RE: Who was better: Patton or Rommel

RE: Who was better: Patton or Rommel (Full Version)

All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion

Message

Von Rom -> RE: Who was better: Patton or Rommel (8/14/2004 4:06:36 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Jane Doe quote: ORIGINAL: Von Rom Well, well, how nice of you to jump to max_h's aid [8\|] Many of ID's arguments were simply not arguments. Many of his assumptions were based on FALSE information. yeah, right... quote: I did not even respond to some of his arguments simply because they were ridiculous on the face of them. [8\|] quote: Surely, my example of criticizing von Manstein has shown you how someone with an agenda can tear apart any general - yes, even von Manstein. And I did that without even trying. You are aware, aren't you, that von Manstein - that vaunted German general - was tried as a war criminal and sentenced to 18 years in prison? Nope, your straw men only showed me how bad you were at debating quote: And ID had an agenda. . . He had opinions, not agenda. And IMHO his opinion seemed to be baked up pretty well by lots of research on the subject. quote: As to being enotional - I seem to recall you jumping into that other thread and pinning degoratory remarks on me. Hey, I was only trying to help you. That's why i posted a quick guide on how to debate. quote: Of course, it appears you are only interested in supporting the information that coincides with what you, yourself, believe. If you say so quote: BTW, Jane Doe, since you seem to know all about Patton - you must since you agree with ID - please tell me who originated Operation Cobra. And please provide sources. Operation Cobra was originated from God, because God is everywhere, in substance and in everyone's thoughts. AND Patton believed in God. Yeah Patton was a firm beliver. Heck Patton would have even crossed the highway with his eyes shut to show his faith in thy Lord. So it's normal that God chose Patton to be his voice on earth and be the great general who thought of operation cobra... Oh, and did you know that Patton was afraid of snakes.. talk about a coincidence... Hey but as you know, Patton was known to overcome even his worst fears! And Patton did just that when he executed the cobra. Yeah Patton was the best. Hourra for Patton! Join the witnesses of Patton Hourra for Patton! quote: And IMHO his opinion seemed to be baked up pretty well by lots of research on the subject. A lot of his information was wrong. So, if I present evidence proving the earth is flat, then you would believe that too? [8\|] quote: Operation Cobra was originated from God, because God is everywhere, in substance and in everyone's thoughts. AND Patton believed in God. Yeah Patton was a firm beliver. Heck Patton would have even crossed the highway with his eyes shut to show his faith in thy Lord. So it's normal that God chose Patton to be his voice on earth and be the great general who thought of operation cobra... Oh, and did you know that Patton was afraid of snakes.. talk about a coincidence... Hey but as you know, Patton was known to overcome even his worst fears! And Patton did just that when he executed the cobra. Yeah Patton was the best. Quite the emotional outburst. It was the kind of response I expected from you. You are a scary individual.

EricGuitarJames -> RE: Who was better: Patton or Rommel (8/14/2004 4:33:34 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Von Rom quote: ORIGINAL: JallaTryne vonRom Just a short question: Is there any commander from any other country participating in ww2 that is Pattons equal or better in your opinion? The problem I have found is this: There is a great deal of misinformation and out-right lies that have ben perpetrated about Patton, especially by historians. I am now on my 5th book about Patton, and I can now see why some people on this forum believe what they do about him - a lot of the information being written about him by authors is simply wrong. In particular, I would point to D'Este and his book "Patton A Genius for War". It is a good book. However, on many key points D'Este simply gets it wrong. It is hard to explain why he does so, whether it is a result of his poor research, his researchers, his editors, or simply because he is parroting the official army line about Patton. If people really want to learn more about Patton, and especially about the MISconduct of the war by the Allied High Command, then I would urge many of you to read: *Ladislas, Farago, Patton: Ordeal and Triumph* (New York: Astor-Honor, Inc., 1964)** This book took the author 12 years to research and write, and is the most candid and frank book I have read about Patton, the war, and about the Allied High Command. It is also the book upon which the movie "Patton" has been based. Some questions it answers: 1) Why did General McNair try to sabatoge Patton's armoured training maneuvers in 1941? 2) Who really planned Operation Cobra and the subsequent breakout? 3) Why was Patton really deprived of gas before the Mosselle River? Was there really a shortage of trucks in France as has been claimed by some historians? 4) What was the scandal in Monty's army that occurred at the same time that Patton's Third Army was being deprived of gas in Lorraine? Why has it been covered up? 5) Who was trying to kill Patton? 6) Why did the Allied High Command's order to stop Patton in Lorraine coincide at the same time with Hitler's order to also stop Patton in Lorraine? 7) Why were a small group of reporters trying to remove Patton from command? 8) Why was Allied top secret information being leaked to outside sources? 9) Why have some historians purposely (and wrongly) tried to discredit Patton? 10) Patton often said that he was fighting two enemies. One was the Germans. Who was the other enemy? These are a just a few of the many, many questions that will be answered. I highly recommend the book. It's an eye-opener. . . Would this be the same journalist who wrote a book claiming that Martin Bormann escaped to South America and also managed to 'spirit away' millions of dollars worth of Nazi Gold? Hmmm, seems like a reliable source to be quoting[8\|] By his own admission - http://www.nybooks.com/articles/10254 - he's not even a proper historian!

Sarge -> RE: Who was better: Patton or Rommel (8/14/2004 5:31:20 AM)
Hey Von Rom we get it [>:] your a Patton fan

Von Rom -> RE: Who was better: Patton or Rommel (8/14/2004 6:18:30 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: EricGuitarJames quote: ORIGINAL: Von Rom quote: ORIGINAL: JallaTryne vonRom Just a short question: Is there any commander from any other country participating in ww2 that is Pattons equal or better in your opinion? The problem I have found is this: There is a great deal of misinformation and out-right lies that have ben perpetrated about Patton, especially by historians. I am now on my 5th book about Patton, and I can now see why some people on this forum believe what they do about him - a lot of the information being written about him by authors is simply wrong. In particular, I would point to D'Este and his book "Patton A Genius for War". It is a good book. However, on many key points D'Este simply gets it wrong. It is hard to explain why he does so, whether it is a result of his poor research, his researchers, his editors, or simply because he is parroting the official army line about Patton. If people really want to learn more about Patton, and especially about the MISconduct of the war by the Allied High Command, then I would urge many of you to read: *Ladislas, Farago, Patton: Ordeal and Triumph* (New York: Astor-Honor, Inc., 1964)** This book took the author 12 years to research and write, and is the most candid and frank book I have read about Patton, the war, and about the Allied High Command. It is also the book upon which the movie "Patton" has been based. Some questions it answers: 1) Why did General McNair try to sabatoge Patton's armoured training maneuvers in 1941? 2) Who really planned Operation Cobra and the subsequent breakout? 3) Why was Patton really deprived of gas before the Mosselle River? Was there really a shortage of trucks in France as has been claimed by some historians? 4) What was the scandal in Monty's army that occurred at the same time that Patton's Third Army was being deprived of gas in Lorraine? Why has it been covered up? 5) Who was trying to kill Patton? 6) Why did the Allied High Command's order to stop Patton in Lorraine coincide at the same time with Hitler's order to also stop Patton in Lorraine? 7) Why were a small group of reporters trying to remove Patton from command? 8) Why was Allied top secret information being leaked to outside sources? 9) Why have some historians purposely (and wrongly) tried to discredit Patton? 10) Patton often said that he was fighting two enemies. One was the Germans. Who was the other enemy? These are a just a few of the many, many questions that will be answered. I highly recommend the book. It's an eye-opener. . . Would this be the same journalist who wrote a book claiming that Martin Bormann escaped to South America and also managed to 'spirit away' millions of dollars worth of Nazi Gold? Hmmm, seems like a reliable source to be quoting[8\|] By his own admission - http://www.nybooks.com/articles/10254 - he's not even a proper historian! quote: Would this be the same journalist who wrote a book claiming that Martin Bormann escaped to South America and also managed to 'spirit away' millions of dollars worth of Nazi Gold? Hmmm, seems like a reliable source to be quoting By his own admission - http://www.nybooks.com/articles/10254 - he's not even a proper historian! Well, it seems that you know as much about Farago as you do about Bormann. Ladislas Farago Mr. Farago is very qualified to write books on military history and intelligence. He is internationally known as a writer, military historian, biographer, and as an expert in espionage and intelligence. He served in WWII as Chief of Research and Planning, Special Warfare Branch, Chief of Naval Operations, U.S. Navy. He is the author of 18 books on intelligence and military history, and has edited Corps Diplomatique and United Nations World. He wrote The War of Wits which is a classic of military and political intelligence. He also wrote The Tenth Fleet which has been heralded as the classic study of US anti-submarine action in WWII. Both his books on Patton: Patton: Ordeal and Triumph (which took 12 years to research and write) as well as The Last Days of Patton were made into movies. And both books have stood the test of time for their content. The screenplay for the movie Tora! Tora! Tora! was written by Ladislas Farago, Larry Forrester, Ryuzo Kikushima, and Hideo Oguni. I have found that many so-called qualified historians make mistakes; they can undertake questionable research; and that they sometimes omit information or slant information for a purpose (in D'Este's book on Patton I found several). So being an historian in and of itself is only ONE criteria. Martin Bormann As the end of the war drew near, many of the top Nazis were fleeing. Hermann Goring had fled west, and had been captured by American soldiers, after the death of Hitler had been announced. In Hitler�s political will, Goring had been expelled from the party while Martin Bormann had been named Party Minister . According to Jochen Von Lang, Gobbels and Bormann had "held a military briefing on the night of May 2, 1945." Gobbels had already decided to commit suicide but Bormann desperately wanted to survive. The last entry into his diary was "escape attempt!" Martin Bormann�s whereabouts after this night is unknown. At the end of the war, the allied leaders decided to prosecute top Nazis as War Criminals in Nuremberg. As Martin Bormann was missing, it was decided that he would be tried in absentia. The International Tribunal sentenced Reichsleiter Martin Bormann to death. The fate of Martin Bormann will most likely never be completely solved but the mystery surrounding his disappearance has intrigued a great many. The legend has been kept alive by Nazi-hunters who want to bring guilty parties to justice which is legitimate. In 1961, Dr. Fritz Bauer, a well-known prosecutor of Nazi War Criminals, declared that he was convinced that Bormann was still alive based on credible evidence and eye-witness accounts. It is well known that tens of thousands of Nazis escaped Germany and fled to North and South American as well as Africa. Also well known is the fact that billions of dollars worth of Reich gold has also gone missing. Mr. Farago's book on Bormann is a sober and well researched attempt to trace the evidence as to Bormann's escape and probably of being alive.

Von Rom -> RE: Who was better: Patton or Rommel (8/14/2004 6:22:18 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sarge Hey Von Rom we get it [>:] your a Patton fan And you're still a troll [>:] [image]local://upfiles/279/Om344244367.jpg[/image]

EricGuitarJames -> RE: Who was better: Patton or Rommel (8/14/2004 1:33:55 PM)
Bormann alive! They found his body in 1972 exactly where Artur Axmann said he'd seen it together with the body of Dr. Ludwig Stumpfegger following the 'breakout' from the Berlin bunker. Just because he was supposedly spotted in various locations around the World doesn't mean he escaped. 'Elvis Presley' has been seen repeatedly since his death in 1977, it doesn't mean he's alive. Farago (or should that be 'Farrago'[:D]) is a journalist who likes conspiracy theories, he has little credibility as a historian no matter how readable his books are!

Error in 0 -> RE: Who was better: Patton or Rommel (8/14/2004 1:50:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Von Rom Manstein had a policy of starving the Soviet populace; he did not join the conspirators to kill Hitler as Rommel, Stauffenberg, etc did; and he was sentenced to 18 years in prison for war crimes. Speaking of atrocities. Who was responsible for the Dresden bombing 1945? Did anyone of them face trial? It is the winning team who dictates what is war crimes. [image]local://upfiles/13075/Rp430981427.jpg[/image] Some of the civilians that were actually found after the firestorms in Dresden caused by RAF and USAAF.

EricGuitarJames -> RE: Who was better: Patton or Rommel (8/14/2004 3:37:26 PM)
A couple of points. Jallatryne, you'll have a hard time justifying 'Dresden '45' as a war crime. At the time Germany did not appear to be that close to defeat, 'area bombing' (or 'terror bombing' depending on your pov) had been in practice for around three years and the city could be claimed as a legitimate military target. Regarding the 'July Plot', whilst Rommel knew, he was not an active member of the conspiracy. There is some evidence that Manstein knew as well but also refused to participate.

Error in 0 -> RE: Who was better: Patton or Rommel (8/14/2004 6:03:47 PM)
Robert Saunby, Deputy Air Marshal at Bomber Command: "That the bombing of Dresden was a great tragedy none can deny." A RAF bobmbing crew: "It struck me at the time, the thought of the women and children down there. We seemed to fly for hours over a sheet of fire - a terrific red glow with thin haze over it. I found myself making comments to the crew: "Oh God, those poor people." It was completely uncalled for. You can't justify it." Winston Churchill, memorandum to Air Marshall Arthur Harris (28th March 1945): "It seems to me that the moment has come when the question of bombing of German cities simply for the sake of increasing the terror, should be reviewed" John Black, The Truth about the 1945 Bombing of Dresden (23rd February 1995): "Dresden was a center of cultural and architectural wonders, including the famous Zwinger Museum and Palace and the cathedral, the Frauenkirche. There were no military objectives of any consequence in the city - its destruction could do nothing to weaken the Nazi war machine. U.S. and British air warfare had left Dresden intact until that point. By February 1945, refugees fleeing westward before the onrushing Red Army had doubled Dresden's population. The Soviet military forces were poised to seize the city from the Nazis. It was at that moment that the military and political strategists of Britain and the United States decided to launch a terror bombing attack. " David Pedlow, letter to The Guardian (14th February, 2004): "Normally, crews were given a strategic aiming point - anything from a major factory in the middle of nowhere to a small but significant railway junction within a built-up area. The smaller the aiming point and the heavier the concentration of housing around it, the greater would be the civilian casualties - but given that the strike was at a strategic aiming point those casualties could be justified. Only at the Dresden briefing, my father told me, were the crews given no strategic aiming point. They were simply told that anywhere within the built-up area of the city would serve. He felt that Dresden and its civilian population had been the prime target of the raid and that its destruction and their deaths served no strategic purpose, even in the widest terms; that this was a significant departure from accepting civilian deaths as a regrettable but inevitable consequence of the bomber war; and that he had been complicit in what was, at best, a very dubious operation" Are you proud of the actions against Dresden? Do you think it was a great victory for the Allieds? If no, search your soul as to why not, and then maybe your refusal of using the term "war crime" is slightly adjusted. To not call such a tradegy a War Crime will justify the eradication of cities in future wars. I cannot really see how anyone can justify this. After all, War is based upon some moral/etical rules. I think that your defending The firestorm in Dresden is worrying, but hopefully you will never be in command of an army. JT PS: The German commander of Paris was ordered to destroy Paris, and all its art and culture. He refused to commit such a crime against humanity. Dresden was an important cultural city, with a massive history. Yet the allied commanders decided to destroy it for future generations. There were ruthless morons on both sides of the war.

EricGuitarJames -> RE: Who was better: Patton or Rommel (8/14/2004 6:25:04 PM)
I think the likelihood have me ever being in command of any REAL army (or navy, or airforce) is minimal so the citizens of the World can sleep safely in their beds at night! I think it's one of the great disgraces of the war that the destruction of Dresden has been repeatedly used to besmirch the reputation of RAF Bomber Command in WW2. Many brave men lost their lives taking the war to the Germans when no other forces would or could. In hindsight it's quite easy to argue that the bombing of Dresden was an unnecessary act but in February 1945, when the primary concern was to end the war as quickly as possible and by whatever means necessary this was an 'unfact'. In any case, what was the real death toll? People love to cite David Irving's figures from his book 'The Destruction of Dresden' - 135,000 dead! In reality, as the Dresden police-chief of the time said, the best estimate was 25,000 dead and 35,000 missing - about the same as what happened in Hamburg (John Terraine - 'The Right of the Line' - p.678). Was it a tragedy? In terms of the fact that all civilian casualties in war are tragedies then yes! Was it a 'war crime'? Only if you want to include the fire bombing of other cities like Hamburg or Tokyo and the Atom bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

freeboy -> RE: Who was better: Patton or Rommel (8/14/2004 6:40:51 PM)
I agree that it was in HINDSIGHT unneccessary, but in the day by day attacking of germany it was probably viewed as unother viable target. All those civilian deaths, the firebombings etc underscore that this was not limited war, does anyone seriously think atom bombs wouldn't have been used in Europe had USSR stalled in the East and Normandy been postponed?

Error in 0 -> RE: Who was better: Patton or Rommel (8/14/2004 7:07:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: EricGuitarJames I think the likelihood have me ever being in command of any REAL army (or navy, or airforce) is minimal so the citizens of the World can sleep safely in their beds at night! [:)] quote: I think it's one of the great disgraces of the war that the destruction of Dresden has been repeatedly used to besmirch the reputation of RAF Bomber Command in WW2. Many brave men lost their lives taking the war to the Germans when no other forces would or could. In hindsight it's quite easy to argue that the bombing of Dresden was an unnecessary act but in February 1945, when the primary concern was to end the war as quickly as possible and by whatever means necessary this was an 'unfact'. In any case, what was the real death toll? People love to cite David Irving's figures from his book 'The Destruction of Dresden' - 135,000 dead! In reality, as the Dresden police-chief of the time said, the best estimate was 25,000 dead and 35,000 missing - about the same as what happened in Hamburg (John Terraine - 'The Right of the Line' - p.678). Was it a tragedy? In terms of the fact that all civilian casualties in war are tragedies then yes! Was it a 'war crime'? Only if you want to include the fire bombing of other cities like Hamburg or Tokyo and the Atom bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. I think linking critism of the Dresden incident and "besmirch the reputation of RAF Bomber Command in WW2" is way out of line. Talking about the many brave men is fine, but there were many brave men on either side. What we really schould talk about regariding warcrimes, is the many brave men, women and children that was not a fighting force - called civillians, that were sacrified unneccessary. And I of course believe the military objective of Dresden is solely used to justify unjustifiable orders, not because dresden was unavoidable. Of course I believe the atom bombs in Japan is a war crime! Was it necessary to win the war? No one has ever claimed it to have been. It was convenient. I believe that the rules of war must be placed in atleast 2 categories: The first one is when you defend your country and your people. Then war crimes is more easily accepted. The other is when you are winning, your country is comparable safe. You dont have your back against the wall. Then the definition for war crimes should be much lower. Now you try to justify Dresden by "to end the war as quickly as possible and by whatever means necessary". My humble opinion is that no one can ever justify blind massacre of civilians using this. If it was acceptable in political and military circles, and of course among most people, why did USA not nuke Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, whatever country they feel the need to assault? Why did not the allies simply use GAS upon the german forces? When "whatever means necessary" becomes a dogma in a situation like the one here, humans has reach the lowest debts possible, and the mere tought makes me rather ill. Whatever good the bomber command did in ww2, they stooped down to the NAZI level by ordering dresden. And, by your account, Hamburg as well. JT

Von Rom -> RE: Who was better: Patton or Rommel (8/14/2004 7:12:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: EricGuitarJames Bormann alive! They found his body in 1972 exactly where Artur Axmann said he'd seen it together with the body of Dr. Ludwig Stumpfegger following the 'breakout' from the Berlin bunker. Just because he was supposedly spotted in various locations around the World doesn't mean he escaped. 'Elvis Presley' has been seen repeatedly since his death in 1977, it doesn't mean he's alive. Farago (or should that be 'Farrago'[:D]) is a journalist who likes conspiracy theories, he has little credibility as a historian no matter how readable his books are! Calm down. . . In 1972 a doctor tried to identify two bodies that were found by using dental records he had seen 30 years previous to this examination. In other words, he allegedly identified Bormann's teeth FROM MEMORY. From this, he allegedly stated one of the bodies was Bormann [8\|] The West German Gov't, hoping to close the issue and sweep it under the carpet, declared Bormann dead. However, MANY serious and credible sources refused to believe it including the Israeli Mossad, which continued to hunt for Bormann. There are hundreds of creditable reports since the end of the war until the 1960s of sightings of Bormann at various locations in Europe and later in South America, when his presence in a North Italian monastery was first announced. In the same year, his wife Gerda (a rabid Nazi and daughter of Supreme Party Judge, Walter Buch) died of cancer in South Tyrol, though his ten children survived the war. It was then alleged that Bormann had escaped (like other loyal Nazis) via Rome to South America. Rumoured to have settled in Argentina where he was living secretly as a millionaire, allegedly spotted in Brazil and also in Chile, Bormann's traces proved as elusive as the anonymity in which he first rose to power. However, the ultimate fate of Bormann is of only secondary importance. In his research, Farago and several other investigators, also uncovered a scheme orchestrated by Bormann, and arranged with important Nazis and German corporations, to ship out of Germany during the war, billions of dollars in assets to Argentina and to many other countries. Considering South America was a prime refuge for the Nazis after the war it is instructive to look at changes of the gold reserves of South American countries, particularly Argentina. Argentina�s gold reserves increased from 313.83 metric tons in 1940 to 1064 tons in 1945. The increase in the gold reserves of Argentina in terms of dollars, was a whooping $635,000,000 dollars. To put that figure in perspective the U.S. budget for 1940 was approximately $9.4 billion dollars. Brazil also saw an increase in gold reserves from 45 metric tons in 1940 to 314 tons in 1945, or an increase of about $228,000,000 dollars. The above reserve figures shed some light on the destination of some of the Nazis� loot. How much of the increase in South American gold reserves came from Germany near the end of the war to finance the Nazis� planned comeback is still unknown. However, gold was only one small part of the Nazis� comeback plan. Even more valuable to the Nazis� plan were the amounts of bearer stocks, bonds and the number of Nazi front corporations established worldwide by Bormann. These corporations held valuable patents and would produce a steady income stream to finance the Nazi underground. Many important Nazis were ferreted out of the Third Reich via ODESSA and the Vatican's Ratlines. This is all historical fact. It is a very interesting area of research and the interested reader might find the following of some interest: * "Unholy Trinity" by Mark Aarons and John Loftus * "Blowback: America's recruitment of Nazis, and its disastrous effect on our domestic and foreign policy" by Christopher Simpson * "Nazi in Exile" by Paul Manning Current Vatican lawsuits: http://www.remnantofgod.org/ustashe.htm

Von Rom -> RE: Who was better: Patton or Rommel (8/14/2004 7:30:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JallaTryne quote: ORIGINAL: Von Rom Manstein had a policy of starving the Soviet populace; he did not join the conspirators to kill Hitler as Rommel, Stauffenberg, etc did; and he was sentenced to 18 years in prison for war crimes. Speaking of atrocities. Who was responsible for the Dresden bombing 1945? Did anyone of them face trial? It is the winning team who dictates what is war crimes. Some of the civilians that were actually found after the firestorms in Dresden caused by RAF and USAAF. Let's not go down this road my friend. Nazi Germany instituted a program of Genocide against Jews and against the Slavs in the east, resulting in millions and millions of people being MURDERED. This does not include the systematic German bombing of Guernica, Warsaw, Rotterdam, London, Coventry, Leningrad, Stalingrad, Belgrade, etc. which resulted in hundreds of thousands of more INNOCENT deaths. Germany started the war - the Allies ended the war.

Error in 0 -> RE: Who was better: Patton or Rommel (8/14/2004 7:36:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Von Rom quote: ORIGINAL: JallaTryne quote: ORIGINAL: Von Rom Manstein had a policy of starving the Soviet populace; he did not join the conspirators to kill Hitler as Rommel, Stauffenberg, etc did; and he was sentenced to 18 years in prison for war crimes. Speaking of atrocities. Who was responsible for the Dresden bombing 1945? Did anyone of them face trial? It is the winning team who dictates what is war crimes. Some of the civilians that were actually found after the firestorms in Dresden caused by RAF and USAAF. Let's not go down this road my friend. Nazi Germany instituted a program of Genocide against Jews and against the Slavs in the east, resulting in milions and millions of people being MURDERED. This does not include the systematic German bombing of Guernica, Warsaw, Rotterdam, London, Coventry, Leningrad, Stalingrad, Belgrade, etc. which resulted in hundreds of thousands of more INNOCENT deaths. Germany started the war - the Allies ended the war. Please vonrom, explain how calling the Dresden incident a war crime simultaniously means that I believe Nazi germany did not commit any crimes, did not kill innocent people. If this is a feeble attempt to justify the killings of Dresdens civilians, then you put yourself on the very same levels as the Nazis, and of cource supports me in my claimings that the motiv behind dresden was revenge for the war. Whatever path you decide upon, im sure it will be difficult to support. JT

IronDuke_slith -> RE: Who was better: Patton or Rommel (8/14/2004 7:37:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Von Rom If anyone wants, I will take the time and write up an example (with sources) of where D'Este in his book is wrong (or provides misleading information) about an important aspect of Patton. I dare you. If you won't accept my dare, then I appeal to everyone else in this thread to dare Von Rom to do this. All the exasperation and frustration of the Patton thread will at once be consigned to history if I got to see this. I believe there were conclusions D'este drew which I disagreed with, but I didn't see any noticeable errors in fact, merely in interpretation. Since interpretation is personal, then the errors are not errors as such, merely points where I and the far more learned Colonel D'este do not agree on what the facts tell us. I also believe that providing misleading information is about as bad as it gets for a historian. Therefore, the results of your research should be pretty damning for Colonel D'Este. Perhaps we'll get a new revised edition of "Patton: A genius for War" out of it, with the necessary corrections? Regards, IronDuke

Von Rom -> RE: Who was better: Patton or Rommel (8/14/2004 7:38:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JallaTryne quote: ORIGINAL: Von Rom quote: ORIGINAL: JallaTryne quote: ORIGINAL: Von Rom Manstein had a policy of starving the Soviet populace; he did not join the conspirators to kill Hitler as Rommel, Stauffenberg, etc did; and he was sentenced to 18 years in prison for war crimes. Speaking of atrocities. Who was responsible for the Dresden bombing 1945? Did anyone of them face trial? It is the winning team who dictates what is war crimes. Some of the civilians that were actually found after the firestorms in Dresden caused by RAF and USAAF. Let's not go down this road my friend. Nazi Germany instituted a program of Genocide against Jews and against the Slavs in the east, resulting in milions and millions of people being MURDERED. This does not include the systematic German bombing of Guernica, Warsaw, Rotterdam, London, Coventry, Leningrad, Stalingrad, Belgrade, etc. which resulted in hundreds of thousands of more INNOCENT deaths. Germany started the war - the Allies ended the war. Please vonrom, explain how calling the Dresden incident a war crime simultaniously means that I believe Nazi germany did not commit any crimes, did not kill innocent people. If this is a feeble attempt to justify the killings of Dresdens civilians, then you put yourself on the very same levels as the Nazis, and of cource supports me in my claimings that the motiv behind dresden was revenge for the war. Whatever path you decide upon, im sure it will be difficult to support. JT It was TOTAL WAR. Both sides fought tooth and nail. Germany refused to surrender. It paid the consequences. Germany REAPED what it SOWED.

Von Rom -> RE: Who was better: Patton or Rommel (8/14/2004 7:43:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: IronDuke quote: ORIGINAL: Von Rom If anyone wants, I will take the time and write up an example (with sources) of where D'Este in his book is wrong (or provides misleading information) about an important aspect of Patton. I dare you. If you won't accept my dare, then I appeal to everyone else in this thread to dare Von Rom to do this. All the exasperation and frustration of the Patton thread will at once be consigned to history if I got to see this. I believe there were conclusions D'este drew which I disagreed with, but I didn't see any noticeable errors in fact, merely in interpretation. Since interpretation is personal, then the errors are not errors as such, merely points where I and the far more learned Colonel D'este do not agree on what the facts tell us. I also believe that providing misleading information is about as bad as it gets for a historian. Therefore, the results of your research should be pretty damning for Colonel D'Este. Perhaps we'll get a new revised edition of "Patton: A genius for War" out of it, with the necessary corrections? Regards, IronDuke Well, well ID you have returned. . . again. . . Your faith in historians is admirable. Naive. . . but admirable. . . I guess you never heard of historians trying to re-write history; or having an agenda; or fudging the truth to discredit a person or group. . . [8\|] Your uncritical acceptance of ANY written word is quite scary. . .

Von Rom -> RE: Who was better: Patton or Rommel (8/14/2004 7:48:29 PM)
ID: I accept your challenge. The topic will be: Who originally planned Operation Cobra? You have D'Este's book. So please provide his view as to Who Planned Operation Cobra. I will then provide my evidence.

Error in 0 -> RE: Who was better: Patton or Rommel (8/14/2004 7:55:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: freeboy I agree that it was in HINDSIGHT unneccessary, but in the day by day attacking of germany it was probably viewed as unother viable target. All those civilian deaths, the firebombings etc underscore that this was not limited war, does anyone seriously think atom bombs wouldn't have been used in Europe had USSR stalled in the East and Normandy been postponed? I believe that even at that time it was clear to many that it was a crime against mankind. However, in wartimes our moral is put to the hardest test, and only strong men (women) can rise above the pure instincts of hate and revenge. Because our higher military commanders very rearly see and feel the direct effects of their orders, we MUST expect them to be of a different moral fibre than your average GI Joe. The most useful thing a general should indulge themself in is diplomacy and philosophy. This brings my toughts to a US general in the Bosnian conflict. You probably have your average Patton doctrine of pushing with whatever force necessary to achieve the goal of being the strongest man, in that this fellow ordered a british general to attack an airfield that the russians were closing in on. The British doctrine is somewhat different than the US, and this fellow decided to couple more than 1 thought, and actually included som political understanding of the situation, and landed on a decicion to refuse his chief. That proved his moral fibre as well! It was widely respected as a correct action, and without knowing for sure, I believe the US fella was stuck on the career-ladder from then on. Using hindsight is important to decide what was wrong and what was right. The Dresden action was hence wrong. JT

Pippin -> RE: Who was better: Patton or Rommel (8/14/2004 7:57:32 PM)
I am a tad distrubed here. Von Rom, are you saying that the killing of civilians is ok depending on who is fighting on what side of the war or something?

Error in 0 -> RE: Who was better: Patton or Rommel (8/14/2004 8:01:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Von Rom Germany REAPED what it SOWED. This is the mentality of men devoid of moral fibre, men who is only good as cannon fodder, men who set human thinking and advance back to stone age. "An eye for an eye" is an easily pit to fall into, but it is still a PIT. You are in there now, vonRom, I urge you to try hard to climb out! [:)] JT Oh, BTW, the eye for an eye mentality you so darely press to your chest, was most likely the same basic instinct that allowed the Naziz to becom powerful in pre-war germany.

Error in 0 -> RE: Who was better: Patton or Rommel (8/14/2004 8:03:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Von Rom ID: I accept your challenge. The topic will be: Who originally planned Operation Cobra? You have D'Este's book. So please provide his view as to Who Planned Operation Cobra. I will then provide my evidence. It would only be fair that you presented your views first, vonRom. It was you who said "If anyone wants, I will take the time and write up an example (with sources) of where D'Este in his book is wrong (or provides misleading information) about an important aspect of Patton." JT

Von Rom -> RE: Who was better: Patton or Rommel (8/14/2004 8:49:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JallaTryne quote: ORIGINAL: freeboy I agree that it was in HINDSIGHT unneccessary, but in the day by day attacking of germany it was probably viewed as unother viable target. All those civilian deaths, the firebombings etc underscore that this was not limited war, does anyone seriously think atom bombs wouldn't have been used in Europe had USSR stalled in the East and Normandy been postponed? I believe that even at that time it was clear to many that it was a crime against mankind. However, in wartimes our moral is put to the hardest test, and only strong men (women) can rise above the pure instincts of hate and revenge. Because our higher military commanders very rearly see and feel the direct effects of their orders, we MUST expect them to be of a different moral fibre than your average GI Joe. The most useful thing a general should indulge themself in is diplomacy and philosophy. This brings my toughts to a US general in the Bosnian conflict. You probably have your average Patton doctrine of pushing with whatever force necessary to achieve the goal of being the strongest man, in that this fellow ordered a british general to attack an airfield that the russians were closing in on. The British doctrine is somewhat different than the US, and this fellow decided to couple more than 1 thought, and actually included som political understanding of the situation, and landed on a decicion to refuse his chief. That proved his moral fibre as well! It was widely respected as a correct action, and without knowing for sure, I believe the US fella was stuck on the career-ladder from then on. Using hindsight is important to decide what was wrong and what was right. The Dresden action was hence wrong. JT First of all this is off topic and should be taken to a NEW thread. Second, von Manstein, who many consider one of Germany's best generals promulgated an order to starve masses of innocent Soviet citizens. This was designed mass murder. Von Manstein was sentenced to 18 years in prison. So please take this topic to another thread.

Von Rom -> RE: Who was better: Patton or Rommel (8/14/2004 8:51:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Pippin I am a tad distrubed here. Von Rom, are you saying that the killing of civilians is ok depending on who is fighting on what side of the war or something? This is OFF TOPIC.

Von Rom -> RE: Who was better: Patton or Rommel (8/14/2004 8:52:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JallaTryne quote: ORIGINAL: Von Rom ID: I accept your challenge. The topic will be: Who originally planned Operation Cobra? You have D'Este's book. So please provide his view as to Who Planned Operation Cobra. I will then provide my evidence. It would only be fair that you presented your views first, vonRom. It was you who said "If anyone wants, I will take the time and write up an example (with sources) of where D'Este in his book is wrong (or provides misleading information) about an important aspect of Patton." JT Heheh So you're speaking for ID? And ID speaks for you? You completely ignored my initial request, and now you add your two cents' worth? [8\|] ID "Dared" me. So let him state D'Este's views on who planned Operation Cobra. Heheh

Error in 0 -> RE: Who was better: Patton or Rommel (8/14/2004 8:54:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Von Rom quote: ORIGINAL: Pippin I am a tad distrubed here. Von Rom, are you saying that the killing of civilians is ok depending on who is fighting on what side of the war or something? This is OFF TOPIC. Maybe, but it has evolved naturally from the topic. Is your Bormann conspiracy any more to the topic? JT

Von Rom -> RE: Who was better: Patton or Rommel (8/14/2004 8:56:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JallaTryne quote: ORIGINAL: Von Rom quote: ORIGINAL: Pippin I am a tad distrubed here. Von Rom, are you saying that the killing of civilians is ok depending on who is fighting on what side of the war or something? This is OFF TOPIC. Maybe, but it has evolved naturally from the topic. Is your Bormann conspiracy any more to the topic? JT That was a slight off-shoot. However, topics such as strategic bombing usually take on a life of their own - so please move it to a NEW thread.

gunny -> RE: Who was better: Patton or Rommel (8/14/2004 8:59:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Von Rom quote: ORIGINAL: Sarge Hey Von Rom we get it [>:] your a Patton fan And you're still a troll [>:] [image]local://upfiles/279/Om344244367.jpg[/image] Hehe, I think you're jumping the gun there. Save the Jpeg for the real Trolls.

Error in 0 -> RE: Who was better: Patton or Rommel (8/14/2004 9:02:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Von Rom quote: ORIGINAL: JallaTryne quote: ORIGINAL: Von Rom ID: I accept your challenge. The topic will be: Who originally planned Operation Cobra? You have D'Este's book. So please provide his view as to Who Planned Operation Cobra. I will then provide my evidence. It would only be fair that you presented your views first, vonRom. It was you who said "If anyone wants, I will take the time and write up an example (with sources) of where D'Este in his book is wrong (or provides misleading information) about an important aspect of Patton." JT Heheh So you're speaking for ID? And ID speaks for you? You completely ignored my initial request, and now you add your two cents' worth? [8\|] ID "Dared" me. So let him state D'Este's views on who planned Operation Cobra. Heheh If you believe anyone who critizes you, have other opinions than you, or just points out some obviouse things like this, to be "believers" in ID, then ID would be god on these forums [:)] I can assure you that ID did not write to me "you do this, and I do this,..., and then we can shut that vonRom guy up! " [:D] There is no conspiracy found here. In fact, I urge you to keep up the postings, as you make these forums interesting to follow. ID speaks not for me. I doubt ID is even interested in my opinions. But, yes, on this occation I guess I did meddle in favour of ID, not that he needs any....[;)] JT

Page: << < prev 4 5 [6] 7 8 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.96875