Rhein wiesen lager

Who is right-Stephen Ambrose or Bacque? Is there any evidence to support either or both. There are enough accounts on the net, by former prisoners, of just what Bacque claims. The evidence is there for us to make our own minds up on this one.

 

Oh yeah, because it's really credible, isn't it?
This guy was in the SS and claims not to know why he was classified as a Nazi!
Gerhard in Belgium
And no, he wasn't charged for his boots and PoW uniform. No more than British servicemen were charged for uniforms on demob.

 

I've no time for neo-nazis. I'm no interest in giving them any sympathy. Try this link. I'd be interested in what you think of it.

' The ones who did not boil the water got diarrhea and had to die, in most cases in the ditch of the latrines. There were beautiful fruit plants at the Rhine, after some weeks, however, there was none anymore. We cut off the branches of the trees to be able to cook the water, 2 men cooked a potato in that water at the same time. 40 men got 1 kg of bread. I had no stool for 24 days, 7 weeks only once a week. Under these circumstances about 1000 prisoners died every week.'

Johann Baumbergers war memories

 

Stephen Ambrose can be very convincing but he is also to be judged for what he is himself. There are experts and there are experts and it's better that we can dig around ourselves and not rely on anyone to dicatate what we think-we make our own minds up on this one.

 

I actually read it last night, along with the other "eyewitness testimonies".
And apart from proving exactly how badly the Allies were caught out by an unexpected number of PoWs being taken, the food shortages, and the generally chaotic situation at the war's end, what exactly did you think it proved?

 

The example I've given is is one of many and proves that the conditions were appalling beyond any reasonable doubt of them being accidental. As for the food shortages- I disagree with Bacque on that one and with you- but the camps were designed to take advantage of this. As for the unexpected number of POWs taken prisoner and the difficulties looking after them- the numbers taken in North Africa, the Falaise Pocket and in the Ruhr Pocket are examples of what the Allies knew they had to expect. They knew what was coming. The whole camp system was a set up.

 

And what evidence do you base that theory on? The numbers of prisoners previously taken had NO bearing on what happened at the war's end. Millions of German troops weren't fleeing the advancing Russians in any of those cases
Prisoners taken by the British had previously been shipped either to Canada or the Dominions; after D-Day they were increasingly held in Britain- and many of those camps had to be built from scratch.
The Americans had previously shipped PoWs from Britain to the US; after D-Day both had more important things to do with their scarce shipping.
You seem to be under the impression that the Allies had the men and materials to instantly build proper camps for these prisoners- as well as ensuring the secuity of their own areas, feeding civilians, displaced persons, their own men etc etc.
It doesn't work like that in real life- I don't give a monkey's what Bacque said.

 

The point is that the Allies had experienced vast numbers of German POWs suddenly being an administrative problem. In North Africa Eisenhower had complained of just this saying in exasperation ,'it's a pity we coudn't have killed more.' The Allies knew what to expect simply because it had happened before. As for building the camps the POWs did that but what's really telling is the removal of any equipment that would have made survival possible ie tent tarpaulins, great-coats, food they had with them...
I will defend Bacque where necessary but I will think for myself as well. I don't just rely on Bacque and I've have done my own digging on this subject. Stop the Bacque bashing and give him some credit for bringing to our attention that the camps were appalling.

 

If there was a policy to shoot SS who surrendered, then why are there Former SS alive telling what they saw?

 

Tell me which pages in Crusade in Europe or My Three Years with Eisenhower I can find that exact quote, please.
What actually happened was the PoWs in Africa were shipped out to Britain, the US or Australia to prevent them creating a security problem.

Garbage. The Allies expected the Nazis to fight to the last man and the last round, hence their surprise at the number of prisoners being taken. The same phenomenon was later seen with the Japanese.

And do you have any verifiable proof that was deliberate policy from Eisenhower?

So you think for yourself, but the only "evidence" you can muster is Bacque's thoroughly discredited research and "eyewitness" accounts from known right-wingers?!
I'll say it one last time; there was NO official policy from Eisenhower or anyone else to allow German PoWs to die in "death camps".
Until you stop being Bacque's apologist and can actually give me some credible evidence, that's my last word on this discussion.

 

Take a look at the witnesses and what they're claiming. Different witnesses, different camps and the very same abuses thrown at them. That's the evidence- or are all the witnesses part of some huge anti-Eisenhower conspiracy that has taken over the net. It's too easy to say that they're all right wing. My primary source to this story was an avid anti-Nazi who died four years after being released from one of the camps. If there was no official policy why the similarity of the way the POWs were being treated? That's NOT said by Bacque- it's what I've discovered for myself. Either you're claiming a massive internet conspiracy of right wingers or you need to be more open minded.

 

I'm not asking you to believe Bacque I'm asking you to be open minded enough to work it out yourself. I'm not claiming Bacque as the be all and end all of this and never have if you read my posts. Quite the opposite.

 

I had the honour, a few years ago, of interviewing a former Luftwaffe pilot, a gentleman, and we got on well. Eventually I broached the subject of the camps passing over some photographs. His reaction was immediate. 'I will talk about anything but this...this s**t happened...but I won't talk about it.'

 

It's interesting that I'm labelled a Bacquite and that's me dismissed so easily but being an Ambrosier-ite is acceptable. 'Opposing views are dismissed by referring back to that one source and claiming all of the others are in some kind of conspiracy or denial about the "truth" that one author has discovered,' or in this case denied.

 

It seems as though I've been left the field of battle by the retreating Historian and LRusso216. It would be good to hear from anyone else who wants to either confirm or deny what's claimed here about the camps. If not then the evidence can speak for itself and let's not be reduced to siding as a Bacquite or Ambrosia-ite. Surely we're good enough to go beyond this mud slinging.


As for Eisenhower and the quote on his, 'Its a pity we could not have killed more,' in regard to German POWs, of course he's not going to quote himself on that in his memoirs, but the quote from the carbon copy of an original letter from Eisenhower to Marshall, May 25th, 1943. and was suppressed from the two editions of his letters.


Finally if you want an historian to back up claims of the SS being disposed of try David Stafford (I hope he is considered a qualified and respected enough historian), in his book Endgame, paperback, page 125, he cites evidence of an accepted unwritten policy of the SS being executed and give examples.


The truth is out there.

 

So let's see a link to the original.

No, he just quotes yet more anecdotal evidence. You keep saying it was "official policy", yet seem curiously unable to provide any hard and fast evidence to support that.

Like the fact you're a regular contributor to Stormfront, you mean?

 

The evidence for the quote is in the George C Marshall Foundation. As for David Stafford, if you read what he has to say the policy was to kill the SS rather than take them prisoner-and he provides evidence that this was widely understood by US soldiers. The gibe about ,'Stormfront,' is well below the belt and does this discussion no credit.

 

So post a link to it.

Which is sheer anecdotal evidence. You keep claiming this was official policy. Please provide proof.

Well, truth hurts, and all that.