Which side would you fly for?.......

Which side would you fly for?

  • Total voters
    122

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


No, I do not take your post as anything other than opinion and no offense is taken either.

As to answer your question. No, I don't have a problem with the swastika. It is only a symbol and nothing more. It is a part of history and I have no problem with it being put on restored aircraft or equipment, especially in museums.

I also do not have a problem with SS insignia or anything like that. I would not display them or wear them or anything, but I am a WW2 Militaria collector. I collect uniforms, equipment and insignia from all sides including the 3rd Reich. I own many original WW2 German uniforms, quite a bit of insignia and other equipment. (I collect however from many nations including the US and the UK.) I have no problem buying the artifacts and displaying them with the rest of my collection. I believe these things should be preserved and displayed so that people may learn from these things. As soon as we ban such symbols people will forget. I myself would like to someday open a non profit museum of some sort.

Please don't take me wrong, I don't believe that people should should display these signs on modern day T-shirts of flags and parade around showing hate toward people, but I don't believe in banning and displaying them. I for instance will hang my 3rd Reich Flags in a display with the rest of my 3rd Reich collection, of course right next to it will be the Allied collection as well. It is a WW2 display, not a display of my beliefs as I do not agree with what the Nazis stood for.

Here is a link to a Militaria thread that we have here. There are some pics from my collection. I hope you can understand what I mean by this.
http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/off-topic-misc/militaria-collecting-15242.html
 
I guess the protests about voting for the axis air forces dont relate to the personnel doing the flying, rather, it goes to some of the people doing the voting. It seems inevitable that some guys would vote that way for all the wrong reasons.

For the record, this is my position.....its an intensely personal choice which way people vote, and we should not interfere with that. As far as the actual flyers of the period, most were not politically active, though some were. They cannot avoid the label that they supported a pretty evil regime, and that regime tainted their reputations to the extent of affecting their honour. Collectively, Germany was responsible for waging an aggressive war, but only to the extent of establishing national responsibility, not individual responsibility. Once national responsibility is established, it becomes possible to track down and bring to justice those individually responsible for war crimes.

that whole process has led to approximately 30 war crimes trials, of which about 2/3 were actually convicted. Thats not collective responsibility (apart from establishing national war guilt) and from that it cannot be argued that many individuals of the Luftwaffe were actually guilty of political involvement with the nazis. What I will say is that fighting for a soul-less cause like the Nazis, robs these men of their honour, which is sad, since most of these men were honourable men (and there is a difference).

(EDIT: In fact there were more convictions and trials than that. The main trial, the International Military Tribunal (or IMT) indicted 24 individuals. There were 12 death sentences, 7 imprisonments, 2 died or committed suicide, and 3 acquittals. as there were four main charges brought to the court, some individuals were acquitted of some charges and indicted on others. In additiona there were Miltary tribunals, or camp trials, of which the following is a summary:

The Dachau Camp Trials: 40 officials were tried; 36 of the defendants were sentenced to death on 13 December 1945. Of these, 23 were hanged on the 28 May and 29 May 1946, including the former commandant Martin Gottfried Weiss and the camp doctor Claus Schilling. Smaller groups of Dachau camp officials and guards were included in several subsequent trials by the U.S. court. On 21 November 1946 it was announced that, up to that date, 116 defendants of this category had been convicted and sentenced to terms of imprisonment.

The Mauthausen Camp Trials: 61 officials of this camp were tried by a U.S. military court at Dachau in March/April, 1946; 58 defendants were sentenced to death on 11 May 1946. Those executed included the commandant of the SS-Totenkopfverbände.

The Flossenbürg Camp Trial: 52 officials and guards of this camp were tried between 12 June 1946 and 19 January 1947. Of the defendants, 15 sentenced to death and 25 to terms of imprisonment.

The Buchenwald Camp Trial: Between April and August, 1947, 31 defendants were found guilty. Of these 22 were sentenced to death; 9 to imprisonment.

The Mühldorf Camp Trial, five officials were sentenced to death by a U.S. war crimes court at Dachau on 13 May 1947 and seven to imprisonment.

The "Dora"-Nordhausen Trial: On 7 August 1947 it convicted 15 former SS guards and Kapos (one was executed). The trial also addressed the question of liability of Mittelwerk V-2 rocket scientists).

There have been some criticisms of the legal processes followed after the war, but my opinion is that they were as fair as they could be. The allied (and Soviet) responses to the spectre of Nazi attrocities was measured and restrained, in the legal sense at least. Certainly prefereable to Stalins idea of sumarily shooting 100000 officers without trial, something Churchill was violently opposed to.....



What I will say is that in my opinion there were more than 20 war criminals in Germany at the end of the war, but a lot less than the numbers of LW pilots that served the regime. We will never know exactly how many there actually were.
 
Last edited:
".... What I will say is that fighting for a soul-less cause like the Nazis, robs these men of their honour, which is sad, since most of these men were honourable men (and there is a difference). "

Many outstanding German warriors were the sons of Lutheran pastors (Michael Whitman, and Rudel, to name two). Adolf Galland was French Huguenot by
blood-line.

I doubt these men were soulless. Parsifal - the Red Menace that stalked the German proletariat from 1918 onwards was a real and menacing threat to Christians -- more so for Protestants than Catholics. Communism is godlessness - and for Christians communism can be equated with the anti-Christ.

I am not making allowances for Nazis but I am reminding readers that many Germans turned to and supported Nazism as the only bulwark against Communism. Unless you have had to make that choice - you would be wise to hold moral judgement. The abuses of global communism far outstrip the abuses of the Nazis
state. Sober second thought, please.

MM
 
Hi Mike

I didnt say the men were soul-less...it was the nazi regime that was lacking in soul. its a rhetorical reference, alluding to the nazis complete lack of principal really.

I dont have to make moral judgement, in fact i make strenuous effort not to. i rely on the findings of the courts set up for that purpose who found Germany, as a nation was guilty of waging aggressive war, and as a result of that its personnel could then be held accountable for criminal activities. not everyone, but some of them.

As for

"I am not making allowances for Nazis but I am reminding readers that many Germans turned to and supported Nazism as the only bulwark against Communism. Unless you have had to make that choice - you would be wise to hold moral judgement. The abuses of global communism far outstrip the abuses of the Nazis
state. Sober second thought, please".

That is in fact making a moral judgement based on personal beliefs. Whereas the Germans have been found guilty of waging an aggressive war, and some of its personnel indicted for offences carried out in the name of that aggression, no such indictment has ever been levelled against the Soviets. A legal defence, i admit, because i agree that the Soviets are guilty of some heinous crimes. but the difference is this, whereas the Germans have had moral judgement already passed on them in a court of law, the Soviets have not. We can make our statements about the germans without recourse to passing moral judgement....thats been done for us....but we cannot make our statements regarding the Soviets except if cross a line and start making our own moral judgements, based on our own prejudices and preconceptions.

Somebody needs the courage to place Stalin and his cronies on trial. If they did, I would be the first to applaud.
 
Last edited:
You quote me: "... "I am not making allowances for Nazis but I am reminding readers that many Germans turned to and supported Nazism as the only bulwark
against Communism.

Not just the Soviets, Parsifal, the COMMUNISTS - Stalin-Mao-Pol Pot .....

Nazism is tribal at heart. Communism is phony-baloney brotherhood of working blahbbidy-blah-blah world take-over.

You place more credit in "the courts" than I do, Parsifal.

MM
 
Its not that I have a great deal of faith in the courts, its just that the alternatives are even less appealing. Its all we have to make reasoned, legal judgements. We need to respect its authority and function, because the alternatives are far worse.

The law is supposed to be based on two things, the law of statute, and the law of custom, or common law, but ultimately both these legal bases' are linked to what society expects....its moral judgement if you like, about right and wrong. Judgements that deal with moral issues, must, necessarily cling more tightly to these principals because laws at the end of the day are about what the majority considers to be right, and judgements on moral issues have to be rooted in what the majority thinks is right. Any judgements based on any other principal are starting to enter the twilight zone, or are meaningless because they just let off so much hot air.

So determining if communism is right or wrong would depend on what society....in this case the worldwide community thought of those political systems.
 
I think Natzism is nowerdays used wrongly as a convenient name for far right, as much as Communism for the far left when Tyrany wise they are nearly identical in killing all who disagree and their justifying arguments for rationalising said killings.
Except for how they appeal to their public, and how/what they say, both take away rights both generally prefer themselves as The religion - unless they are relgous based, in which case they demonise act much more evilly with malice without concience.
Everyone says or likes to think "I'm not a ___, but ..." or "How can you say such a thing, were never go that far ..." until after the fact or future hindsight educates them to the truth that they did go or do that.

The rightwingers going further outwards (there seems to be no real or actual leftwingers, just shades of right), of the Northern American Continent uses Commie this and Natzi that too much in the wrong context. I feel this is very dangerous and is not a game of the namecalling as it appears to be accepted as nowerdays i.e; American Republicanist comparing American Democrats to the Communists/Stalinists.

Things like this is partially leading to rising racism, politism/politicalism, nationalism and the eventual prospect of christian fundamentalism, and it will act just as bad as they say those old evil enemies did; like a new age Spanish Inquisition with tech, say, within 30 to 70 years time.
In which case I'll burn at the stake for being a non believer - kcuF em, kcuf em all who tread the path to the darkside of humanity.

In another parallel universe, in a galaxy far far away, 'The Salvation Army' is armed, and it is an army, but they still have the same black uniform, with the same silver piping and the same 'SA' motiffs, and the same cut of uniform style.
 
Last edited:
"... determining if communism is right or wrong would depend on what society....in this case the worldwide community thought of those political systems."

Oh really - right or wrong is "relative", Parsifal. Female circumcision might be "right" in Somalia and "wrong" in Sydney ... that's what you're saying.
Honor Killing might be "right" in Lahore but "wrong" in London.

It's called "relativism", Parsifal, and it's a fatal disease ... check yourself in man ....
 
Last edited:
There are very different mindsets in the various regions of North Anerica and to make that blanket statement is wrong.
 
what alternatives would you suggest....that we impose the white mans burden on these people and summarily shoot anyone who oposes us. I would be opposed to that, if that is relativism then i am guilty as charged.

Colonialism, imperialism, capitalism, call it what you like, is no more successful than communism, and in some instances just as bloodthirsty.

Imposing our wills on other peoples, allegedly for their benefit is not going to work. Imposing our will, for our benefit, is sometimes necessary, such as in Iraq. But it is not the way to achieve lasting change. Neither are the courts. The courts, the rule of law, can deal with the major offenders, if the national will is there. In a few isolated situations there are International tribunals that can deal with crimes against humanity....war crimes if you like, but if the national morality of a community is bankrupt, such as in Somalia, this cannot be effective either, unless and until that society is changed. You dont do that at the end of a gun, or by imposing summary law not based on the will of that people, though these may be necessary as temporary measures to facilitate the lead back to societal strength. You may need to occupy and temporarily impose such measures, but in the end, it is the nation building intiatives (a part of which is the imposition of the rule of law, another is the development of education and another employment) that will solve these issues.

It will be intersting to see what happens in Libya as trhese very issues will come up for that country in the next few years
 
Wrong statement, I certainly hope I/it will be pbfoot, I just can't help this gut feeling I've had ever since the War on Terror started... like being back under the Cold War feeling of when's it going to happen, what will be the result, that sort of unassuming niggle yer know, that inexorbinately grows overtime...

I've edited it a bit more pbfoot with minor additions to clear up any logical (to me) problems.
Apologies (if you believe me or not)

If given the choice, I'd fly in these for love, curiousity and their abilities/personalities;
Spitfire Mk IXe, Bf.109G6, Mitsubishi J2M4, Yokashuka (spelling) D4Y, P-51C, B-17F, Avro Lancaster, F8F2 Bearcat, Ki-44-II-Otsu (and later Ki-84-Ib Hayate) Kyushu J1W1 Shinden.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, if its the gear that floats your boats, then the choices become harder. its another way of saying what is the best aircraft to fly and survive.

In that case I think i would most like to fly the Mosquito NF XII with Serrate and AI mk VIII or higher. Best missions would be flying low level nightime intruder missions
 

I can understand anyone's interest in history..after all that is what we are here for.
Displaying your (or anyone else who has a personal collection) WW2 private collection is your right. Personally, I would not have any SS insignia or equipment in my home, and again that is my right of choice. I would, however, fill the place with parts of Spitfires / Merlin's given the chance. I have no doubt that some people would find that odd and offensive.
I'm torn between historical accuracy and and an undeniable feeling of repulsion with the swastika. I feel the same about the Klu Klux Klan hoods and the trappings of the Vatican.
Interestingly, I have read unfavourable comments about the Frenchman and his unearthing of the WW1 tank that got hit and buried at Cambrai. Is it a war grave or is it right to dig it up and display it so people can learn more?
The same goes for locating the Titanic and the battleships in which so many men died. Do we find them and open a window? or leave them be?
Best wishes with your museum project Chris.
Cheers
John
 
If I was going to have to fly and fight, I'd want the aircraft that gives me the greatest chance of survival.

Countless hours on flight sims have let me know I'll never really be a fighter pilot, so I'd have to go for bombers or recon.

In that vein, I'd choose the RAF and a de Havilland Mosquito. By preference, I'd prefer photo-reconnaissance.
 
I need my coffee Readle; thought you were implying..
I think you answered your own question as soon as you asked it; if because it was not found due to bombardment mud splattering or whatever etc, was burried or hid it from recovery, if the tank stiill has any of its crew inside and or human remains under, on or around it then it is a war grave.
If it was an lost tank, an unknown war grave then the farmer can be initiallly forgiven for digging it up unless he carried on by a immoral margin after finding any remains, loose parts surrounding it shouldn't matter, unless they were partially attatched still to the main 'tomb' componant/area.

Parsifail; I wouldn't fly the best of each because that be boring, because it is a hyperthetical question on the past using our own knowedges and opinions as guidance; and I can choose unlike when you do sevre, you have much less choice and even less time to decide upon them (generally).
 
Last edited:

I'm not implying anything, just expressing my opinion.

www.tank-cambrai.com

The unearthing of such a rare survivalist like Deborah will always a row. Imagine if the legendary 7th fuehrer Berlin bunker was found now.
Personally, I think that everyone concerned has acted with dignity and respected the fallen.It is a somewhat unnerving machine to visit, but I recommend it.

Stay here Hotel Beatus

Cheers
John
 

That is your choice. The day that we "remove" all these symbols is the day that the world forgets. Again I am not saying they should be displayed on buildings and so forth. I work on an old 3rd Reich Airfield. The swastikas are all removed as they should be, same with all the public buildings throughout Germany. To keep them on the buidlings would be offensive. But on a restored aircraft in a museum, or a uniform that is displayed in a museum? No, it should be there.

Also remember that uniform in my collection with the swastika on it, is not hurting anyone. It is an artifact. It is no different than the British Colonial Uniform in a museum about the British Colonies in India. I am sure the Indian people don't really care for it, but it should be available to the public to see and view. It is history...
 


Chris, I have been cutting down the gum tree in the back garden mulling about our posts.
You are right, Museum items artefacts should be correct and authentic.
I may not like it very much, but that's too bad. History is history warts and all.
As you know, I am fully aware of the travesties of the British empire...I rather suspect that the only surviving items are in London.
Thank you
Regards
John
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

M
  • Poll
Which one is overall better between Ta-152H and P-47M/N?
2
Replies
30
Views
7K
_PabloSniper_
A
Is Mig 21 Better For Fight
2
Replies
20
Views
4K
Zipper730
  • Poll
Which period/theater of WWII do you enjoy studying the most?
Replies
6
Views
2K
gomwolf
G
  • Poll
Which was better
Replies
5
Views
2K
Supermarine-SpitfireMkXIV
  • Poll
Which aircraft was the better Russian bomber?
Replies
5
Views
5K
GrauGeist
Menu
Log in
Register