Why the Waffen-SS

[praetorianavis]

As usual does not mean" as usual in the Falaise", for Heaven's sake. It means as SS usually do.

[praetorianavis]

He was addressing specifically the annihilation of the Falaise pocket and in that context, yes they - and the trapped Heer, Luftwaffe, KM, and others personnel were all pretty much annihilated.

As usual does not mean "as usual in the Falaise", for Heaven's sake. It means as SS usually do. And this is how legends are born. Figuratively, if you prefer.

[histan]

In the context that Eisenhower used it, the term "die-hard" is interpreted by someone for whom English is their first language as meaning:
"someone who is unwilling to change or give up their ideas or ways of behaving, even when there are good reasons to do so"
It is not a compliment.

It is a metaphor that when used in a military context is capable of being, incorrectly, interpreted as having its original meaning.

Regards

John

[praetorianavis]

by someone for whom English is their first language
...

It is not a compliment.

Where did I say this was a compliment?

Fanatic, badass and evil are not compliments either.

You miserably miss the point. Either you did not read the last few pages of the thread, or you use a childishly devious argumentation. Or you are intellectually challenged.

[histan]

There is no need to resort to personal insults - it is against the rules of the forum. Please treat people with respect.

I was pointing this out to readers of this forum for whom English is not their first language that in this context - unlike say the context of the Die Hard movies - it is not a compliment.

Actually, in some contexts "Badass" is a compliment:
"someone or something that you admire or find impressive"

As is "Wicked"

Regards

John

[praetorianavis]

I was pointing this out to readers of this forum for whom English is not their first language that in this context - unlike say the context of the Die Hard movies -

This is cheap patronizing. You make things worse, this is a slippery slope. Please treat people with respect.

it is not a compliment.

Of course this is not a compliment, but why don't you read the context? With all due respect.

[histan]

It is not patronizing. German is not my first language and when reading German documents I often have to have the context and meaning of a particular word explained. If you look in the "Translation Help" threads you will find many examples where the meaning of a German word is explained in the context of its use.

Regards

John

[Richard Anderson]

Care to read my post above. I explicitly quoted him of talking about diehard SS units, you can find it on page 118:
„Field Marshal Busch, commanding the Hamburg area, was stated to be ant-Nazi and willing to surrender, but unable to do so until the Western Allies reached the Baltic and cut him off from the possibility of the arrival of DIE HARD SS formations.“

Whoops, sorry, I didn't search "The Surrender".

He uses "die hard" as a generally accepted, natural attribute of SS formations, even, or especially at the very end of the war, because everybody and his uncle has either experienced it, or heard a number of stories about it. It was a generalization, like "red haired Scots". They had this image, and this is what this post is about.

Yeah...on 2 May 1945.

[Richard Anderson]

As usual does not mean "as usual in the Falaise", for Heaven's sake. It means as SS usually do. And this is how legends are born. Figuratively, if you prefer.

Um, no, sorry, I suggest you read the paragraph and page again in context.

BTW, is there a reason you felt you needed to post that twice? There is both and edit and a quote function on this board.

[Richard Anderson]

I was pointing this out to readers of this forum for whom English is not their first language that in this context - unlike say the context of the Die Hard movies -

This is cheap patronizing. You make things worse, this is a slippery slope. Please treat people with respect.

It isn't "cheap patronizing" or even just "patronizing". It is the rules of the forum, as I suspect you will soon learn. You might want to start responding to what is actually said, rather than what you image was said.

[Sid Guttridge]

Hi Cult Icon,

The problem is not that the three senior W-SS divisions were not decisive during the turning point campaign of Stalingrad over the winter of 1942-43.

The problem is that they weren't even present on any front anywhere for the better part of six months!

Cheers,

Sid.

[Sid Guttridge]

Hi praetorianavis,

You write, "The Waffen-SS cultivated a rough, tough, gung-ho esprit de corps and its core units fought fanatically."

"Cultivated" speaks of self promotion. We don't have to accept them blindly by the own estimates.

So did most of the Army's panzerwaffe (largely with conscripts, not volunteers), the paratroops (who were part of the Luftwaffe), etc., have tough, gung-ho, esprit de corps. There was no magic Waffen-SS fairy dust that uniquely produced good soldiers. Indeed, as the only W-SS divisions in the running to be called "good" are the armoured ones, I would suggest that it was their association with the panzerwaffe, not with the SS, that gave them their main edge.

Nor is fanaticism necessarily a plus. Banzai charges were fanatatical, rarely produced results and usually ended in annihilation on a level even the W-SS wasn't prepared to endure.

All armoured units were used as firebrigades at critical points of the front. This was a feature of the panzerwaffe, not the W-SS particularly.

Of course the W-SS units in Normandy were generally better than "ordinary German infantry". Ordinary German infantry divisions were horse and foot bound (if mobile at all!), often of a low establishment, with older men, captured weaponry, all conscripts, and incorporating unreliable Eastern volunteer battalions, or sometimes Ersatzheer reserve divisions. By contrast all the W-SS divisions in Normandy were full of volunteers (or at least "volunteers") and armoured and motorized. It would be pretty disgraceful if they hadn't performed better than "ordinary German infantry" in Normandy.

You write, "During the Cold War, a Wehrmacht and Waffen-SS mythology developed in popular culture, as described in R. Smelser, E. J. Davies: "The Myth of the Eastern Front: The Nazi-Soviet War in American Popular Culture". In a way, they have been heroized, as tough elite troops fighting Communism." Yup, except the facts are otherwise. In reality, to the end of 1944 (later figures for separate fronts are apparently not available) the W-SS suffered a slightly lower proportion of its losses on the Eastern Front than the German Army! So one has to ask whether the W-SS was really more committed against Communism?

You write, "The fascination lives on (Communism is no more mentioned), sometimes unconsciously." Yup.

You write, "My point is that currently it is mainly propagated by Hollywood films - completely against their intentions. Apparently, Hollywood producers are hooked on the evil aura of these troops. However, as opposed to the 1950s and 1970s, bad and evil fascinates today's youth." Yes, but you forget the publishing industry, which is where most military history buffs get their information and opinions.

Cheers,

Sid.

[Cult Icon]

The problem is not that the three senior W-SS divisions were not decisive during the turning point campaign of Stalingrad over the winter of 1942-43.

The problem is that they weren't even present on any front anywhere for the better part of six months!

Even if they were, they wouldn't have made a material difference. The campaign, which was doomed from the start to turn the tide of the war, was too large and the Red Army was too strong for 3 divisions to swing it from defeat to victory. As posted earlier, I believe that the 3 SS divisions (and beyond that PR-GD HQ, if available in the South in Dec 1942, should have been able to reach the 6th Army in Winter Storm.

[praetorianavis]

Hi Sid

So did most of the Army's panzerwaffe (largely with conscripts, not volunteers), the paratroops (who were part of the Luftwaffe), etc.,

So why Eisenhower did not write: the panzerwaffe, the paratroop, etc as usual, fought to annihilation?

Nor is fanaticism necessarily a plus.

It is not, but the line between fanaticism and heroism is somewhat blurred („your heroes are my fanatics and vice versa“), and to-the-last-man fights usually are celebrated in most armies of the world. We can frown upon this, but it is a fact.

All armoured units were used ad firebrigades at critical points of the front. This was a feature of the panzerwaffe, not the W-SS particularly.

Yes, but for some reason it is the fire brigade role of the Waffen-SS that is emphasized in military literature. Maybe they were systematically used as such by Hitler? After some time the word went around...

Of course the W-SS units in Normandy were generally better than "ordinary German infantry".

This only added to the legend. Ordinary people don’t split hair when it comes to legends.

to the end of 1944 (later figures for separate fronts are apparently not available) the W-SS suffered a slightly lower proportion of its losses on the Eastern Front than the German Army!

"Slightly", maybe, but it did not decrease their unabated zeal against Communism. They were thoroughly ideologized troops, anticommunism was part of their esprit de corps, while the average Landser was apolitical and his main concern was to go home, unharmed, if possible.

sometimes unconsciously.

I quoted an article depicting the enthusiasm in the US officer corps concerning the German military. Incidentally, in the early 1980s the US military introduced camouflage uniforms everywhere - even people sitting in offices wear it - stepping into the footsteps of the dreadful elite troops of the German army (although the latter mostly wore it as combat gear). Most armies in the world followed the example. Except Israel’s Tsahal: they prefer to keep their olive green uniforms, saying that they are better than camo. What they don’t mention is they don’t want to look like SS. I don’t want to say US troops want (most don’t even notice it): but this is how they look (in a modernized version, of course).

Yes, but you forget the publishing industry, which is where most military history buffs get their information and opinions.

In the publishing industry the legend of the W-SS is alive and kicking.
Wherever you look, you discover criptoNazis! =8-O

Peace on you

praetorianavis

[praetorianavis]

What I try do to is to answer the question: why the Waffen SS.

For some posters here any attempt at an explanation to the birth and persistence of their legend is tantamount to glorification. They are out on a relentless holy war where any means are permitted with the enraged fanaticism reminiscent of that of the berserks among the you know who. No prisoners taken, no quarter given.