Malmedy Massacre
Re: Malmedy Massacre
The thing is, I think , no Army want's to investigate these "mistakes" and I am not only talking about the german army..
In the book the story of the bulge of John Toland, it was mentioned that the AMI's did not talke prisoners either.
The famous Wild bill guarnere (Band of Brothers) said in his book that at D_Day he did not take prisoners either.
There was no investigation from the american side.
In the book the story of the bulge of John Toland, it was mentioned that the AMI's did not talke prisoners either.
The famous Wild bill guarnere (Band of Brothers) said in his book that at D_Day he did not take prisoners either.
There was no investigation from the american side.
Re: Malmedy Massacre
Perhaps Haen has put this most succinctly. That the incident happened is without doubt. That the events have been shrouded in the fog of war and over half a century of relative peace in Europe is also true. We live in an age where we crave or expect an explanation for every action. Where targets can be picked and eliminated as if playing a game.
Such an array of "gimmicks" did not exist in December 1944. The Germans were fighting a mobile war, wanting to strike hard and fast and move onwards towards the Meuse. Did the Germans raise the question of what to do with the prisoners that they would Inevitably gather in such an assault? Even if they did, it was strategically unfeasible to tie up any of their assets in guarding such a large group of prisoners.
Some things are beyond explanation. The Baugnez incident is one.
As the calendar once more approaches December 16th I remember all those whose lives changed forever in that last winter of war in Europe.
May they all rest in peace.
Such an array of "gimmicks" did not exist in December 1944. The Germans were fighting a mobile war, wanting to strike hard and fast and move onwards towards the Meuse. Did the Germans raise the question of what to do with the prisoners that they would Inevitably gather in such an assault? Even if they did, it was strategically unfeasible to tie up any of their assets in guarding such a large group of prisoners.
Some things are beyond explanation. The Baugnez incident is one.
As the calendar once more approaches December 16th I remember all those whose lives changed forever in that last winter of war in Europe.
May they all rest in peace.
Re: Malmedy Massacre
Yet the US Army did investigate the killing by American soldiers of SS guards at Dachau, the killing by American soldiers of German and Italian POWs at Biscari and dozens of other cases.htk wrote:The thing is, I think , no Army want's to investigate these "mistakes" and I am not only talking about the german army..
Re: Malmedy Massacre
hi harro
So might the group Piper have killed (or mopping up as its called today) ... i think probably so. I think its more important to use this as a lesson what war is about .. instead taking here the moral highground and blame it solely on the SS and ignore the truth and so paving the way for the next masacre.
[Parts of the post dealing with only Dachau was moved to http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic. ... 8#p1755458]
So might the group Piper have killed (or mopping up as its called today) ... i think probably so. I think its more important to use this as a lesson what war is about .. instead taking here the moral highground and blame it solely on the SS and ignore the truth and so paving the way for the next masacre.
[Parts of the post dealing with only Dachau was moved to http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic. ... 8#p1755458]
Re: Malmedy Massacre
There is a difference between not taking prisoners and executing ones you have taken. One also has to look at the context of a document that states something like "we didn't take any prisoners". It could be due to either lack of opertunity or refusal to do so. In any case I believe the Americans and British both took a considerable number of prisoners during the Battle of the Bulge. As far as investigating goes how likely was higher command to hear about not takeing prisoners at the time?htk wrote:... In the book the story of the bulge of John Toland, it was mentioned that the AMI's did not talke prisoners either. The famous Wild bill guarnere (Band of Brothers) said in his book that at D_Day he did not take prisoners either.
....
Re: Malmedy Massacre
"htk", I don't see how this would prove anything. The Dachau massacre was investigated and that's more than anyone can be said about the German response to the Malmédy killings (or for that matter the murders in Stavelot, la Vaulx Richard, Trois-Ponts, Parfondruy, La Gleize and all other places where members of the Leibstandarte killed POWs and civilians).
Re: Malmedy Massacre
I have seen nothing to indicate that it was ever classified. If you have please provide the source. Patton did decide not to prosecute them although if I recall correctly the officer in charge was punished all be it a "wrist slap".htk wrote:... as i have understood - please correct me if i am wrong - the dachau "incidents' investigation proved that the guard where murdered by US troops, the report was then made a secret.
Not really especially sense in other cases US soldiers were tried, convicted, and punished for such crimes.If this is correct - then it proves only my point. In war such "incidents" are not unusual, and a typical respons was (is) to ignore when possibe.
There is a big difference in most modern militaries between "mopping up" and killing POWs.So might the group Piper have killed (or mopping up as its called today)
???? Who else was to blame for the Malmedy Massacre? What truth are we ignoring? How does this pave "the way for the next masacre"?... blame it solely on the SS and ignore the truth and so paving the way for the next masacre.
Re: Malmedy Massacre
My point is not to blame solely the SS (or wehrmacht for that matter) as the only group who did this kind of acts... but that this is a thing encountered also in other wars (before and after WW2). When asking how (accepting that the SS etc where not the only ones)does it pave the way for slaughtering prisoners ?
[Parts of the post dealing with only Dachau was moved to http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic. ... 8#p1755458]
[Parts of the post dealing with only Dachau was moved to http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic. ... 8#p1755458]
Re: Malmedy Massacre
This thread is for discussions on the Dachau killings, we have several threads on that topic, for example http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=39246
Please stay on topic, this means that for example comments about the fighting in present day Syria or allegations of Allied war crimes have no place in this thread.
/Marcus
Please stay on topic, this means that for example comments about the fighting in present day Syria or allegations of Allied war crimes have no place in this thread.
/Marcus
Re: Malmedy Massacre
It's the but they were bad too-argument all over again.
- BillHermann
- Member
- Posts: 742
- Joined: 04 Jan 2012, 16:35
- Location: Authie
Re: Malmedy Massacre
It's like this argument comes up as a justification and is simplistic in many ways.
No one is saying that the "others did not do bad things as well" and it does get old.
Not to go to far off topic, but Baugnez and Dachau were completely different in many ways. There is little that can be compared except for prisoners being killed. Other than that very different.
Dachau, being done by an individual and was spur of the moment out of stress and hatred after seeing the dead and dying and smelling the stench of death. The allied battlefield doctrine tradition and culture with prisoners being much more ethical and responsible in contrast to The SS. This is not condoning the actions at Dachau or saying that the allies did not do bad things but the above is showing a clear difference.
The Baugnez killings were far more controlled and organized. It was not one machine gunner and a small group like at Dachau. The killings at Dachau were actually stopped by an officer kicking the killer to stop where at Baugnez the officer ordered the killing. It is difficult to know if the killings at Baugnez would have happened if things were different but it obvious that the perpetrators were seasoned and quite comfortable with the doing these types of killings.
One being part of the culture of the SS and the fact that the organization encouraged and ordered these types killings. The other being a spur of the moment action. Both wrong, yes but different circumstances and reasons. If these details pcan not be understood than it is short sighted. Arguments have been also made about a collective German anger due to bombings. This more of an excuse as most Germans were living under these stresses and dis not act like the SS.
The 1st SS slowed down and stopped killing when the battle turned against them and when they knew they were losing. This behaviour was seen right from the beginning, in France, the Balkans and The eastern front. The killings were no accident, they were not staged and the Waffen-SS knew the implications. Turning them into misunderstood victims does them no favour. This brutality and lack of compassion was a large part of who they were. Anything else does them a disservice.
No one is saying that the "others did not do bad things as well" and it does get old.
Not to go to far off topic, but Baugnez and Dachau were completely different in many ways. There is little that can be compared except for prisoners being killed. Other than that very different.
Dachau, being done by an individual and was spur of the moment out of stress and hatred after seeing the dead and dying and smelling the stench of death. The allied battlefield doctrine tradition and culture with prisoners being much more ethical and responsible in contrast to The SS. This is not condoning the actions at Dachau or saying that the allies did not do bad things but the above is showing a clear difference.
The Baugnez killings were far more controlled and organized. It was not one machine gunner and a small group like at Dachau. The killings at Dachau were actually stopped by an officer kicking the killer to stop where at Baugnez the officer ordered the killing. It is difficult to know if the killings at Baugnez would have happened if things were different but it obvious that the perpetrators were seasoned and quite comfortable with the doing these types of killings.
One being part of the culture of the SS and the fact that the organization encouraged and ordered these types killings. The other being a spur of the moment action. Both wrong, yes but different circumstances and reasons. If these details pcan not be understood than it is short sighted. Arguments have been also made about a collective German anger due to bombings. This more of an excuse as most Germans were living under these stresses and dis not act like the SS.
The 1st SS slowed down and stopped killing when the battle turned against them and when they knew they were losing. This behaviour was seen right from the beginning, in France, the Balkans and The eastern front. The killings were no accident, they were not staged and the Waffen-SS knew the implications. Turning them into misunderstood victims does them no favour. This brutality and lack of compassion was a large part of who they were. Anything else does them a disservice.
Last edited by BillHermann on 11 Dec 2012, 03:54, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Malmedy Massacre
I think the point is here we are discussing the Malmedy Massacre not the opinions of John Toland or what US soldiers got up to in Normandy.htk wrote:The thing is, I think , no Army want's to investigate these "mistakes" and I am not only talking about the german army..
In the book the story of the bulge of John Toland, it was mentioned that the AMI's did not talke prisoners either.
The famous Wild bill guarnere (Band of Brothers) said in his book that at D_Day he did not take prisoners either.
There was no investigation from the american side.
There are two excellent books on the Malmedy Massacre that demolish the myths.
Danny S. Parker's Fatal Crossroads is the newest study of the incident.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/At-Crossroads-C ... 740&sr=8-1
Also The Malmedy Massacre by John M.Bauserman.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/At-Crossroads-C ... 740&sr=8-1
These books give an unbiased factual account of what happend .
Ron
- BillHermann
- Member
- Posts: 742
- Joined: 04 Jan 2012, 16:35
- Location: Authie
Re: Malmedy Massacre
What I find particularly interesting is that Waffen-SS witnesses to Baugnez have stated much that it happened as what has been recorded with little variation. The record is quite clear that even the perpetrators and Waffen-SS witness have said that much of the guilt lies with them.
I am not sure why a percentage of people would some how want to believe different.
I am not sure why a percentage of people would some how want to believe different.
-
- Host - Allied sections
- Posts: 10054
- Joined: 02 Sep 2006, 21:31
- Location: USA
Re: Malmedy Massacre
To that list I'd add a minor supplement. LtCol Pergrin was commanding the US engineer battalion deployed in the Malmedy area & was within hearing distance of the event. The engineer company he was inspecting at the time brought in many of the massacre survivors. Pergrin himself carried some of the wounded to the aid station in his jeep and was able to question them. His description of this is in a chapter in his book 'First Across the Rhine'Dutto1 wrote:
There are two excellent books on the Malmedy Massacre that demolish the myths.
Danny S. Parker's Fatal Crossroads is the newest study of the incident.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/At-Crossroads-C ... 740&sr=8-1
Also The Malmedy Massacre by John M.Bauserman.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/At-Crossroads-C ... 740&sr=8-1
These books give an unbiased factual account of what happend .
Ron
-
- Member
- Posts: 2387
- Joined: 15 Apr 2002, 21:29
- Location: MA, USA
Re: Malmedy Massacre
Just to build on what Harro wrote - the "two engagement" conspiracy theory (the US troops surrendered, laid down their arms, then picked them up again and were killed fighting) apparently first started with Hans Gruhle, Peiper’s adj.
Franz Uhle-Wettler (see http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franz_Uhle-Wettler) ran with it.
The theory was then picked up by Trevor Depuy in Hitler’s Last Gamble (1995) but was completely demolished by Michael Reynolds The Devil’s Adjutant (1995), John Bauserman's The Malmedy Massacre and Danny Parker's Fatal Crossroads
Danny Parker's book is especially valuable because he includes a section on the historiography (history of the history) of the Malmedy Massacre and trial, beginning with Dietrich Ziemssen's book Die Malmedy Prozess published back in 1952.
Franz Uhle-Wettler (see http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franz_Uhle-Wettler) ran with it.
The theory was then picked up by Trevor Depuy in Hitler’s Last Gamble (1995) but was completely demolished by Michael Reynolds The Devil’s Adjutant (1995), John Bauserman's The Malmedy Massacre and Danny Parker's Fatal Crossroads
Danny Parker's book is especially valuable because he includes a section on the historiography (history of the history) of the Malmedy Massacre and trial, beginning with Dietrich Ziemssen's book Die Malmedy Prozess published back in 1952.