Captured Helferinnen used as sex slaves?

Discussions on the Holocaust and 20th Century War Crimes. Note that Holocaust denial is not allowed. Hosted by David Thompson.
User avatar
Vikki
Forum Staff
Posts: 3300
Joined: 08 Jul 2003 01:35
Location: Amerika

Post by Vikki » 10 May 2004 05:40

I agree.

And I'd like to re-ask my question of a week ago a little more......succinctly?

According to the ICRC, Doenitz released German Helferinnen from duty the day before the war ended, perhaps thinking that this action (rendering them civilians) would prevent them from having to go into captivity as POWs. But some civilian German women were sent to Russian labor camps. Under the rules of POW treatment, should Doenitz' release of the female Auxiliaries have made their treatment better than if they had still been considered military Auxiliaries? Should it have prevented them from being taken as POWs in the first place? Or did it deprive them of some protected status they would have received if they had still been considered "combattants"?

User avatar
Vikki
Forum Staff
Posts: 3300
Joined: 08 Jul 2003 01:35
Location: Amerika

Post by Vikki » 11 May 2004 00:08

David Thompson wrote:When committed by soldiers, the act of rape is a war crime and the knowing refusal of commanders to punish rapists is a war crime as well. If the Soviet government made sure that "there were plenty of orders coming down to stop them, and summary punishments and executions were ordered," they obviously felt the same way.
Milovan Djilas, who was head of the Yugoslav Military Mission to Moscow during the war, says in his book Conversations with Stalin that he complained to the Soviet dictator about atrocities committed by Red Army troops in Yugoslavia. Stalin replied: "Can't you understand it if a soldier who has crossed thousands of kilometers through blood and fire has fun with a woman or takes a trifle?" (emphasis mine)
~Milovan Djilas, Conversations with Stalin (London: Rupert Hart-Davis, 1962). Quoted by Cornelius Ryan, The Last Battle, p. 493n.

User avatar
Oleg Grigoryev
Member
Posts: 5051
Joined: 12 Mar 2002 20:06
Location: Russia

Post by Oleg Grigoryev » 11 May 2004 00:46

Fraulein Valkyrie wrote:
David Thompson wrote:When committed by soldiers, the act of rape is a war crime and the knowing refusal of commanders to punish rapists is a war crime as well. If the Soviet government made sure that "there were plenty of orders coming down to stop them, and summary punishments and executions were ordered," they obviously felt the same way.
Milovan Djilas, who was head of the Yugoslav Military Mission to Moscow during the war, says in his book Conversations with Stalin that he complained to the Soviet dictator about atrocities committed by Red Army troops in Yugoslavia. Stalin replied: "Can't you understand it if a soldier who has crossed thousands of kilometers through blood and fire has fun with a woman or takes a trifle?" (emphasis mine)
~Milovan Djilas, Conversations with Stalin (London: Rupert Hart-Davis, 1962). Quoted by Cornelius Ryan, The Last Battle, p. 493n.
funnly lile nobody ever tried to verify if Stalina catually said that, be as it may, during first months of 1945 4148 Soviet officers were prosecuted for the crimes against German civillians -that is officer alone -how many soldiers -God alone knows -especially with policies such as that at 2nd Belorussian Front, where Rokososvkiy ordered all the rapists are to be executed on the spot and without trail.

User avatar
ancasta
Member
Posts: 159
Joined: 25 Mar 2004 01:22
Location: United Kingdom

Post by ancasta » 14 May 2004 23:44

My grandmother once told me that she saw a young German girl saved from gang rape by a Russian Jew, who took her under his wing and protected her. She in turn realised that the mass German hate propaganda against the Jews was all one big lie. The Jew believed that the non-jewish Russian rapists were no better than the 'animal' Germans who ran the camps and wanted to prove to the German girls that Jews were infact decent people with morals and standards.

In a modern sense, picking up some of the above arguements, is there not currently a debate going on about what we, in the west, are being told is *really* happening in Iraq? In the press much is made about modern political propaganda to keep the public 'sweet' about the war. Meanwhile soldiers returning from the war tell us something completely different to what we have been informed, and accusations abound about war crimes, including unbelievably, rape. In 60 years nothing changes. :(

User avatar
Kunikov
Member
Posts: 4455
Joined: 20 Jan 2004 19:23

Post by Kunikov » 15 May 2004 01:17

War is war is war, how is it that today we still can't 'understand' that these things happen? There are no 'clean' wars.

Panzermahn
Member
Posts: 3639
Joined: 13 Jul 2002 03:51
Location: Malaysia

Post by Panzermahn » 15 May 2004 02:04

funnly lile nobody ever tried to verify if Stalina catually said that, be as it may, during first months of 1945 4148 Soviet officers were prosecuted for the crimes against German civillians -that is officer alone -how many soldiers -God alone knows -especially with policies such as that at 2nd Belorussian Front, where Rokososvkiy ordered all the rapists are to be executed on the spot and without trail.
Funny it seems that Antony Beevor never mentioned in Berlin: The Downfall that Rokossovsky ordered all rapists to be executed on the spot and without trial..

Even if the order is allegedly given by Rokossovsky, what credibility does it had to confirms its implementation...Maybe Rokossovsky is genuine appalled but how many Russian officers is proven to follow his orders to execute russian rapists on the spot?

According to Beevor, almost 1 million German and non-German women were raped by the Russians..So does this mean a minimum of 1 million Russian troops were executed on the spot and without trial?

In fact, 2nd belorussian Front had the worst record of war crimes compared to other Russian Fronts as it infamous for their rapes and brutalities in East Prussia, Poomerania like Dirlewenger and his gang at Warsaw

User avatar
Kunikov
Member
Posts: 4455
Joined: 20 Jan 2004 19:23

Post by Kunikov » 15 May 2004 02:10

panzermahn wrote: Funny it seems that Antony Beevor never mentioned in Berlin: The Downfall that Rokossovsky ordered all rapists to be executed on the spot and without trial..
Funny? Why exactly is it funny? Shows the 'great' research Beevor has done on the subject.
Even if the order is allegedly given by Rokossovsky, what credibility does it had to confirms its implementation...Maybe Rokossovsky is genuine appalled but how many Russian officers is proven to follow his orders to execute russian rapists on the spot?
It shows that rapes were not tolerated by the Red Army and orders were implimented against them. It also shows that it was NOT policy in the Red Army to murder/torture their victims, unlike the Wehrmacht and SS.
According to Beevor, almost 1 million German and non-German women were raped by the Russians..So does this mean a minimum of 1 million Russian troops were executed on the spot and without trial?
They were all raped by the Red Army? What about the Poles troops he talks about? Who is to say that each rape was perpetrated by a different Red Army soldier? As well, where does he get his numbers from?
In fact, 2nd belorussian Front had the worst record of war crimes compared to other Russian Fronts as it infamous for their rapes and brutalities in East Prussia, Poomerania like Dirlewenger and his gang at Warsaw
Source for this assertion is?

Panzermahn
Member
Posts: 3639
Joined: 13 Jul 2002 03:51
Location: Malaysia

Post by Panzermahn » 15 May 2004 02:32

Funny? Why exactly is it funny? Shows the 'great' research Beevor has done on the subject.
The amount of women in eastern territories raped by the Russians in 1945, East Prussia, Berlin, Poomerania, Silesia
It shows that rapes were not tolerated by the Red Army and orders were implimented against them. It also shows that it was NOT policy in the Red Army to murder/torture their victims, unlike the Wehrmacht and SS.
From Beevor's book, even some of the officers participate in the rapes of German women...

Not in their policy in the Red Army to murder/torture their victims? Source, please? Btw, Soviet Union did not ratified the Geneva Convention of 1929 so would it be contradictory if you said Red Army had a policy of not torturing or murdering their victims but yet did not ratified Geneva Convention, universally accepted in human civilization as a compassionate and humanitarian policty towards civillians and combatants
They were all raped by the Red Army? What about the Poles troops he talks about? Who is to say that each rape was perpetrated by a different Red Army soldier? As well, where does he get his numbers from?
I mean the majority of the rapes were committed by the Russians..Poles were involved too but not in such a large number like the Russians...Beevor gets his source from main and secondary sources..Main sources is from the Bundesarchiv koblenz where testimonies and affidavits of the survivors and witnesses of the tumultous moments of 1945 which were kept and the reports of the rapes, expulsion made by german military historians and kept in German Military Archives at Freiburg. Secondary sources is from recollections, interviews and testimonies from the survivors themselves...Ursula von Karsdoff is one example..Her book mentioned numerous brutal rapes perperated by the Russians even on old women and young girls and she was a victim herself
Source for this assertion is?


Antony Beevor's book...quote (sorry i forgot the page)

a German soldier snapped his heels and saluted to the Russian officer. He enquired "May i know whether i''m (POW) under the soldiers of Marshal Zhukov or Rokossovsky's bands?

Russian officer answered with a laugh, "You're were captured by the soldiers of Marshal Zhukov. Tell me, why do you call Rokovssovky and his army as bands?"

German soldier answered, "They (Rokossovsky's army) did not follow the rules of land warfare. That's why German soldiers called them bands"

User avatar
Oleg Grigoryev
Member
Posts: 5051
Joined: 12 Mar 2002 20:06
Location: Russia

Post by Oleg Grigoryev » 15 May 2004 04:46

panzermahn wrote:
funnly lile nobody ever tried to verify if Stalina catually said that, be as it may, during first months of 1945 4148 Soviet officers were prosecuted for the crimes against German civillians -that is officer alone -how many soldiers -God alone knows -especially with policies such as that at 2nd Belorussian Front, where Rokososvkiy ordered all the rapists are to be executed on the spot and without trail.
Funny it seems that Antony Beevor never mentioned in Berlin: The Downfall that Rokossovsky ordered all rapists to be executed on the spot and without trial..

Even if the order is allegedly given by Rokossovsky, what credibility does it had to confirms its implementation...Maybe Rokossovsky is genuine appalled but how many Russian officers is proven to follow his orders to execute russian rapists on the spot?

According to Beevor, almost 1 million German and non-German women were raped by the Russians..So does this mean a minimum of 1 million Russian troops were executed on the spot and without trial?

In fact, 2nd belorussian Front had the worst record of war crimes compared to other Russian Fronts as it infamous for their rapes and brutalities in East Prussia, Poomerania like Dirlewenger and his gang at Warsaw
It is not funny -it is tragic that such a crappy research as Beevor book got so much pablicity. Btw ones agin how did Beevor got his number?
Not in their policy in the Red Army to murder/torture their victims? Source, please? Btw, Soviet Union did not ratified the Geneva Convention of 1929 so would it be contradictory if you said Red Army had a policy of not torturing or murdering their victims but yet did not ratified Geneva Convention, universally accepted in human civilization as a compassionate and humanitarian policty towards civillians and combatants
Funny little man, a while back you alleged that it was in fact a Soviet policy to torture etc, when you were asked for proof you fell silent. Now you are asking to prove the non-existence of something???? Besides what’s the logic if one failed something one must act in complete opposition? Germany ratified Geneva-29 yet it did not stop it from setting the record in people killed/time spend doing it category.
I mean the majority of the rapes were committed by the Russians..Poles were involved too but not in such a large number like the Russians...Beevor gets his source from main and secondary sources..Main sources is from the Bundesarchiv koblenz where testimonies and affidavits of the survivors and witnesses of the tumultous moments of 1945 which were kept and the reports of the rapes, expulsion made by german military historians and kept in German Military Archives at Freiburg. Secondary sources is from recollections, interviews and testimonies from the survivors themselves...Ursula von Karsdoff is one example..Her book mentioned numerous brutal rapes perperated by the Russians even on old women and young girls and she was a victim herself
while rapes indeed happen ones “say so” is hardly sufficient to prove the occurrence of rape. That is btw the main problem with Beevor’s research –it is one-sided.
Antony Beevor's book...quote (sorry i forgot the page)

a German soldier snapped his heels and saluted to the Russian officer. He enquired "May i know whether i''m (POW) under the soldiers of Marshal Zhukov or Rokossovsky's bands?

Russian officer answered with a laugh, "You're were captured by the soldiers of Marshal Zhukov. Tell me, why do you call Rokovssovky and his army as bands?"

German soldier answered, "They (Rokossovsky's army) did not follow the rules of land warfare. That's why German soldiers called them bands"
well that would make German armed forces one big band would not it now.?

User avatar
Vikki
Forum Staff
Posts: 3300
Joined: 08 Jul 2003 01:35
Location: Amerika

Post by Vikki » 15 May 2004 07:07

Oleg Grigoryev wrote: while rapes indeed happen ones “say so” is hardly sufficient to prove the occurrence of rape. That is btw the main problem with Beevor’s research –it is one-sided.
You're quite right, one's "say so" is hardly sufficient to prove the occurrence of rape, and particularly the occurrence of widespread rapes. But when one considers the literal masses of recorded accounts of Soviet rapes---and not just accounts by the victims themselves, but (even more frequently) by bystanders, witnesses, and medical personnel---I think we can begin to see a pattern, and begin to believe those poor, deluded women who thought they were raped.

And just so the pattern we're beginning to see doesn't come from "one-sided" sources, let's consider some evidence from the Soviet side. In your quote above, you state that 4148 Soviet officers were prosecuted for crimes against German civilians (quite surprising to me---were they prosecuted for actual crimes, or for dereliction in controlling their troops?---since many of the accounts I've read specifically state that it was not Soviet officers, but regular soldiers, who were responsible for most of the acts against civilians), and that Rokossovsky ordered all rapists to be shot on the spot. Would these extreme measures have been required unless there were an extreme need for them? Do you think that Stalin would have issued orders for better treatment of the Germans in both April and August 1945 if a problem didn't exist? Would Red Star editors have felt a need to justify one or two unconfirmed rapes with statements such as "War is war, and what we did was nothing in comparison with what the Germans did in Russia"?

It seems that the Soviet authorities themselves were even beginning to believe the accounts of those deluded women who thought they had been raped. And to believe that there had been more than a few of them.

User avatar
Kunikov
Member
Posts: 4455
Joined: 20 Jan 2004 19:23

Post by Kunikov » 15 May 2004 07:13

Fraulein Valkyrie wrote: It seems that the Soviet authorities themselves were even beginning to believe the accounts of those deluded women who thought they had been raped. And to believe that there had been more than a few of them.
No one denies rapes occured, that is what you don't seem to understand. We want verification of the so called 'millions', verification which you cannot and won't show us. Rape is a part of war, yet when it comes to the Red Army it seems that it is something out of the extraordinary. The only thing that "Panzerboy" and the rest of those who would like to accuse the Red Army of any and all attrocities can do is repeat hearsay arguments over and over.

User avatar
Vikki
Forum Staff
Posts: 3300
Joined: 08 Jul 2003 01:35
Location: Amerika

Post by Vikki » 15 May 2004 08:18

Kunikov wrote: No one denies rapes occured, that is what you don't seem to understand. We want verification of the so called 'millions', verification which you cannot and won't show us. Rape is a part of war, yet when it comes to the Red Army it seems that it is something out of the extraordinary. The only thing that "Panzerboy" and the rest of those who would like to accuse the Red Army of any and all attrocities can do is repeat hearsay arguments over and over.



Actually, I agree with you that rape is a part of war. It happens, even though, as David Thompson states, "When committed by soldiers, the act of rape is a war crime and the knowing refusal of commanders to punish rapists is a war crime as well". And, as a sidenote---and I am perhaps the only one who could or would say this here, since I'm a woman---I personally think that a lot of worse things than rape happened to a lot of people during the war. On all sides.

But I "understand" your point quite well. Just as you rightfully object to those "who would like to accuse the Red Army of any and all atrocities," I object to attempts to minimalize the number of rapes that occurred, particularly through the means of simply ignoring or brushing off primary documentation such as large numbers of firsthand accounts, as well as the obvious seriousness of the numbers given the Soviet government's own reaction to the situation. And by the way, first hand accounts are not considered "hearsay" in most academic historical circles---they're considered primary documentation.

As you probably know better than I, Beevor's estimate of numbers (p. 410) comes from sources quoted in Sander and Johr's Befreier und Befreite---apparently the book version of the film that I quoted from Owings' Frauen many posts ago. At the time I cited the work, I disavowed, and still do, any knowledge or opinion on the estimate of two million. My only comment on that number has been to offer a statistical look at it relative to the overall female population of Germany at the time, and relative to the prevalence of accounts of rape.

But do you have a source that gives an alternate estimate of Russian rapes? I think it was mentioned awhile ago that some sources might be forthcoming from the Soviet archives, but I haven't seen any of those yet.

Until we have an alternate estimate, I guess we're stuck with arguing over the two million figure.

User avatar
Oleg Grigoryev
Member
Posts: 5051
Joined: 12 Mar 2002 20:06
Location: Russia

Post by Oleg Grigoryev » 15 May 2004 08:47

You're quite right, one's "say so" is hardly sufficient to prove the occurrence of rape, and particularly the occurrence of widespread rapes. But when one considers the literal masses of recorded accounts of Soviet rapes---and not just accounts by the victims themselves, but (even more frequently) by bystanders, witnesses, and medical personnel---I think we can begin to see a pattern, and begin to believe those poor, deluded women who thought they were raped.
How wide spread was prostitution in the time in question? That would include amateurs as well – those who prostituted for food and such?
And just so the pattern we're beginning to see doesn't come from "one-sided" sources, let's consider some evidence from the Soviet side. In your quote above, you state that 4148 Soviet officers were prosecuted for crimes against German civilians (quite surprising to me---were they prosecuted for actual crimes, or for dereliction in controlling their troops
Western term dereliction has no direct equivalent in Russian language you would have to be more specific. Btw I stated that 4148 Soviet officers were prosecuted in the first months of 1945.
since many of the accounts I've read specifically state that it was not Soviet officers, but regular soldiers, who were responsible for most of the acts against civilians),
that would in turn mean that number of prosecuted soldiers was even higher. I don’t see a contradiction.
and that Rokossovsky ordered all rapists to be shot on the spot. Would these extreme measures have been required unless there were an extreme need for them? Do you think that Stalin would have issued orders for better treatment of the Germans in both April and August 1945 if a problem didn't exist? Would Red Star editors have felt a need to justify one or two unconfirmed rapes with statements such as "War is war, and what we did was nothing in comparison with what the Germans did in Russia"?
I am sorry did I said somewhere that there was no problem?
It seems that the Soviet authorities themselves were even beginning to believe the accounts of those deluded women who thought they had been raped. And to believe that there had been more than a few of them.
I have serious doubt that Soviet authorities ever saw one such an account –they relied on reports of Special Sections and Front’s Political departments.
I object to attempts to minimalize the number of rapes that occurred, particularly through the means of simply ignoring or brushing off primary documentation such as large numbers of firsthand accounts, as well as the obvious seriousness of the numbers given the Soviet government's own reaction to the situation. And by the way, first hand accounts are not considered "hearsay" in most academic historical circles---they're considered primary documentation.
You are trying to calculate the number of rape cases – rape is crime; in order to establish that crime took place one needs to have either corroboration to the original testimony or forensic proof. Count the number of rape accusations and that is exactly what you are going to end with –some number of rape accusations (accusation being a key word) - some of which are happened and some did not. If my memory serves me well 2000000 first occurred in 1946. I find it hard to believe that such a short period it was possible to compile and verify such a huge number of reports. Please feel free to show otherwise. People still have no idea how much casualties did German Armed forces suffered in 1945 –but they dead sure about rapes.

Btw since neither book nor movie is available to me would you be so kind and inform how 2 million number was arrived to? Methodology-wise that is.

User avatar
Kunikov
Member
Posts: 4455
Joined: 20 Jan 2004 19:23

Post by Kunikov » 15 May 2004 14:23

Fraulein Valkyrie wrote: And by the way, first hand accounts are not considered "hearsay" in most academic historical circles---they're considered primary documentation.
Do you have 2 million first hand accounts? No, thus it is hearsay.
As you probably know better than I, Beevor's estimate of numbers (p. 410) comes from sources quoted in Sander and Johr's Befreier und Befreite---apparently the book version of the film that I quoted from Owings' Frauen many posts ago. At the time I cited the work, I disavowed, and still do, any knowledge or opinion on the estimate of two million. My only comment on that number has been to offer a statistical look at it relative to the overall female population of Germany at the time, and relative to the prevalence of accounts of rape.
What I know is that an estimate was created by one doctor working out abortions and the such, I won't trust that. The reasons for women having abortions are many and the reasons as to how they got pregnant, a few as well. Not everything revolved around rape, which Beevor also admits.
But do you have a source that gives an alternate estimate of Russian rapes? I think it was mentioned awhile ago that some sources might be forthcoming from the Soviet archives, but I haven't seen any of those yet.
If I did I would have presented it, I doubt there was a census taken by the authorities to interview soldiers and ask them how many women they raped.
Until we have an alternate estimate, I guess we're stuck with arguing over the two million figure.
You might be, I know better.

David Thompson
Forum Staff
Posts: 23724
Joined: 20 Jul 2002 19:52
Location: USA

Post by David Thompson » 15 May 2004 15:59

How wide spread was prostitution in the time in question? That would include amateurs as well – those who prostituted for food and such?
This question is off-topic. We're talking about crimes here, not "dates" -- rapes, not "fraternization."

The problem with the direction that this thread has taken is the same problem which has characterized the other 1945 Red Army rape threads. There are just a few major questions, but even fewer definitive answers:

(1) Was there a large number of rapes which accompanied the advance of the Red Army into Germany? This was certainly the Nazi propaganda line, which was directed at increasing the resistance offered by German troops. However, the rape stories persisted after the Nazi regime had collapsed and the German armed forces surrendered. The stories are both numerous and widespread. They are attested to by Red Army soldiers, by Germans, and by foreign witnesses who were not sympathetic to the Nazi regime. This question, therefore, can be safely answered "Yes."

(2) Is there a basis for estimating how many rapes occurred? There is abundant anecdotal evidence of rape, but the basis for the statistical estimates is unclear. The method(s) by which the statistics were complied is also unclear. It is impossible, based on what we've seen here in the forum, to distinguish between statistics which are based on known facts and those that are estimates or projections.

(3) Is there any evidence that the rapes were a Soviet policy, or resulted from a refusal of Soviet commanders to punish rapists? There are a lot of claims to this effect, but proponents of the "policy" point of view have not produced any orders or admissions that such a policy existed. The evidence for the proposition is:

(a) the widespread occurrence of the rapes,

(b) Milovan Djilas' recounting of Stalin's characteristically coarse and cynical remark,

(c) some shrill propaganda bombast from Ilya Ehrenberg and others exhorting Russians to resist the German invaders to the death, and

(d) a supposed Red Army order, of uncertain authenticity, said to have been captured by German troops in 1945 and thereafter used as Nazi propaganda.

(4) Against that point of few are these facts:

(a) contemporaneous orders from Soviet commanders exist which impose summary proceedings and stern punishments for Soviet troops caught committing rape.

(b) Red Army statistics show that these punishments were imposed in thousands of cases in 1945.

(c) the German accounts in particular distinguish between Soviet front line troops, who were relatively well-behaved, and rear-echelon tropps, who were to blame for the rapes. If there were a policy, presumably all of the troops would have the same behavior.

(d) the German accounts and those of foreign witnesses state that most of the rapes were committed within a fairly short period of time -- after the area had been overrun by the Red Army and before a military government was formed. This kind of interregnum or transitional period is frequently characterized by criminals taking advantage of the attendant disorder and uncertain lines of authority.

So for the three questions, the answers for me are (1) Yes; (2) I can't tell; and (3) There does not appear to have been an overall policy but there appear to have been command and control problems in some individual units.

Return to “Holocaust & 20th Century War Crimes”