Culpability of the German Officer Corps (Again) was Hitler as Commander (Again)

I agree with the thrust of your remarks, but would like to qualify them with a tactical, time-related issue. By the time of the bomb assination attempt against Hitler in July 1944, the war was ckearly lost. By that time, a clear military alternative to outright surrender was to collapse the Western front and throw all forces against the Soviets.

The subsequent sequemce of events is a little murky, but I cannot see the Western Allies sitting still when victory was offered to them on a plate. Surely they would have moved as fara s Berlin, probably all the way at least to the eastern borders of the Third Reich, possibly up to the Eastern Front itself. That would have spared German civilians the worst of the Red Army revenge, at least immediately and quite likely forever.

There is a new (or rather renovated) story, a German book. A group of German officers planned the restauration of the German Army. Hitler was in some way a tool.

The Soviets used to accuse Hitler he were a tool used by German capitalists and militarists. Later Hitler as a person was studied. Now we return to the 'sources'. I believe Remstmaa supported the book.

Jerzy Pankiewicz

A group of officers, led by von Seeckt, planned as you say. Some of them thought Hitler could be used as a tool, once convinced that he wasn't going to try to dump the military in favor of the SA. Actually, quite a few people tried to use Hitler as a tool, or to put him into impossible situations. It didn't work very well.

While capitalists and militarists supported Hitler in some of his activities, they never controlled Hitler.

The fact is that most of the German population and officers supported Hitler in his desire to conquer Europe, especially France! That alone makes the German officers culpaple in the massacre of millions of soldiers and civilians of other nations long before the war started turning bad for them. The fact that you are a soldier does not make the act of aggression and war right. Unjustified invasions and war are as much murder as the 'final solution'. Hitlers murdering of the Jews of Europe just shows how many people in Germany were swept up in the desire to rid Europe of jews. A large percentage of the German population joined the Nazi Party (with its puplished anti-semite beliefs) long before Hitler became the Fuhrer. They joined because they wanted to. The murdering of millions of people can't happen just because one guy at the top was giving orders. At the end of the war the Counter Intelligence Corps and the war crimes tribunals used the nazi party file records to judge who was a true Nazi and who wasn't. If someone joined the Nazi party early enough they were probably a Nazi. Plus their application for the party had in their own words why they wanted to join.

Its one thing to be a soldier defending your country, its another to be one too conquer and subjugate your neighbors. True not everyone participated in the 'final solution' but they certainly didn't mind conquering there neighbors.

A group of officers, led by von Seeckt, planned as you say. Some of them thought Hitler could be used as a tool, once convinced that he wasn't going to try to dump the military in favor of the SA. Actually, quite a few people tried to use Hitler as a tool, or to put him into impossible situations. It didn't work very well.

While capitalists and militarists supported Hitler in some of his activities, they never controlled Hitler.

As opposed to WSC, Stalin or FDR? IMHO, not a lot to choose between the four. And military officers are not in their positions to be political advocates. They fight the war their nation is in. If war is trust upon their nation, as the UK thrust war on Germany, then their duty is to fight, and do so to the best of their abilities. The UK, UK and USSR expected no less of their officers.

-snip-

Sure it can. Chairman Mao killed 29,000,000 farmers, nationalist army officers and government officials when he took control of Mainland China. Stalin killed 20-25,000,000 in the years following Lenin death's and during the second world war, not counting military deaths. Lenin killed 6-8,000,000 Ukrainian farmers and political nusiances. Besides Hitler's killing 5,100,000 jews and about 10,000,000 others. (Zbignew Brezezinski's numbers)

Lots of Communist secret police personnel who carried out those massacres are living in Russia and China on government pensions. The only officials ever brought to trial were Germans.

<snip>

Oh, Brzezinsky. The guy who called Gorbachev 'The most dangerous Soviet leader since Lenin.' It's interesting that the danger of Gorbachev exceeded even the danger of Stalin in Brzezinsky's mind. Tells you a lot about how Brzezinsky's mind operates.

And how much credibility his work deserves.

Stuart Wilkes

I think Glenn Steinburg has already answered this idiotic point.

in. (snip)

You show your ignorance of the role of military chiefs in a modern democracy such as Britain in WW2. It simply was not possible for politicians to 'make a war happen' and expect the Chiefs of Staff, the General Staff and the officer corp to follow them blindly into battle. The British Chiefs of Staff were ultimately responsible to the Crown, not the Government, for their actions and in WW2 they had at all times a right of appeal both to the Crown and to the Houses of Commons and Lords. If they felt that the executive - the Ministers - were behaving improperly or against British national interests or indeed in ignorance of British military capabilities, then their views would have been heard and carried great weight. You consistently fail to see the difference between a multi-party democracy in a constitutional monarchy or federal republic and a totalitarian dictatorship.

Germany,

You keep saying this, and it becomes more pathetic with each

Steve