Gott mit uns, God is with us. I think that was on their WW1 buckles also.
Last edited:
70th anniversary of Hiroshima
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Gott mit uns, God is with us. I think that was on their WW1 buckles also.
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
Not really...a quick example: it's well known that Eisenhower prayed with the troops before they departed for Normandy, but did von Brauchitsch pray with the troops before Barbarossa? No.
If you're referring to "Gott Mit Uns", that's held over from the Imperial Prussian buckles, and some German units used that motto on theirs as well. Other units, such as the Bavarians had an entirely different motto and emblem.
Pre-war Germany kept the Imperial Prussian design and replaced the crown or "dopple-adler" with the Eagle/Swastika emblem. And like in WWI, many units had other mottos/motifs on their buckles.
WWI Prussian buckle (1916):
WWII Wehrmacht buckle (1938):
GregP
Major
Well tom,
You have your opinions and you got them honestly. You come from a religous family and they also serve. Suppose I come up with a perfectly reasonable argument that there is no God, with sources. Would it change your mind? I assume no. You have to believe in something or you don't stand for anything.
I've been studying WWII as an actice subject of interest, albeit mostly aviation and some naval, for more than 50 years and have formed opinions based on my own study and experiences that include speaking with several high-scoring Luftwaffe aces of the war as well as with Ivan Kozhebud of the Soviet Union when he was signing prints and Suburo Sakai when he was visiting Arizona in the 1980's. I own one signed print from each.
So someone posting a few lines in a forum is suposed to change my opinions, especially when they often don't quote any source that can be found? Perhaps I should blindly follow everyone in here who purports to be an expert on some subject when I can often clearly recognize their apparent expertise as a quote from a book I read? Yeah, right.
I see that most of the people who say I am rigid have NEVER changed their minds about anything yet in here. They concentrtate on changing the minds of others. Show me where you've been convinvced of anything significant that you had been arguing the other way and we can talk. Can't recall that one myself, but I also have not really been watching for it.
I'm here for the aircraft and the discussion of same. The rest just sort of happens.
I'll try my best to discuss, but I have lousy luck with that. People seem to want to fight about it rather than discuss it. When it degenerates into sarcasm and personal attack, the discussion is and has been over, and it's started into the "let's see how badly we can insult the other one and maybe he'll get mad and get banned" part.
Want to change the opinions of a reasonable person? State your argument, offer sources that can actually be found, and stay away from insult and sarcasm. No, I'm not going to spend $90 on some book because you say that 3 lines on page 298 back you up. But if it only a few lines, scan it and post it. However, if your contention is the truth and if the subject is general, it should show up in multiple sources and be backed up with multiple accounts. Sometimes an incident is documented in only one or maybe two places, and that is all there is about the subject.
As far as faith goes, I saw a LOT of it when the situation was tight and saw almost none when it was tight the other way ... that is we were kicking butt. Sure there were chaplains. I knew many. Their services were packed just before a fight was about to happen and empty after the fight when life wasn't in doubt. I think I know soldiers as well as anyone who served in a conflict. They need somone with whom to plead for salvation before they are about to be placed in a situation where they might be killed or when they are wounded and dying or maybe dying. Some need a regular Sunday service.
So the service provides for that. It's the same service that issues your rifle and ammunition, and the Chaplains have a budget, just like everyone else. God has always been a good tool for armies. Convince the grunts that God is on your side and you can lead millions to a glorious victory. So I am well aware that God and faith have been invoked by political and military leaders from the start of warfare. After you sweep away the religious and political stuff, what is the message that is left? That's the takeaway.
You'll never convince me that God supports a war on either side. It certainly doesn't follow the main teachings of whatever book someone wants to base a religion on, be it Bible or otherwise. If a main "religion book" DID support war, that religion would probably be outlawed everywhere since we're too prone to war anyway.
And agreeing to disagree is the basis for getting along with diverse stances. Once you do that, you can find some areas of common ground and start to build discussion from there. If you take the stance of "you have to agree with me or else we are enemies," then war starts. So I don't think agreeing to disagree is a bad thing.
You have your opinions and you got them honestly. You come from a religous family and they also serve. Suppose I come up with a perfectly reasonable argument that there is no God, with sources. Would it change your mind? I assume no. You have to believe in something or you don't stand for anything.
I've been studying WWII as an actice subject of interest, albeit mostly aviation and some naval, for more than 50 years and have formed opinions based on my own study and experiences that include speaking with several high-scoring Luftwaffe aces of the war as well as with Ivan Kozhebud of the Soviet Union when he was signing prints and Suburo Sakai when he was visiting Arizona in the 1980's. I own one signed print from each.
So someone posting a few lines in a forum is suposed to change my opinions, especially when they often don't quote any source that can be found? Perhaps I should blindly follow everyone in here who purports to be an expert on some subject when I can often clearly recognize their apparent expertise as a quote from a book I read? Yeah, right.
I see that most of the people who say I am rigid have NEVER changed their minds about anything yet in here. They concentrtate on changing the minds of others. Show me where you've been convinvced of anything significant that you had been arguing the other way and we can talk. Can't recall that one myself, but I also have not really been watching for it.
I'm here for the aircraft and the discussion of same. The rest just sort of happens.
I'll try my best to discuss, but I have lousy luck with that. People seem to want to fight about it rather than discuss it. When it degenerates into sarcasm and personal attack, the discussion is and has been over, and it's started into the "let's see how badly we can insult the other one and maybe he'll get mad and get banned" part.
Want to change the opinions of a reasonable person? State your argument, offer sources that can actually be found, and stay away from insult and sarcasm. No, I'm not going to spend $90 on some book because you say that 3 lines on page 298 back you up. But if it only a few lines, scan it and post it. However, if your contention is the truth and if the subject is general, it should show up in multiple sources and be backed up with multiple accounts. Sometimes an incident is documented in only one or maybe two places, and that is all there is about the subject.
As far as faith goes, I saw a LOT of it when the situation was tight and saw almost none when it was tight the other way ... that is we were kicking butt. Sure there were chaplains. I knew many. Their services were packed just before a fight was about to happen and empty after the fight when life wasn't in doubt. I think I know soldiers as well as anyone who served in a conflict. They need somone with whom to plead for salvation before they are about to be placed in a situation where they might be killed or when they are wounded and dying or maybe dying. Some need a regular Sunday service.
So the service provides for that. It's the same service that issues your rifle and ammunition, and the Chaplains have a budget, just like everyone else. God has always been a good tool for armies. Convince the grunts that God is on your side and you can lead millions to a glorious victory. So I am well aware that God and faith have been invoked by political and military leaders from the start of warfare. After you sweep away the religious and political stuff, what is the message that is left? That's the takeaway.
You'll never convince me that God supports a war on either side. It certainly doesn't follow the main teachings of whatever book someone wants to base a religion on, be it Bible or otherwise. If a main "religion book" DID support war, that religion would probably be outlawed everywhere since we're too prone to war anyway.
And agreeing to disagree is the basis for getting along with diverse stances. Once you do that, you can find some areas of common ground and start to build discussion from there. If you take the stance of "you have to agree with me or else we are enemies," then war starts. So I don't think agreeing to disagree is a bad thing.
Last edited:
bobbysocks
Chief Master Sergeant
You'll never convince me that God supports a war on either side. It certainly doesn't follow the main teachings of whatever book someone wants to base a religion on, be it Bible or otherwise. If a main "religion book" DID support war, that religion would probably be outlawed everywhere since we're too prone to war anyway.
you obviously have never read the old testament....
you obviously have never read the old testament....
GregP, why do you think you are the only one who as access to veterans and speaks to veterans? Every argument you get into you bring this up...
Just like when you told Bill that he should speak to P-51 flyers like you have. Not even realizing that his Dad flew them in WW2, and that he has spoken to not only him(for crying out loud it is his father), but just about every other famous ace from all sides of the war.
Just an annoying observation...
Just like when you told Bill that he should speak to P-51 flyers like you have. Not even realizing that his Dad flew them in WW2, and that he has spoken to not only him(for crying out loud it is his father), but just about every other famous ace from all sides of the war.
Just an annoying observation...
GregP
Major
I'm aware of his father's status. It seems some verterans don't think like others. Go figure. I suppose we will have to put up with diverse opinions, just like in real life. I have zero doubts he has spoken to a lot of WWII pilots. They don't seem to have told him what some others have told me and that is not surprising. People can see the same event and come away with completely different impressions. So the opinions of the pilots he spoke with are right and everyone elses's are incorrect? Can't agree with that one. I don't think the pilots he spoke with are wrong, they just expressed different thoughts from the one I spoke with. Pretty normal in life.
I'd discuss it, but only when it doesn't escalate into personal attacks. Maybe it's better not to fight than to get heated. I'll go with that any day until it is impossible.
I have no doubt Bill's opinions and knowledge are solid and I have respect for both as well as the opinions of others as long as they don't try to beat me over the head with them and try to convince me that only they are right and there is no room for any dissenting thoughts. Haven't had much luck there.
It seems I can't express my thoughts without someone trying their best to rescue me from them. That usually generates a response in anyone's mind. When I concede we will have a agree to disagree, I get more challenge rather than a de-escalation, coupled with sarcastic insults, and that's not aimed at Bill, so don't take it that way. We aren't arguing now and that's a good thing. Seems like a no win situation and my only course that would seemingly satisfy everyone is to surrender and concede to superior opinion. I'm not much of a surrender practitioner and I haven't noticed anyone else being so, either.
If one person is free to state their opinion publically in here, then everyone should be. Maybe I'm aiming high.
The same government that issued the "God is with us" belt buckles above also created death camps and did their best to kill off a race of people. I think you can't have it both ways. Any God I'd worship wouldn't sanction mass murder for any reason. Others may feel there is no juxtaposition there at all. If so, I cannot agree. I can shut up and not discuss it, but I cannot agree. Perhaps religion isn't such a good subject in a subforum called "Aviation."
I'd discuss it, but only when it doesn't escalate into personal attacks. Maybe it's better not to fight than to get heated. I'll go with that any day until it is impossible.
I have no doubt Bill's opinions and knowledge are solid and I have respect for both as well as the opinions of others as long as they don't try to beat me over the head with them and try to convince me that only they are right and there is no room for any dissenting thoughts. Haven't had much luck there.
It seems I can't express my thoughts without someone trying their best to rescue me from them. That usually generates a response in anyone's mind. When I concede we will have a agree to disagree, I get more challenge rather than a de-escalation, coupled with sarcastic insults, and that's not aimed at Bill, so don't take it that way. We aren't arguing now and that's a good thing. Seems like a no win situation and my only course that would seemingly satisfy everyone is to surrender and concede to superior opinion. I'm not much of a surrender practitioner and I haven't noticed anyone else being so, either.
If one person is free to state their opinion publically in here, then everyone should be. Maybe I'm aiming high.
The same government that issued the "God is with us" belt buckles above also created death camps and did their best to kill off a race of people. I think you can't have it both ways. Any God I'd worship wouldn't sanction mass murder for any reason. Others may feel there is no juxtaposition there at all. If so, I cannot agree. I can shut up and not discuss it, but I cannot agree. Perhaps religion isn't such a good subject in a subforum called "Aviation."
Last edited:
It reminds me of the aftermath of the WW1 meetings in no mans land when they supposedly played football (the football maybe a myth but they certainly met and had a drink) both sides concluded they were fighting deluded mad men who thought that God was with them when obviously God was with us.
My Grandmother and her sons were involved in the war they routinely invoked God in everyday conversation like "God speed" when leaving or God willing if something wasnt certain.
GregP
Major
I've always had the belief that the common soldiers on both side were usually quite similar in their thoughts and hopes, and that they were fighting because their politicians failed at their jobs and resorted to war.
Almost everyone going off to war has family ask God for their safe return. They usually ask it themselves. Never doubted that.
What I said was they aren't praying when they're shooting from a strong position and things are going well ... they're praying when they're being shot at or are in a tight position. It's what I saw. Others may have seen things differently but, so far, they've mentioned it when THEY were in tight spots, which is what I said happens. So far, I don't see any contradictions.
When your grandmother's sons left, were they going to town and back for food or supplies or were they going off to war as soldiers? Hopefully all survived the war. My grandmother used to say about things when they were certain, that she hoped it would be OK ... "the good Lord willing and the creek don't rise ..." A couple of times it did rise, but they had built the house on a raised foundation, so they were fine. A bit of forethought helped a lot.
Almost everyone going off to war has family ask God for their safe return. They usually ask it themselves. Never doubted that.
What I said was they aren't praying when they're shooting from a strong position and things are going well ... they're praying when they're being shot at or are in a tight position. It's what I saw. Others may have seen things differently but, so far, they've mentioned it when THEY were in tight spots, which is what I said happens. So far, I don't see any contradictions.
When your grandmother's sons left, were they going to town and back for food or supplies or were they going off to war as soldiers? Hopefully all survived the war. My grandmother used to say about things when they were certain, that she hoped it would be OK ... "the good Lord willing and the creek don't rise ..." A couple of times it did rise, but they had built the house on a raised foundation, so they were fine. A bit of forethought helped a lot.
GregP said:
That's exactly what you do...
Person A: "I heard this..."
You: "That is wrong. I work at a museum and I talk to Veterans all damn day. They told me differently, so you are wrong, I am right. I'll take their word over what you have heard any day."
Just an observation...
I have nothing but respect, love your knowledge, and what you bring to this forum, but I got news for you, you are not the only one who has access to these things.
Last edited:
I don't think it is a myth. My Grandmother has told me stories of her father participating in this very thing in WW1.
As a combat veteran myself, I have witnessed lots of soldiers praying even when things where good, not just when in a tough spot. Why? Because there is no such thing in combat a situation that was not hell, scary and tough.
parsifal
Colonel
Im not religious, but people do strange things when confronted with danger. Im happy to admit that when given the opportunity to think about something about to happen, I jumped at the chance of asking for divine intervention....basically "if something is going to happen big guy, please dont make it be me?"
People who are scared do stuff, anything, to deal with that terror.
People who are scared do stuff, anything, to deal with that terror.
what I resent is the implication that anyone of faith is not practical, or hard bitten and they can't get the job done
.
The late 60 early 70 was not a easy time to have faith, it got you branded as a outsider, a holy roller. holy roller = wuss, not really wuss in that time era, but the real term used won't get by the censor. I got into a few fights over that.
One morning I was walking up to my assigned chopper when I noticed the pilot had his eyes closed before the engine start. I thought he might be praying, I asked him later, and I was right.
I could talk about Vietnam all day if someone would listen, but I probably wouldn't mention a word about religion unless somebody asked me a specific question about it. I think a lot of people may be that way.
.
The late 60 early 70 was not a easy time to have faith, it got you branded as a outsider, a holy roller. holy roller = wuss, not really wuss in that time era, but the real term used won't get by the censor. I got into a few fights over that.
One morning I was walking up to my assigned chopper when I noticed the pilot had his eyes closed before the engine start. I thought he might be praying, I asked him later, and I was right.
I could talk about Vietnam all day if someone would listen, but I probably wouldn't mention a word about religion unless somebody asked me a specific question about it. I think a lot of people may be that way.
Exactly...
Every morning before takeoff, the chaplin came out and blessed every one of our birds before flying over the wire.
I am not religious, but I appreciated it. Especially the first time before we flew over the berm into the combat zone.
GregP
Major
I could talk about Vietnam all day, too, Tom. But we'd likely not have the same things to say as we weren't in the same unit. I CAN say it was usually hot and humid, and my housekeeper was a wonderful girl. Wish I knew her today. Combat was combat. Enough said; you know or you don't. Everything else was trying to be comfortable and cool, which almost never happened and still doesn't much today. I liked nickel Heineken night at the club, mostly because it was cheap and we didn't have much money.
If anyone goes back, stay on the well-travelled trails. My thoughts are that there are still 10,000+ unexpended booby traps along the less travelled trails, not all of them are ours.
I'll think about your points, Adler. Someone's opinion can be questioned, certainly. The result shouldn't always have to be unpleasant and escalated to be so with no comment from you mods. If we can't agree, then we can't. Doesn't mean it has to get unpleasant all the time. Civil disussion is quite ok and I'll go with that if given half a chance. If not, I can fire as well as anyone, alibeit without liking it ... civil is always better.
I don't see many objections when I get fired at, in fact ... never so far unless I object personally to a mod. But I do see it when I respond. It tends to color the response at times. Any response ... in kind ... to incoming flak should be OK, or both should not be OK, don't you think?
I'll look for a response here.
I will think about what you say / have said and also try to adjust. Maybe less really IS more. I'm not all that good at typing anyway because I have one finger that doesn't work too well. An AK-47 round through the hand does that. Less typing may be in order.
If anyone goes back, stay on the well-travelled trails. My thoughts are that there are still 10,000+ unexpended booby traps along the less travelled trails, not all of them are ours.
I'll think about your points, Adler. Someone's opinion can be questioned, certainly. The result shouldn't always have to be unpleasant and escalated to be so with no comment from you mods. If we can't agree, then we can't. Doesn't mean it has to get unpleasant all the time. Civil disussion is quite ok and I'll go with that if given half a chance. If not, I can fire as well as anyone, alibeit without liking it ... civil is always better.
I don't see many objections when I get fired at, in fact ... never so far unless I object personally to a mod. But I do see it when I respond. It tends to color the response at times. Any response ... in kind ... to incoming flak should be OK, or both should not be OK, don't you think?
I'll look for a response here.
I will think about what you say / have said and also try to adjust. Maybe less really IS more. I'm not all that good at typing anyway because I have one finger that doesn't work too well. An AK-47 round through the hand does that. Less typing may be in order.
Last edited:
There was a TV programme went into this in depth. It happened in a couple of cases, by myth I meant the idea that the whole of the front had Germans and British playing football.
GregP
Major
I think we've all heard stories about the two sides in a war decalring a temporary truce and having a holiday. Makes pretty good sense to me and follows the famous movie of same. I might do the same after a time of insane action.
I'd hesitate to say it was fiction as I have heard it often enough.
Wonder if we'll ever really know?
I'd hesitate to say it was fiction as I have heard it often enough.
Wonder if we'll ever really know?
Greg, you don't see the majority of responses from Mods. We try to keep most on the PM level. Only when effects others is it in public. There is a reason for everything. Don't think it is a "war" against you.
How many US/Allied lives were saved by the bombings?
I often read post war estimates of hundreds of thousands, but this is not what was thought at the time the decision to use the weapons was being made.
At a meeting held at the White House on 18th June 1945 this subject was discussed. US campaigns, specifically MacArthur's, between March 1944 and May 1945 were analysed in depth. This showed a total of 13,742 US killed and an estimated 310,165 Japanese killed, a ratio of 22:1. Based on this the Americans estimated their casualties for the first 30 days of the Kyushu invasion to be likely similar to those incurred at Luzon. That is 31,000 killed, missing and wounded, considerably fewer than the 42,000 incurred in the 30 days following the Normandy landings.
Leahy mentioned that the assault on Okinawa had cost the US forces 35% casualties, but was reminded of the different situation at Kyushu by King who estimated casualties somewhere between the figures for Luzon and Okinawa.
I believe that the inflated casualty predictions have come from applying the 35% Okinawa figure to the total number of troops allowed for the Kyushu landings, 776,700. This was not considered at the time.
Inflated figures in the 100,000s are post war propaganda and should be taken with at least a pinch of salt. The decision to drop the bombs was NOT based on such figures.
Cheers
Steve
I often read post war estimates of hundreds of thousands, but this is not what was thought at the time the decision to use the weapons was being made.
At a meeting held at the White House on 18th June 1945 this subject was discussed. US campaigns, specifically MacArthur's, between March 1944 and May 1945 were analysed in depth. This showed a total of 13,742 US killed and an estimated 310,165 Japanese killed, a ratio of 22:1. Based on this the Americans estimated their casualties for the first 30 days of the Kyushu invasion to be likely similar to those incurred at Luzon. That is 31,000 killed, missing and wounded, considerably fewer than the 42,000 incurred in the 30 days following the Normandy landings.
Leahy mentioned that the assault on Okinawa had cost the US forces 35% casualties, but was reminded of the different situation at Kyushu by King who estimated casualties somewhere between the figures for Luzon and Okinawa.
I believe that the inflated casualty predictions have come from applying the 35% Okinawa figure to the total number of troops allowed for the Kyushu landings, 776,700. This was not considered at the time.
Inflated figures in the 100,000s are post war propaganda and should be taken with at least a pinch of salt. The decision to drop the bombs was NOT based on such figures.
Cheers
Steve
