targets in Blegrade were purely military and as the stukas carried out pinpoint attacks and the twin engined bombers carried a relatively insignificant load, it is certain that the figure of 1,500 was an exaggeration. However the Communist government wanted to conduct its own version of the Nuremburg trials and, convisted of atrocities, Alexander Lohr was hanged on the 26th Feburary 1947"

It seems Churchill had a penchant for inflating numbers killed during Luftwaffe bombing attacks. But on can't deny the great capital to be made out of claiming that 35.000 people died in Rotterdam and 17.000 people died in Belgrade. Perhaps too Churchill was seeking to minimise the post war shock of the revalation of the numbers of dead German's due to the RAF's bombing policy, by claiming that the "German's did it too".

Tony

User avatar
Andy H
Forum Staff
Posts: 15326
Joined: 12 Mar 2002, 21:51
Location: UK and USA

#62

Post by Andy H » 15 Mar 2005, 21:43

Hi Tony

I'm confused by the following statements that you have used:
Hayward is correct in saying that "estimating fatalities is difficult because of a paucity of realible statistical data".
&
But what is not in doubt at all is that 40.000 civilians didn't die from Luftwaffe bombing on the 23rd or August 1942.
How can you be so firm about denying that 40,000 didn't die when, Hayward who I presume has done more in depth research (than either of us), can't?

According to Edwin P Hoyt in "The Battle for Stalingrad-199 Days", Richthofen told his officers that upon the day/night of the 23rd they had made the equivelent of 2000 sorties. He was eminently satisfied with the destruction he had wrought.This should help bring the Russians to their knees.

He also quotes (but gives no Ref)-As one German soldier wrote home "The whole city is on fire;on the Fuhrer's orders our LW has sent it up in flames. That's what the Russians need, to stop them resisting"

Hoyt gives a figure of 600a/c making the attack and notes that most unloaded their bombs over residential area's

Andy H


tonyh
Member
Posts: 2911
Joined: 19 Mar 2002, 13:59
Location: Dublin, Ireland

#63

Post by tonyh » 16 Mar 2005, 20:31

Hi Andy.

I state that because it isn't borne out by what I have studied regarding the Luftwaffe or Stalingrad. 40.000 in one day is just a ridiculous figure, given what the Luftwaffe had on hand at the time, the strategic and tactical urgency and the mulititude of tactial targets in and around the City. The Luftwaffe just didn't have enough level bombers on hand to do the damage needed to kill 40.000 people in a day. Its a nonsensical figure. The British only managed it at Hamburg and possibly Dresden using far more level bombers carrying a far far heavier load. The Luftwaffes medium twins could come close to the load a Lancaster etc had.
How can you be so firm about denying that 40,000 didn't die when, Hayward who I presume has done more in depth research (than either of us), can't?
Well, actually he does, he states that
Recent popular accounts have advanced a figure of around 40,000 (20), although this seems extravagant when compared with the death tolls in German cities hit by similar bomb tonnages.
Hayward doesn't place much faith in the number and quite simply I have yet to see any reliable source to back up the claim. Frankly the number, like the equally absurd 35.000 at Rotterdam and the 17.000 at Belgrade, is used to try and justify arguments for the RAF bombing campaign aganst cities.

I haven't read Hoyt's book, but from the quotes given it doesn't seem to be mucth use regarding Luftwaffe operations over the City.

Tony

User avatar
Andy H
Forum Staff
Posts: 15326
Joined: 12 Mar 2002, 21:51
Location: UK and USA

#64

Post by Andy H » 16 Mar 2005, 21:45

Hi Tony

I would tend to agree from what I've read that the 40k fig seems unresonable for a single day, though I see that figure being reached within a month.

Andy H

User avatar
WalterS
Member
Posts: 1497
Joined: 22 Feb 2004, 21:54
Location: Arlington, TX

#65

Post by WalterS » 17 Mar 2005, 08:04

The 40,000 figure cited by Beevor and others refers to Russian civilian deaths during the first week of the August 42 bombings. Dr Hayward postulates that as many as 24,600 might have been killed during the first day's bombings, on 23 AUG. I think both figures are reasonable, and they are not mutually exclusive.

We do know that the raids of 23-25 AUG were among the most intense and destructive yet mounted by the Luftwaffe. Dr Hayward uses terms such as "immense raid," "hellish attack" and "terror attack" to describe these raids. He also quotes Soviet General Chuikov:
The huge city, stretching for nearly thirty-five miles along the Volga, was enveloped in flames. Everything was blazing, collapsing. Death and disaster descended on thousands of families.
Hayward, p.188

Descriptions from historians such as Beevor and Craig clearly show that the entire city was mercilessly hammered by the Luftwaffe during these raids.

Craig writes of the scene on the morning of the 24th:
The downtown section was almost flat, with nearly a hundred blocks still engulfed by raging fires.
Craig, "Enemy at the Gates," p. 66

We also know that Sixth Army was nowhere near Stalingrad on 23 August, having just crossed the Don river that morning, some 45 miles to the west. According to Dr Hayward, the German advance on Stalingrad stalled for several days. German forces didn't approach Stalingrad's suburbs until the 26th, at which time they were rebuffed by a Soviet counterattack. The point here being that the German aerial bombardment of Stalingrad on 23-25 August was not in direct support of German ground forces, but an attack against the city itself.

Then, there's General von Richthofen's quote "The city is destroyed, and without any further worthwhile targets." Of course, the Luftwaffe would attack Stalingrad many times in September and October, but then they were attacking particular strongpoints that the defenders had created amid the rubble of the city. On 23 Aug the Luftwaffe was attacking the city, its inhabitants, and any Soviet military targets that happened to be around.

We also know that General von Richthofen had had considerable experience in the aerial bombardment of cities. He had commanded the Condor Legion at Guernica, and the VIII Air Corps which attacked Belgrade in April 1941. More recently, he had attacked Voronezh in support of Operation Blue.

Dr Hayward:
On 5 July, for example, Richthofen unleashed Fliegerkorps VIII's bomber and dive-bomber forces against the city [Voronezh], leaving its citizens battling numerous fires and choking on the dense clouds of smoke swirling through the broken buildings.
Hayward p.140

This operation, unlike the Stalingrad attack of 23 August, was in support of ground operations, the point being that General von Richthofen was no stranger to bombing cities.

When General von Richthofen wrote "The city is destroyed," I believe he knew exactly what he was talking about.

Fugazi
Member
Posts: 75
Joined: 29 Sep 2004, 14:44
Location: Kuwait

#66

Post by Fugazi » 17 Mar 2005, 08:56

WalterS:
I think both figures are reasonable, and they are not mutually exclusive.
However, we haven't seen anything yet to indicate the figures aren't based on speculation, and figures of 135,000 "seemed reasonable" for Dresden a few decades back.

tonyh
Member
Posts: 2911
Joined: 19 Mar 2002, 13:59
Location: Dublin, Ireland

#67

Post by tonyh » 21 Mar 2005, 19:05

Andy H wrote:Hi Tony

I would tend to agree from what I've read that the 40k fig seems unresonable for a single day, though I see that figure being reached within a month.

Andy H
Well that certainly depends on what was being bombed. From what I have read the Luftwaffe confined its attacks to clearly defined tactical targets. For instance the Factory area was THE prime target for a very large number of raids. The main reason for this being that the Stalingrad zavod was producing nearly 50% of the T-34 output. A sound and VERY logical target. The factory areas were continually hit right up until they were taken, albeit temporarilly, by the Germans.

The over running of the zavod in Kharkov, which the second highest T-34 manufacturer and its subsequent evacuation to the Uralmash zavod caused considerable hardship to the Soviet tank arm. So its understandable why the Germans had their eyes on this highly prized target.

I still think the the 40.000 figure is baloney. Maybe I was a bit hasty in saying that a month of bombing couldn't produce such an effect, but certainly for a day or even a week (Beevor's unsourced claim).

Again, while I think that haywards account is the definitve version dealing purely with the Luftwaffe ops over the City, I still take issue with his 'possibility' extrapolation of 24,600. This is only arrived at by comparing a similar RAF raid on Darmstadt. But as I said earlier, the raids and equipment were carried out in a very different manner. My post earlier clarifies this.

Because some so desparately WANT the figure to be 40.000 doesn't make it so.

Neither does the likes of

"On 23 Aug the Luftwaffe was attacking the city, its inhabitants, and any Soviet military targets that happened to be around."

which is clearly bunkum.

Tony

thom
Member
Posts: 251
Joined: 12 Mar 2006, 06:34
Location: Canada

Re: Stalingrad 23 Aug 1942: Tactics or Spoliation?

#68

Post by thom » 29 Mar 2008, 18:33

[quote="Peter H"]
Total
1017 killed,1281 wounded.

These figures come from a report of the Stalingrad defense committee about the results of the air raids of August 24, 25, and 26. The report, dated August 27, 1942, was published in the document collection "Stalingrad 1942-1943", p. 395.

User avatar
bf109 emil
Member
Posts: 3627
Joined: 25 Mar 2008, 22:20
Location: Youngstown Alberta Canada

Re: Stalingrad 23 Aug 1942: Tactics or Spoliation?

#69

Post by bf109 emil » 01 Apr 2008, 16:37

PAK wrote:In Germany it's mainly the british bombardements which are considered "unjustified".
The american bombing aimed at trainstations, production facilities etc..., where the british also aimed for the city core, which might have happend just to kill civilians and spread terror, this is considered unjust.

So the fire bombing of Tokyo and 65 other cities was no different then the British night bombing,just bigger and more devastating as the 100,000 deaths from the Tokyo raid whaere 21/2 times those of Stalingrad. the difference being, the Japanese raids where Aimed directly at burning the cores or districts of a city, where as Stalingrad used majority of HE bombs on factories, rail-stations, troops ships, unlike the fire-storm planned and created by the 9th airforce.

A lot of whining has been done about the raid on Dresden, so what, it was a fair target, Germany was still at war, the city was not only a rail-hub, but a link for other industries, allied armies couldn't walk through the city, as it didn't do what other towns or small cities had the beuromister(mayor) defy Hitlers orders, and allow allied troops to pass without resistance, and tactical, or strategic bombing, most ground troops, airmen, couldn't give a damn whether a bridge should be targets, but ma and pa Nazi's bread shop should heavens forbid be damaged..

Even if the last few yards of Stalingrad, and the Russians clinging to the cliff edge of the Volga had been killed, any form of bridge to cross the Volga, even if a bridge-head from artilery was established, would it haveallowed troops and supplies sufficient for eastward march, before the whole soviet air-force would have been ordered to destroy, remove, cayusing any German troops the means to retreat, or escape nul and void?? Gehlen warned Hitler there where over a million troops gathering to the north, and von Manstein told Hitler what the outcome, would be, with poor or lightly armoured allied held flanks...

David Thompson
Forum Staff
Posts: 23722
Joined: 20 Jul 2002, 20:52
Location: USA

Re: Stalingrad 23 Aug 1942: Tactics or Spoliation?

#70

Post by David Thompson » 01 Apr 2008, 18:27

bf109 emil -- Please stay on topic and source your factual claims for our readers, who come here for verifiable information on the subject being discussed.

H&WC Section Rules
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=53962

thom
Member
Posts: 251
Joined: 12 Mar 2006, 06:34
Location: Canada

Re: Stalingrad 23 Aug 1942: Tactics or Spoliation?

#71

Post by thom » 09 Aug 2009, 22:19

Sorry to revive this thread. But for those of you who are interested in contemporary Soviet sources on this subject - 1,816 inhabitants of Stalingrad were buried between August 22-29, 1942, and 2,698 were wounded (Pavlova, Zasekrechennaia tragediia, p. 186). For comparison, 1,017 killed and 1,281 wounded inhabitants of Stalingrad as a result of the air raids from August 24-26 were reported by the Stalingrad defense committee (see above).

It looks indeed like the figure of 40,000 deaths is post-war propaganda.

User avatar
Oleg Grigoryev
Member
Posts: 5051
Joined: 12 Mar 2002, 21:06
Location: Russia

Re: Stalingrad 23 Aug 1942: Tactics or Spoliation?

#72

Post by Oleg Grigoryev » 09 Aug 2009, 22:26

thom wrote:Sorry to revive this thread. But for those of you who are interested in contemporary Soviet sources on this subject - 1,816 inhabitants of Stalingrad were buried between August 22-29, 1942, and 2,698 were wounded (Pavlova, Zasekrechennaia tragediia, p. 186). For comparison, 1,017 killed and 1,281 wounded inhabitants of Stalingrad as a result of the air raids from August 24-26 were reported by the Stalingrad defense committee (see above).

It looks indeed like the figure of 40,000 deaths is post-war propaganda.
well number of buried hardly equal to the number of dead - considering the general situation in the city there was not exactly whole lot of windows of opportunity and human resources available to conduct proper search and rescue effort and establish the actual number with good degree of certainty. Consider 9-11 - is the number of people whose remains were recovered and identified equals to the number of people reported missing? Stalingrad was a large urban area overflown with refugees - not all that different from Dresden.

User avatar
bf109 emil
Member
Posts: 3627
Joined: 25 Mar 2008, 22:20
Location: Youngstown Alberta Canada

Re: Stalingrad 23 Aug 1942: Tactics or Spoliation?

#73

Post by bf109 emil » 09 Aug 2009, 22:36

David Thompson wrote:bf109 emil -- Please stay on topic and source your factual claims for our readers, who come here for verifiable information on the subject being discussed.

H&WC Section Rules
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=53962
from the Gehlen, Reinhard : Service: The Memoirs of General Reinhard Gehlen
Gehlen warned Hitler there where over a million troops gathering to the north
likewise Gehlens work"Major General Reinhard Gehlen headed the Foreign Armies East section of the Abwehr, directed towards the Soviet Union.

Gehlen so infuriated Hitler with his precise predictions of Soviet victories that der Führer ordered him sent to an insane asylum. Instead, he fled to the Bavarian Alps.

but to stay on topic and asked by WalterS
In Germany, are the Luftwaffe bombing raids on Stalingrad in August 1942, which killed upwards of 40,000 Russian civilians, also considered "unjustified?"
I would have to say NO they where not unjustified nor a crime and resulted from this The German summer offensive proper began on June 28th. Paulus's 6th Army had reached the Don River at Voronezh by the 5th of July. The city was bypassed and the virtually undefended Don crossings were captured. The advance continued to progress rapidly as Russian forces retreated eastwards. By the 25th, the Chir River was reached and the Russian 62nd Army was encountered. 6th Army became embroiled in heavy fighting to force the enemy out of the Don Bend. The Army was forced to halt during the first week in August in order for elements of 4th Panzer Army to catch up from the south. Paulus also contracted dysentery but continued to perform his duties efficiently.
The 19th of August saw the advance towards Stalingrad resume. Paulus had initiated an attack to envelop the two Russian Armies standing before the city, the 62nd and 64th. The forces of 4th Panzer Army became bogged down in heavy fighting around Abganerovo, south of the city and Paulus's advance was continually hampered by fuel shortages, allowing the bulk of the Russian Armies to escape into the city.
http://www.theeasternfront.co.uk/Comman ... paulus.htm
Which clearly shows that prior to bombing the Russian army escaped and took refuge within the city, the target of German advancement...IMHO if bombing this city to rid of Soviet Soldiers now known to be there was/is illegal, so to must be the towns of Caen and others in France which where bombed to rid German soldiers for an allied advance (along the same lines of thinking)...Stalingrad was a legitimate target, known to now house and aid know military forces and thus a bombing or softening up of a target prior to advance was done by all sides during WW2

thom
Member
Posts: 251
Joined: 12 Mar 2006, 06:34
Location: Canada

Re: Stalingrad 23 Aug 1942: Tactics or Spoliation?

#74

Post by thom » 10 Aug 2009, 22:05

well number of buried hardly equal to the number of dead - considering the general situation in the city there was not exactly whole lot of windows of opportunity and human resources available to conduct proper search and rescue effort and establish the actual number with good degree of certainty.
But 2,000 vs. 40,000? And when were all these remaining bodies collected, in the chaos of the next 2-3 weeks when 315,000 people fled the city, or by the Germans who entered the city on September 12th? I have never heard of this, and tens of thousands of non-buried bodies decomposing in the summer heat would certainly have been a considerable threat for the 6th army.

User avatar
Oleg Grigoryev
Member
Posts: 5051
Joined: 12 Mar 2002, 21:06
Location: Russia

Re: Stalingrad 23 Aug 1942: Tactics or Spoliation?

#75

Post by Oleg Grigoryev » 10 Aug 2009, 23:41

Who said they were collected? Honestly, most people got better things to do under artillery and aerial bombardment (like trying to hide and survive) than running around, collecting the dead - if someone tried to do that he would probably join the ranks of those who needed to be counted in short order. Some were buried under the rubble, some burned, some got blown to bits, some may have gone down to the Volga bottom during evacuation , some might have been buried and never reported . 40000 is obviously an estimate rounded to the nearest thousand or maybe 10 thousand. The fact that the city was filled with stench of rotten flesh is mentioned in many accounts - it does not say so directly they - some poetic allegory is utilized "smell of death" or what have you. There was certainly no lack of unburied bodies - some in uniforms some without.

Post Reply

Return to “Holocaust & 20th Century War Crimes”