The ultimate warrior of all time (1 Viewer)

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

Status
Not open for further replies.
Doctor, hello!

No need to apologize, at all. I understand you very very well. Both my father´s and mother´s families have or have had persons who fought in the war and i understand certain issues stir deep emotions. It is horrible to know one of your relatives perished at the hands of thugs during the war. Believe me.

You are simply confirming my ideas, the Waffen SS are unavoidably associated with evil regimes and lust for crime. That´s precisely where the tragedy of those soldiers lies.

They have no right to respect, they have no right to pride; in the end the fate of those soldiers was so much much better than they could have hoped for, since they were not all shot or hanged when the war ended. They should thank God for such favors.

I will not add more to this, since there are several persons here whose knowledge and records i admire and respect and will not want to make comments that might offend them. With this i mean you are one of those persons whose knowledge i do respect and can also learn from it.
QUOTE]

Udet - I made the mistake of 'absolutes' in my prior post because of the personal impact .. but there is another side as always. For the Waffen SS in particular, whose formation included bot volunteers and draftees from other counries.

I became friends with Dr. Jack Palgren 25 years ago on a Remote Sensing project and over the course of time heard his side of the story on the Russian Front. He was Waffen SS Anti-Tank platoon Commander from Belgium. There was probably no arena on the face of the earth in which no quarter was given or received.

He met my father and when the discussion touched the SS (once) he only commented that while he personally never committed an atrocity, he was awash in it during the war, and simply commented "I will one day stand in judgement" - to which my father siad, "as so will we all".

Regards,

Bill
 
Think you might have misunderstood my post. I didn't say the American soldier was better than his SS counterpart because he was on the winning side. I'm saying that any warrior becomes more formidable when he believes in the cause he is fighting for. The example of American soldiers vs the SS in WW II is a stark comparison. In the American revolution the Continental Army and the civilian militia defeated a better trained and equipped British army and also defeated the Hessians who were mercenaries, fighting mostly for money.

Look what a handful of outnumbered Marines did at Wake Island. They were on the losing side but they kicked the Jap's ass in that fight.

TO

So you're saying the soldiers of the Waffen SS didn't believe in the cause they were fighting for ?? If so then thats just plain wrong. The Waffen SS wasn't made up of murderers thugs if thats what you think. The execution of civilians was carried out by the SS Totenkopfverbände Gestapo, these were the ugly fellars of the SS, not the Verfügungstruppe which were the combat troops and by far made up the bulk of the Waffen SS. Also please remember that crimes were made by every country militarily involved in WW2 - I'd dare to say that the biggest was dropping an A-bomb on a major city.

Strictly talking battlefield effectiveness I would definitely prefer the Waffen SS over most Allied units, their battlefield experience and equipment would certainly prove more than a match for most Allied units. That having been said the best military units of WW2 were those belonging to the Wehrmacht and not the SS, the average Wehrmacht soldier recieving more than three times the training of British US soldiers. The soldier of the Waffen SS didn't recieve the same training as the Wehrmacht soldier, their basic training program mainly revolving around patrionism, dedication self-sacrefice for the führer motherland. The Waffen SS did very well on the battlefield partly because it was always given first priority to new weapons, equipment supplies, and later on (42/43) because it had become a very experienced unit.


As for your example about the marines kicking the Japanese army's ass, well the Waffen SS Wehrmacht did that to the Soviet army from day one of Op. Barbarossa till the end of the war, and seriously so. The Japanese army was of no greater quality than the Soviet army, it was infact much poorer equipped than the Soviet army.
 
Also please remember that crimes were made by every country militarily involved in WW2 - I'd dare to say that the biggest was dropping an A-bomb on a major city.

I was going to try to to rationally answer your reply until I read your above quote.

BIGGEST WAR CRIME OF THE WAR? ARE YOU OUT OF YOUR F***ING MIND? Everybody was bombing civilian population centers in the war, the Atom bomb attacks saved more Japanese lives than American lives. That's right!

But to defend the fighting prowess of the SS and at the same time accuse the USA of war crimes by dropping the Atomic bomb goes over the line for me.

By the way, it was American and other Allied soldiers who kicked the German Army's ass from one end of Europe to the other.

Just ask the Screaming Eagles, All Americans, Tough 'Ombres, Big Red One etc., etc., etc.

TO
 
The Waffen SS wasn't made up of murderers thugs if thats what you think. The execution of civilians was carried out by the SS Totenkopfverbände Gestapo, these were the ugly fellars of the SS, not the Verfügungstruppe which were the combat troops and by far made up the bulk of the Waffen SS.

That's absolutely not true. I digged up an example from my homecountry. The Dutch vlliage of Putten was massacred by the SS-batallion "Nothwest" which belonged to the Waffen SS. about 650 men were deported, only 15 returned. Biggest warcrime here in the Netherlands. Please be carefull defending these SS "warriors" without having a well founded knowlege.

Also please remember that crimes were made by every country militarily involved in WW2 - I'd dare to say that the biggest was dropping an A-bomb on a major city.

The biggest was the killing of 6 milion innocent jews. While the A-bomb dropping was a horrible thing to do, it served a purpose, ending the war and preventing more killings. The "entlosung" was nothing more than a midless murdering without purpose, for the perverse joy and arrogance of the Nazi's.
 
One of the worst things was Hitler commiting suicide. None of the Allies could interview him and find out what his brain was made of.
 
I was going to try to to rationally answer your reply until I read your above quote.

BIGGEST WAR CRIME OF THE WAR? ARE YOU OUT OF YOUR F***ING MIND? Everybody was bombing civilian population centers in the war, the Atom bomb attacks saved more Japanese lives than American lives. That's right!

Two bombs were dropped, not just one, and both on major civilian cities. The A-bomb could've been demonstrated for the Japanese in better ways than killing millions of civilians. The A-bomb ended the war thats true, but it could've been dropped elsewhere.


Perhaps I was abit hasty in calling it the worst crime of WW2, seeing how many Jews were murdered by the Nazi's and how many innocent people were murdered by the Soviets - but these took place over the entire course of the war, while dropping the A-bomb was a single event.

Perhaps one of the worst crime of the war was the oil companies financing it for all parties, not least Germany.

But to defend the fighting prowess of the SS and at the same time accuse the USA of war crimes by dropping the Atomic bomb goes over the line for me.

I'm not trying to defend the SS, the SS committed many terrible war-crimes, there's no question about it, but the majority of the combat troops didn't.

Soviet troops committed even worse crimes, annihilating entire civilian villages towns.

Bottom line is I agree that the SS carried out one of the worst crimes against humanity ever, the persecution of the Jews - it was murder and nothing else, and I despise what they (SS) did as much as most in here and everywhere else do.

By the way, it was American and other Allied soldiers who kicked the German Army's ass from one end of Europe to the other.

Yet the German army achieved taking less casualties than the Allies in all theatres.

Invading Europe certainly wasn't a smooth cake run if thats what you think ToughOmbre.
_________________________

Now please ToughOmbre, cool it down will you.
 
The worst part is, buddy, that Soren always been that way... I remember a long while ago having (me as well as Plan_D and may be some other members) a strong arguement with him over a subject that I don't clearly remember... All I remember is that he was proved wrong.

What exactly is it you're trying to accuse me of Meastro ??
 
In my opinion, the Spartan warrior definitely takes the cake. He is incredibly well trained (leaving home at the age of about 8), he is a professional soldier, very well disciplined, well armed and equipped for its style of fighting, well commanded with excellent tactics.

The Spartan hoplite was the ultimate warrior. The battle victories achieved by them are remarkable. As famously quote by King Leonidas at Thermopolyae when told the Persians would block the sun with arrows...."fine then we will fight in the shade". The Spartans fought to the last man, biting, kicking and punching their enemy until final defeat.

I would class the Samurai as the most honourable and disciplined soldier of all time, but not the ultimate.
 
I would class the Samurai as the most honourable and disciplined soldier of all time, but not the ultimate.

Everyone holds the samurai in such high regard that I find it almost ridiculous.

Honor is relative to each specific culture. Samurai have been documented as "taking no prisoners," which is an attitude that pervaded all the way into WWII.

Hardly what I'd call "honor." Definitely not according to any western ideal such as chivalry.
 
More Japanese died from the firestorming of Tokoyo than the 200,000 from the bombs....

Dan - dead on.

There has never benn an 'official' accounting of the first low level March 1945 Raid on Tokyo.. estimates are as high as 200,000 for the first night alone in the 13 square miles that went up in total obliteration. I remember as a kid how much was still 'gone' in 1948-1950.
 
Soviet troops committed even worse crimes, annihilating entire civilian villages towns.

German soldiers on occasion would do similar things. I have heard of at least two villages almost wiped out by the Germans, and both involved them putting all the people into a barn and setting it on fire. Then as the civilians rushed out in flames, the German's machine gunned them.



But I suppose you could argue that when all of Tokyo was burning the chance of survival was almost as bad.

Here is a thread about an SS officer who helped one of these raids.

It says:

"The Germans rounded up the village men, forced them into barns and machine-gunned them. The 241 women and 209 children were herded into the church, which was set afire with grenades and then shot at with machine guns."
http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/ww2-general/ss-officer-1944-french-massacre-dies-9151.html
 
So you're saying the soldiers of the Waffen SS didn't believe in the cause they were fighting for ?? If so then thats just plain wrong. The Waffen SS wasn't made up of murderers thugs if thats what you think. The execution of civilians was carried out by the SS Totenkopfverbände Gestapo, these were the ugly fellars of the SS, not the Verfügungstruppe which were the combat troops and by far made up the bulk of the Waffen SS. Also please remember that crimes were made by every country militarily involved in WW2 - I'd dare to say that the biggest was dropping an A-bomb on a major city.

A bigger crime would have been at Truman's feet if he had not ordered the use and 700,000+ GI and a couple of million (or more) Japanese die in the November invasion.

Strictly talking battlefield effectiveness I would definitely prefer the Waffen SS over most Allied units, their battlefield experience and equipment would certainly prove more than a match for most Allied units.

In 1940-1943 perhaps - they had huge advantage in Battle of Bulge and were defeated

That having been said the best military units of WW2 were those belonging to the Wehrmacht and not the SS, the average Wehrmacht soldier recieving more than three times the training of British US soldiers.

Not in 1943-1945

The soldier of the Waffen SS didn't recieve the same training as the Wehrmacht soldier, their basic training program mainly revolving around patrionism, dedication self-sacrefice for the führer motherland.

Source for this claim


As for your example about the marines kicking the Japanese army's ass, well the Waffen SS Wehrmacht did that to the Soviet army from day one of Op. Barbarossa till the end of the war, and seriously so.

And so they advanced rapidly to the West while kicking the Soviet's ass and rapidly to the East while kicking Brit and US and French and Canadian butts - finally after all the ass kicking most surrendered in droves - unlike the Japanese

The Japanese army was of no greater quality than the Soviet army, it was infact much poorer equipped than the Soviet army.

The equipment, particularly armor, was not a major factor in the jungles and islands of the Pacific. Until they bumped into the Marines at Guadalcanal they had whipped everyone else... then they were never again successful.
 
As i seem to recall, and in accordance with the words of a recently retired member of the U.S. Army, the training manual and procedures used in the U.S. Army Rangers is almost a literal copy of the S.S. manual. My response to him was "you got to be kidding me...", he simply replied: "no...no kidding here son...if we copied their manual is for something don´t you think?".


Look guys, i´d invite you all to drop the "who committed more crimes" mode in this discussion; it would be better to affirm victors do not commit war crimes.

Hiroshima and Nagasaki are not war crimes for the simple reason the action was carried out by the U.S.A., a member of the winning club. I mean, it could not be easier than this. I´ve read tons of paperwork regarding the allied considerations to explain or justify the atomic bombing...too much effort invested to in the end conclude the unavoidable conclusion: victors of a war do not commit war crimes. Winners of wars embody some sort of automatic moral high ground; it upholds justice and goodness.

I´ll mention one case i studied closely a few years ago, General der Flieger Alexander Löhr.

When the war ended the Yugoslav hyennas stepped forward claiming their share of the jackpot -Yugoslavs leaded by another interesting figure supported by Good Guy Churchill, Josip Broz Tito who is responsible for the murder of God knows how many dozens of thousands of Croats immediately after the end of the war; read about the massacre of Croat civilians in Bleiburg, Austria-.

General Löhr was handed over to these revengeful Yugoslavs to stand "trial". If that was a trial then i will be the future King of England, forget about Prince Charles. So bow down before me and pledge allegiance to my Royal Banner.

To make the long story short, Löhr was subjected to a circus trial, and was condemned to death by firing squad. The sentece was of course carried out.

Among several charges, there was this one that was perhaps the more substantial of all: the murder of 17,000 Yugoslav civilians during the German attack against Yugoslavia during 1941, a few months before the launching of Barbarossa.

Further research showed the figure of 17,000 to be an entirely made up fact, guess by who? Who else could have been but the Noble and Venerable Churchill who would more than rival Goebbels and Ilya Ehrenburg in terms of disseminating lies and distortions; everything is possible and valid when it comes to defeat your enemy.

The estimates of what could have been a more accurate figure indicate ~4,000 yugoslav civilians killed by Luftwaffe operations in Yugoslavia, mostly in the capital city of Belgrade, which by the way represented a fair prize since a garrison of the Yugoslav army was active within the city.

It was an invasion in course, therefore it was important to attack any places or areas where enemy soldiers were active, something that was happening inside Belgrade.

On the other hand we have another Noble and Honorable man, Sir Arthur "-Civilian- Bomber" Harris; under his command, direction and orders, RAF bombers killed and incinerated a number of German civilians that might surpass the A-Bombing of the two japanese cities.

Civilian Bomber Harris died a peaceful death.
 
The Samauri could be brutal yes, but they honoured the warrior code with total disciplined. They would isolate an opponent on the battle field and engage in a one on one duel with them, following the laws and ethics of their code.

Even by WW2 it must be said that the Japanese still did follow this code. Never surrendering and kamikazes. The abuse of prisoner of wars and attocities are also linked to this i believe.

Not saying that they acted in what we would class socially acceptable, honourable manner but they did follow their code and fight with total dedication.

btw spartan is still ultimate soldier.
 
TO, suffice to say that your post re dropping A bombs is right on and to equate that to war crimes is as ridiculous as to say that millions of civilians were killed by them or that the war was financed by oil companies. Does that mean that the oil companies precipitated and perpetuated the second world war or the current Iraq War.
 
The Samurai were beaten by the Mongols...they had no flexibitlity or improvisation in combat so I wouldn't rate them highly as a combat force. They also kept the sword long after the musket had made it less important.
 
God point basket, but the Mongols beat many of their opponents mainly because of their highly mobile horse mounted archers. But I agree that the Samurai didn't feature much flexibility and would have a darn hard time against an opponent carriyng a shield.


Now people lets stick to the topic.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back