Why German Commanders kept Fighting
Vložit
- čas přidán 1. 06. 2024
- Why did some German commanders not surrender in the last stages of the Second World War? For some the answer might be obvious, yet, during this interview with Bas Willems there was at least one example I was not aware of and that was quite interesting.
Cover Image: Bundesarchiv, Bild 183-H29033 / CC-BY-SA 3.0
commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi...
Cover design by vonKickass.
»» GET OUR BOOKS ««
» The Assault Platoon of the Grenadier-Company November 1944 (StG 44) - sturmzug.com
» Army Regulation Medium Panzer Company 1941 - www.hdv470-7.com
»» SUPPORT MHV ««
» patreon, see videos early (adfree) - / mhv
» subscribe star - www.subscribestar.com/mhv
» paypal donation - paypal.me/mhvis
»» MERCHANDISE ««
» teespring - teespring.com/stores/military...
» SOURCES «
Willems, Bastiaan: Violence in Defeat: The Wehrmacht on German Soil, 1944-1945. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2021.
#WhyGermanCommandersDidNotSurrender,#Mutiny,#5thPanzerDivision
If you are interested in Dr. Bastiaan Willems book, check it out here, these are non-affiliate links:
United States: www.amazon.com/Violence-Defeat-Wehrmacht-1944-1945-Cambridge/dp/1108479723
Germany: www.amazon.de/Violence-Defeat-Wehrmacht-1944-1945-Cambridge/dp/1108479723/
United Kingdom: www.amazon.co.uk/Violence-Defeat-Wehrmacht-1944-1945-Cambridge/dp/1108479723/
I so love these interviews with historians and how well they are done! Excellent prep work, clear focus and a fantastic opportunity for us all to learn. Very good work. Thank you!
P.s. They are also a wonderful way to find new and interesting books on WW2 as well so we can get even more enjoyment that way and benefit the authors in some small way.
@@dennisivan85 And do remember that the clearly stated war goal was a German *unconditional surrender.* Not any kind of honourable surrender, no guarantees for anything. Absolute, unconditional, _in your hands I put my life, limb and liberty and that of my parents, children, siblings, wife, everyone I know and hold dear_ surrender. No guarantee that you and yours are not being branded and sold into slavery kind of surrender.
Think about that.
Think about the soldier who has heard (and probably seen on the last holiday from the front) the bombed out cities, civilians, children roasted to death or asphyxiated in bomb shelters and bunkers due to the firestorm inflicted by carpet bombing, day and night. Think about the soldier who has heard of and probably seen how Nazi Germany has been maltreating the 'Slavic' _Untermenschen,_ (including USSR) civilians and POWs.
There will be a reckoning and you will be quite handy for any angry soldiers to retaliate upon.
And they eat babies. Which is most likely not literally true, but there sure are many rumours and stories ... there probably is a kernel of truth there. I mean, come on, they have Polit-commissars behind attacking soldiers to mow down anyone retreating from our deadly fire --- if they do that to their own troops, what will they do to POWs. And then there is Katyn. These were Polish POWs, officers --- and do they not treat officers better than common soldiers when they become POWs?
Also, there is that "surrender and you'll be sentenced to death --- and likely at least some of your _Sippe_ too." (You can translate _Sippe_ with _clan_ --- in the Scottish sense of the word --- and not be far off.)
I think you are overlooking one very perhaps not so obvious point of view, but perhaps a very important one. When we talk about the German officer corps, we are talking about professional soldiers. While it is true that defeat would mean the end of Germany as the know, it doesn't mean that Germany would not have an army after the war. This was always true essentially everywhere. I was reminded of this point by stories of US soldiers in WWI being ordered to attack German trenches on the morning that the 11/11 armistice was to take place. It was largely a case of eager beaver officers taking steps to give themselves the best possible reputation for advancement in what they knew would seen be a very much smaller peacetime army. I should think that German officers of all ranks would be capable of thinking in similar terms, particularly in light of the way the German Army winnowed down after WWI. One might well be confident of a place in a very much smaller army, but in what position and at what rank? Competition would be keen, I should think, particularly if one expected a long peace, or even perhaps a continued war against the Russians. Certainly it was better to avoid capture by the Russians in any case as it was not certain there would be any future after that one. But in any case, not being captured at all but still fighting would look much better on the old resume.
I think it's quite humorous that the professor sits before bookshelves and the German sits before a dark cold wall like in a bunker.
Still a very interesting video.
*Austrian
@@manubishe true
Who said austria is not german!
@@jonathansibrian695 I do. An Austrian.
**throws poop at prussia*
@@tyrionlannister4920 Your attitude "Austrians are not German" is pretty much a post-1945 one, when you tried to detach yourselves from the Nazis and pretended to be victims instead of willing co-perpetrators.
Thanks for a more psychological approach to a pretty complex topic.
"Enjoy the war: the peace will be terrible."
And so it was
@@Mitaka.Kotsuka
G'day,
Actuarily, olde Bean, the Peace was pretty good fun after WW-2, except for the Nations which STARTED the Shooting...
The Anthropologists have discovered that the more often a Primate fights, then the more often that Primate fights AWAY from it's Home Territory ; apparently because most Primates learn to recognise, and avoid the company of individuals that are quick to take offence & pick fights - so the bad-tempered individuals have to go away and find Strangers to hang out with, before becoming upset and picking a fight...
Also, they found that the more often a Primate fights away from their Home Territory, then the more often that Primate LOSES, whenever they do fight...; because the Local Primates ALWAYS unite and defend against ANY Outsider who behaves badly.
Thus, if Germany's Killer-Monkeys expected to beat the Soviet Killer-Monkeys then the Germans would have needed to wait in Germany for the Soviet Killer Monkeys to come visiting.
It worked for the Chinese, and for the British & for the AmeriKans, in WW-2...; and for the Indonesians and for the Vietnamese and Somalis and Iraqis and the Afghans..., when beating the visiting AmeriKan Killer Monkeys.
So, Biology is "rigged" against the embittered, the twisted, the insecure, the paranoid, the covetous, the envious, the quick to anger and the Idiots who think that Might Makes Right.
Thus, the Meek SHALL Inherit the Earth, because they who are too proud to be meek, pick Fights, run out of Friends, wander off far from home and pick a fight with Strangers and then get their Gonads duly composted - and thus the Warrior DNA is removed from the Human Gene Pool.
Such is Life...
Have a good one...
Stay safe.
;-p
Ciao !
@@WarblesOnALot Man sorry... either my english or yours is very bad. I just dont understand and im not gonna try.
cheers, whatever you wanted to say
@@Mitaka.Kotsuka Bollocks- the peace was great. Unless you were in Eastern Europe. And even then it was probably better than 2 world wars within a quarter of a century.
@@45641560456405640563 Or unless you live in Okinawa, where rape from US soilders to Japanese women is still happening to this very day.
Yeah... great times
Thank you. I had never heard of extorting the commanders via their families. I wonder if the German soldiers were aware of what happened to the Soviet POW's and feared similar fates, or maybe they were told horror stories to make surrendering less attractive than fighting? One book I read indicated the Japanese told their troops that Americans eat anyone they captured.
Maybe they got the inspiration for that from them doing that themselves in at least one instance.
@Mialisus I don't think the Japanese encountered many fat Marines or GIs in the Solomons, let alone at Bataan.
The Japanese military was a death cult, long before they embraced deliberate suicide tactics. Regularly brutal towards their own soldiers and sailors as a means of maintaining not just discipline, but absolute obedience when issued any order, no matter how brutal to oneself or others. And yes, even Japanese civilians were "encouraged" to kill themselves and their children rather than consider surrender. Win or lose, they were fighting an existential war of annihilation led by extremists. And they alone chose those terms. Medieval indifference to suffering combined with a totalitarian philosophy that life is war and war is life. If I were British, Russian, Chinese, Indian, or African, I would still much rather be captured by the Germans than by the Japanese.
They knew what they had done in the Soviet Union and where afraid that the red army would behave like they did...
@@ffurtado2001 Soviets were far worse.
Remember the Stauffenberg plot from july 1944 - everyone knew about that and the Sippenhaft for the relatives.
Same for Rommel who committed suicide to avoid the consequences for his family.
That and the Germans knew that surrender most likely meant death at the hands of the Soviets they surrendered to. The Eastern front was brutal and neither side really kept their prisoners alive if they took them at all.
The soviets raped everyone. There were millions pf rapes so the germans couldn't surrender, they didnt want to be a part of operation kealhaul, working in Siberia.
Great discussion! I now better understand this subject. I really enjoy your guest's comments when he is on, and look forward to more of this kind of content.
Thanks so much!
Many German units , even though they surrendered to the American army, were turned over to the Russians, if those soldiers were in units that fought on the eastern front. They only had to check the soldiers documents to know where they had fought.
That was Units that were continuing to fight the Russians and after a period of time they shut U.S. lines or were citizens of the Soviet Union.
I would not surrender to communists, either. If you can kill one more before dieing the world is a better place and a safer world. This was a common belief in my Infantry unit.
As famously happened to Eric Hartmann and his squadron who surrendered to the Americans, were handed over and then suffered appalling treatment by the Russians immediately particularly the women, and the men who tried to defend them who were summarily shot right there in the field.
Thanks for continuing this series.
Always good analysis and historical perspective here on MHV. Thanks!
Thanks!
This is going to be good. I always enjoy the episodes with this guest. Personally I feel the Germans fought to the end because of fears of the Russians. The Allies didnt really offer the Germans a way out. It was just total surrender. I think the Germans would have surrendered earlier if they were not so scared of Russian reprisals. The military knew what the SS and the Einsatzgruppen did in the East and they knew the Russians would be extremely brutal when they entered Germany and they were. Dont forget the German commander of Paris who refused to destroy the city under Hitlers orders. The Germans were willing to surrender in the West because they knew defeat was inevitable. However in the East even though they also knew defeat was inevitable fear of Russian retribution was immense.
The military was FULLY complicit in the warcrimes of the East, they committed most of them. Not the SS, not the Einsatzgruppen, the Wehrmacht did most of them. Millions of Red Army POW's murdered, millions of Soviet women raped, and of course stealing the food of the locals because the Wehrmacht lived off the land. It didn't receive a single breadcrumb from Germany because there was a food shortage in Germany already. When the Red Army advanced through the Ukraine and Belarus and liberated devastated lands and empty villages they got to see the German crimes. And any man of military age they found was conscripted into the Red Army, so many of them actually HAD experienced German warcrimes first hand.
Also, it was the Americans who insisted on complete unconditional surrender, because they didn't want to end up fighting WW3 in 20 years time all over again because of yet another dagger in the back myth in Germany. This time there would be victors marching through the streets of Berlin to show to the Germans that they had lost. And it worked.
@@chaptermasterpedrokantor1623 It wasnt the Americans who insisted on complete unconditional surrender. That was agreed amongst the Allies. I can assure you I have read hundreds of books on this subject. As for the Wehrmacht of course they committed crimes against civilian populations. However they were not the main drivers of civilian deaths that would have been SS and Einsatzgruppen who usually entered areas after they had been taken by the Wehrmacht.
@@Stevethesearcher do you have any statistical data to back up your claim?
@@chaptermasterpedrokantor1623 Thankyou mr general since you were on the front lines and know exactly what happened and who did it
@@benh5366 watch MHVs Video on the Topic he is right
"Enjoy the war, the peace will be terrible", thanks for this insight. Great series, I have to get my hands on that book.
I might be a little biased, but I think it's a good one :)
@@bastiaanwillems2252 biased or proud. I think you should be both. Not sure when I can purchase it, but it is on my wishlist.
@@tabletopgeneralsde310 Yes, I'm actually very proud (biased was just a little joke ;) )
One reason I guess befire hearing the video, is that many commanders and men knew the war was lost, but especially on the Eastern Front were afraid of retribution and wanted to give as many as possible the opportunity to flee West.
Though the fact that some of them got turned over to the Soviets anyway grimly reinforces the lesson of unconditional surrender in breaking the 'stab in the back' narrative; "If they lose, there will be no where to run"
I feel like the threats came both ways. When a German Commander surrenders, either the Gestapo takes his family or the Soviets murder his family. The ladder is more for the troops, the former for commanders. That way, you can see why it is very dishonorable to surrender, it symbolizes that a surrendering soldier would rather abandon his family and possibly live than die to protect them. Additionally, the Soviets were known to be keen on taking revenge on German POWs due to the Ersatzgruppe executiions previously in the war, that way, they felt that they had to keep fighting because they were going to die anyways, they should go out fighting. Of course, this mostly applied to the units trapped in the Eastern front, plenty of units were well known to retreat west to surrender to the Allies than fall into Soviet captivity.
Great discussion!
Thanks!
It wasn't really the "German troops" that refused to surrender when a senior commander did. It was the division down to company commanders and senior NCOs who did because they were also subject to Sippenhaft by the Gestapo.
They probably also knew they had little chance of survival in Soviet captivity so what the hell....
An intriguing but confusing question. Why on earth would the German commanders have surrendered? During Barbarossa the Russian troops had typically fought until they ran out of ammunition. Did the Finns surrender, when the Winter War begun? No, they fought for every inch. Did the Soviet divisions cought in Finnish "mottis" surrender? No, they preferred to either die fighting or freeze to death. The local population in Köningsberg, both German and Baltic civilians, supported the German troops.
In the Eastern Front the rule had been "Everybody fights. Nobody quits." for five years. The Germans had absolutely no intention to be the first to quit!
Did you miss the bit where they said they arrested his daughter after he surrendered the city? Or executed one commander after he surrendered the city for an actual military reason? Also it's not a weird question when the only outcome of their defense leads to further death and destruction and no useful military outcomes.
6 years.
A friends grandfather fought in the Wehrmacht . Their company was captured by the Soviets and he was the only one kept alive cause he knew how to cut hair.
I love these ones. Pray, carry on.
Thanks mate! Afraid this was the last one for a while!
@@bastiaanwillems2252 I should think we all appreciate these discussions. Smaller topics but they are puzzle pieces which give us a greater understanding of the whole when looked at properly. Thank you.
Fascinating info. It really came down to surrendering was not really an option when you look at the alternatives.
The Red Army would regularly execute surrendering Germans (German troops of course also killed surrendering Russians). Many were killed by Russians in particularly gruesome ways, such as being run over by a tank. German soldiers of the time would have been all too aware of such practices and rightly avoided surrendering as much as they could. Eye-witnesses also attest to such atrocities, you can refer to Christian Hardinghaus's book "Die verdammte Generation" for a witness account.
Paybacks a bitch. When your side wipes out whole villages you can expect the other side to kick you when down
Woe is me. Can you really cry about that when you did it to someone many many times more?
I wonder is sippen a cognate of the word saime.
I find it interesting how many words for kinship are in the europian language.
It's very possible. The people who created the Indo-European hypothesis in the late 18th century noted that a lot of words for simple things like mother, father and horse were similar across languages in Europe and the Indo-Iranian language area. As Baltic languages are considered part of the Indo-European language family there might be a relationship between them.
It comes from the germanic: sebjō „kinship".
@@comsubpac Then I would guess its not related as saime also means household.
@@baltulielkungsgunarsmiezis9714 Sifjar is cognate to the Old English sibb and modern English sib (meaning "affinity, connection, by marriage") and in other Germanic languages: Gothic 𐍃𐌹𐌱𐌾𐌰 (sibja), Old High German sippa, and modern German Sippe. Sifjar appears not only in ancient poetry and records of law, but also in compounds (byggja sifjar means "to marry"). Using this etymology, scholar John Lindow gives the meanings "in-law-relationship", scholar Andy Orchard provides "relation", and scholar Rudolf Simek gives "relation by marriage".
According to Wikipedia.
What city is Dr. Willems talking about? (Gotha in Thuringia?) If so, maybe someone should update that wikipedia page -- does the surrendering/executed german officer have any commemorative plaque or anything in the city to document his action? Will buy the book by Dr. Willems (whose first name apparently has two "aa"s, titled "Violence in Defeat: The Wehrmacht on German Soil, 1944-1945". Looking forward to a good read...
I understand from Bastiaan that Sippenhaft happened. What I did not hear was any answer to the question I am most curious to have answered: Did the Sippenhaft policy ever result in family members ever suffering (aside from perhaps imprisonment) due to a relative who has surrendered.
Is there any documentation that indicates the murder of any family members due to such a policy?
There is some limited literature on Sippenhaft, but the interesting thing is of course that family members would also be rather committed (even though many would go on to deny it). It would be quite feasible to distance oneself from your father who surrendered. Lasch's daughter, for example, worked at the German High Command.
@@bastiaanwillems2252 She successfully avoided any reprisal? Was she incarcerated, even briefly, as a result of her father's actions?
The idea of Sippenhaft does not really surprise me a great deal as many political and military organizations have taken to the idea of group or community responsibility regarding things such as guerrilla warfare but it does seem perhaps excessive. The North Korean regime does seem a modern day rather extreme example.
@@grognard23 She was incarcerated for a while, and she was actually interrogated, but from the little I could gather it seems that Gestapo men were not out to torture her or anything like that. At the end of the day, even Nazis know that it is best to keep the generals fighting your war on your side, so it's an odd balancing act.
@@bastiaanwillems2252 I appreciate the answer and I understand the balancing act. It is an interesting bit of psychology. Used by militaries and even some sports teams and others. One member of a squad makes an error and all pay for it with extra physical training or restrictions and suchlike. Balancing act indeed. Does it weld them into a more cohesive force or does it destroy them when they turn on the individual deemed responsible for the error, whether rightfully accused or not.
German soldier: "I'm not a great strategic thinker."
Well, neither were the generals in the high command.
Very true! Despite all the attention given to the Second World War, we tend to forget that the generation of Nazi generals was really the poorest one ever produced by the German High Command. Of course, if you base your strategy on racist notions of your enemy, and as a result refuse to appreciate their strengths and weaknesses accurately, you'll inevitably end up with a flawed strategy.
@@bastiaanwillems2252 because it took 3 powers to take down the Reich , and AH did in 4 weeks what the kaiser was unable to do in 4 years of war defeat the french and they kicked out the british out of the continent , oh but according to you they were the worst ever , right
@@dejabu24 Well, not only according to me, basically every historian will tell you the same.
Fanboys, however, can't look past the shiny tanks and cool propaganda, and will uncritically everything the Nazis claimed. I'll leave it to you with whom you'd like to side. In fact, Military History Visualised already did a great job debunking the myth that you seem so willing to cling to.
@@bastiaanwillems2252 what historians ? , there are other historians that will tell you otherwise, but ultimately is what your research tells you , and I did mine I hope that you did yours and not conform your self just to read what others have to say from people that they never met ,
I have seen all of his videos he didn’t debunked anything, some of his points are valid but some are not like in this video , he let many good points in favor of the Reich away , the fact that you are using the term nazi instated of National socialism already tells me that you are biased against the Reich , so don’t try to play the you are biased on me pal
@@dejabu24 You're not a historian, but just someone interested in history. No problem at all with that, of course, but it's why I'm asked for my opinion, and you're not.
Bravo
Thanks!
@@bastiaanwillems2252 Read some of your work, and again, bravo. Such detail in such chaotic times is truly amazing. Please keep providing us with this information! Just like the 5th Panzer Division, keep trucking on!
Homeboy, 19yo Eero Seppänen was slightly wounded, but continued to fight using Panzerschreck, destroying eight of the 21 tanks destroyed in Siiranmäki. Which side is more fanatical? About 5000 Soviets KIA on that hill alone. My brother met Adolf Ehrnrooth in the 1990s. Although Adolf softened a bit, he was certainly quite ruthless as commander.
does it matter which side is the more fanatical ? Why do you ask this question ? Trying to defend "the poors german soldier" ?
@@shibre9543 In this case, (Swedish) colonel Adolf Ehrnrooth allegedly ordered an artillery barrage to his own trenches. I have no precise information about his enemies Colonel Peter Agafonovich Kurenya and Colonel Georgy Pavlovich Isakov. That's why I asked.
@@jussim.konttinen4981 yeah ...
Thank you for delving into this sad and controversial topic. The motivation which blinds men to take a life, exposes how fragile our humanity is and how jealously we ought to nurture it.
Thanks so much for you kind words!
The decline in mission tactics is probably due to the worsening quality of soldiers, isn't it?
You can't do that kind of leadership with people who aren't trained in it.
For an interesting insight as to why the practices of Aufträgstaktik declined from about 1942 onwards, I would like to suggest that you read the books and listen to the lectures of Citino (many good ones are on here). Essentially, it wasn't just that experienced men were being lost, it was also that Hitler began to dismiss other experienced men, and replace them with others, who may not have been as capable, but whom were very loyal. Therefore, Hitler's directives (which turned into blunders) towards the end of the war were amplified by his subordinates unwillingness and/or inability to refute them, and execute these directives to the letter, without deviation.
Interesting. Also, from a soldier's perspective you knew you were losing, yet while you were retreating on the road you might see a few Jagdtigers roll past and think that we still have a chance.
More like they knew that dying was far better than being captured by the Russians. You will notice how German soldiers surrendered at massively higher rates when they were fighting the western Allies, compared to when they were fighting the Soviets. In fact, you even have cases like that of Walter Wenck's 9th Army where they actually fought to the death for the sole purpose of surrendering to the Americans instead of the Russians
@@filmandfirearms they knew what they've done in the Eastern Front, they knew mercy was not on the table for those animals.
@@marcoflorestello from watching this chanel I know that at the end of the war rumors were spreading in German lines about war crimes but I think the majority of Germans don't know the extent of war crimes committed. If a concentration camp was near a city the citizens had a idea there were prisoners but not what was going on inside. The soviets never signed the Geneva convention they starved Ukraine occupied Baltic country's if Germany never did any crime in the Soviet union the outcome will be still the same for the Germans.
Yes, very true. I'd say that tanks were such morale boosters, especially the new ones. In Königsberg the High Command started rumours that 500 taks were offloaded nearby and fighting their way towards the city. Same story with V-weapons. Yes, they were weapons, but they were also objects of propaganda.
@@marcoflorestello Except the vast majority of the men serving by the late war weren't even in the Wehrmacht during the invasion of Russia. That much is clear by troop numbers alone, with the early war Wehrmacht being a fraction of the size it was by the end of the war. They had no idea what had happened then because they hadn't been there and didn't know anyone who had. You also have to consider that the Russians were at least as horrible to German and Polish civilians and non combat military personnel, as the Germans were to the Russians
I think that a factor that was only briefly touched upon toward the end of the video, was the immense effect that the Yalta Conference and the formulation of the proposed Morgenthau Plan would have had on the average German soldier's mentality as to whether or not to keep fighting at the end of the war. As with all things involving history, one must try to understand the environmental, cultural, and other factors that influenced the actions and decisions of those involved in those points in time. Taking these factors under consideration- the demands by the Allies for unconditional surrender, the seemingly horrific plans for turning Germany into a completely agrarian state, bereft of any type of industry, and living under the thumb of occupying armies after the war- and all of this exploited to its fullest extent by Goebbels and the Propaganda Ministry- would have caused many German soldiers to give pause when considering surrender. To be fair, all of this, plus the factors mentioned in the video, were not completely convincing; hundreds of thousands of Germans surrendered in the final months of the war- but for those who kept fighting, I can't help but believe that these factors played a huge part in their decision making process.
I think people these days don't realise how terrified the average German was of the Red Army. Imagine your country is losing a war against Islamic State... wouldn't you want to keep fighting?
(not saying the Soviets were the same as IS, but in the mind of the Germans after many years of propaganda, they would have thought of the Russians much in the same way as how we think about IS today)
They’re pretty much the same, both were Zio pawns and had similar aims and methods.
They are both made up w/uneducated & brutal political,
base & crass,l ow class minions that will make you wish that you had eaten a bullet or hugged a grenade w/a pulled pin
13:34 probably one of the only instances where it's not nice
Do you think that German soldiers would have fought harder or less hard if they could see Germany as it is today, and the position of the German people today?
I think they would have fought less hard.
The nightmare was that the Morgentau plan would happen, or that Germany would be completly wiped out from the map.
But Germany still exist today. And that could have made German soldiers relax had they known that in 1944 and 1945
They would of fought harder.
They would have fought harder! Say what you will about the Germans. I will always respect their courage and commitment to their country and people.
People tend to overestimate the importance of WW2. Birth control has had a greater impact on European demographics. The US is not doing very well. Brazil, Russia, India, and China are mediocre. Some are calling events over the last week democratic South Africa's "darkest hour".
Would depend on whether they were from the parts that aren't Germany anymore and what became East Germany or from West Germany.
👍👍👏
10:51 well, in hindsight, that's kinda true. Germany did go under for the better part of the XXth century and failed to become European champs recently so...
And both East and West took every opportunity to present the common German soldier as a murdering psychopath anyway, sooo...
I am also not sure of how you can judge how long Germans could be expected to fight and expect to be treated well when they surrender. I know of no examples where German POWs weren't sent straight to the GULAGs with at least a fifth of them dying on the way with half of the officers being shot on the spot. There is a reason German soldiers knew the stories of what happens when you surrender to the Soviets - because they were true. You know how many of the captured troops in Stalingrad ever made it back to Germany and after how long and you can probably judge for yourself about how well those people could fit into the category "Survivor". If it were me, I'd definitely try to surrender to the Western powers too, like the 12th and 9th did... at least I would not be treated as a flea and could hope to see Germany again a year or so after the war.
The most german soldiers in soviet captivity survived. Of course theire died far more than in the west, but the major part survived an od that part the biggest number returnded to germany in the years after the war.
@@pitegal3495 huge numbers died, or were held in captivity and used as slave labor for a decade, even though the war was over and there was zero justification for holding them captive. A horrible crime, well beyond anything the Germans did with prisoners, which at least were defensible on the grounds that they were being held during active hostilities.
@@Ras_al_Gore I suggest you to have a look in the numbers. Only some thousand out of millions of german pow in the USSR were held in captivity years after the war. Most of them were judged in more or less fair tribunals, but the same happend to some other germans in other countries for war crimes.
And most german pows died in soviet captivity in the wartime not afterwards. And compared the percentage of german pows in soviet hands and the way around shows, that the chances for germans were far better.
@@pitegal3495 yes, the Soviet Union, famous for its "more or less fair" tribunals...
And of course more POWs died in Germany. They lost, they were being starved and bombed to death. If someone blows up a prison to kill the guards, do you blame the guards for the deaths of the prisoners?
@@Ras_al_Gore compared to the millions starved and worked to death in Nazi camps the number of soviet pows died in allied bombing is vanishingly small.
Are you realy trIng to defend the german behavior against their pows?
After bombarding and capturing the German village of Badbergen the1st Black Watch had a visit from the Burgomeister of the village Dinklage who wished to surrender as the people were weary of the shelling. This lead to a new tactic where the 154th Brigade who would get a German speaking officer to phone the next village and demand the surrender of the village, failure would result in the village being shelled, then attacked by the Crocodile flame throwers. This proved to be very successful and saved many British and German lives.
@@Airwave2k2 Even though you'd think that constitutes a war crime, it actually doesn't. Bombing civilians was (and still isn't) not punishable. Every country, throughout history, has done it. It's *morally* bad, but, critically, not a "crime".
@@Airwave2k2 They saved lives on both sides, it was not a "Threat" it was what was going to happen and had happened,. Maybe you prefer Genghis Khans pyramid of skulls? These were Nazi's who had caused WW2 and were now trying to save there towns and people
@@bastiaanwillems2252 the indiscriminate killing of innocent civilians is a war crime.
@@benwilson6145 killing innocent civilians to save lives.... jesus f. christ.
@@mito88 Were you born stupid or did you study stupidity? This was the war and the advance to beat the Nazi's required the defeat of the Army. The Nazis did not fight in the fields, no they hid in the towns and villages and in order to defeat them that was were the battles were fought. In your vast brain can you suggest an alternative?
⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️
Also you must remember the American soldier at phillpeans did not want to surrender to the Japanese, they wanted to fight to the death.
rightly so...when you mistreat your opponents you harden their resolve. same happened in france. once SS murdered US troops word got around and even green US units started fighting to the death because they expected germans to kill them if they surrendered.
10:57 they weren't wrong.
This sounds very similar to the "Nacht und Nable" technique they used to help pacify occupied territories.
*Nebel
@@nirfz Thanks, I was dubious about my spelling.
My understanding is that Nacht und Nebel referred to Himmler's order to the SS to destroy the evidence of the extermination camps in the East to prevent it falling into the hands of the advancing Soviets, not "to pacify occupied territories). This was of course only partially successful.
This is an interesting topic. There are more examples in of this in history. Politicians want to stop the war but the people and the king want to keep fighting for example.
if a foreign army invaded..yes i can understand why they kept fighting........
The Russians never signed up to the Geneva Conventions wrt War, whereas the Germans had. When the Germans saw the mutilated bodies of German soldiers who had been captured/killed by the Ruskies they threw the rulebook out the window. Even so, at the end of hostilities there were something like 4 million plus Russian POW's in German hands, and most of these poor slobs were shipped back to Russia, against their will I might add, on Churchill's orders. The ordinary grunts fared a lot 'better' than the Russian officers who were shot by the NKVD on arrival back in Soviet controlled territory.
Are you fucking joking right now? The Nazis engaged in a war of annihilation from the get-go.
The Soviets responded in a very kind manner for what was done to them.
@@Spade_1917 wrong
@@mito88 If you disagree with me you are quite littleraly a fascist sympathizer
@@Spade_1917 again wrong
You are a very sick person and your blatant racism and bias destroys your credibility. The nazis were murdering prisoners and civilians before they invaded the USSR....but its the 'russians' fault? LMFAO
Algorithm
One remark. Also many German veterans of the Eastern front were afraid of the Soviet retaliation for those atrocities they committed. They thought the Russians will pay back in exactly the same manner
Quite scary prospects, aren't they? And many Soviet soldiers did seriously think about it. It took a lot of effort not to let them. And some did manage to satisfy their hunger for revenge. Unfortunately.
What do you mean? They did the same. The soviets invaded Poland and the Baltics when Germany invaded Poland. Two criminal ideologies.
@@tubarao1143 Oh, really? Maybe the first major difference is that communists didn't set up the goal to exterminate all poles and balts?
Also have you heard anything about pretexts for the Soviet invasion? The Curzon line? The Polish aggressive wars against its neighbours in 1917-1920s? The fact that Baltic States were very much willing to join Axis? Also Polish unwillingness to cooperate against Hitler? Ring a bell?
@@tubarao1143 If you start calling ideologies criminal for simply invading/annexing countries then you'll find out that no major country is innocent. Shocker?
It's a big game of big guys, and small countries are simply bargaining chips. It's always been like that.
@@JohanKlein Ok Soviet Union was not a criminal regime with criminal ideology. Gotcha
@@JohanKlein Not even a nice try.
Poland was occupied and divided by the Tsarist Empire. The fact that Poland recovered some of it after the First World War is hardly a justification for what Germany and the Soviet Union then decided to do to Poland.
And the fact that the Baltic states supposedly wanted to join the Axis could also have been because they were looking for help against the claims of the Soviet Union, which were put forward with more or less ridiculous justifications.
In Finland you could see what the neighbouring countries had to expect.
Maybe you should try again to gloss over the Soviet Union's aggression against its neighbours.
But I also think that there were differences in the crimes. In the Soviet Union, peoples were not so much exterminated for racial reasons, but often simply to create fear or as consequence of incompetence. I guess it made no difference for the victims for what reason they were murdered.
At a point Stalin had to stop the mass slaughter of German POW's and civilians so that they could be used as slave labor. Only a person with no imagination would surrender to the Soviets. Paulus did fairly well as a traitor while only 6,000 out of 250,000 of his troops ever made it home.
Your Nickname says it all. Noob
Simple really, has a defeated army ever been treated well after the war? Nope, so you fight because one way or the other it ain't going to be pretty.......
This has happened, what are you smoking?
It’s not unheard of
@@looinrims Yeah I'm sure armies that are losing are totally willing to take the chance that they'll be the one exception....
@@SouthParkCows88 Why do you think a lot of germans tried surrendering to the western allies? Because they would be treated fairly and according to the Geneva convention.
Many German and Italian prisoners did very well in their captivity. Many found agricultural work in the US and British Commonwealth nations (obviously, under restrictions) and decided to stay there after the war. And, by and large, the treatment of prisoners in WW1 was quite fair. The only great fear the Axis nations had was being captured by the Red Army, both for ideological purposes, the pre-war knowledge of the gulags and general Stalin-ry, and most of all, general knowledge of what the Axis armies did over there. There was nothing comparable on the Western Front, so no reason for the German soldiers to fear being captured by the Americans or British. It was MUCH better than being constantly bombed or shelled by them.
@@noobtubephails Many, many French and British soldiers were captured by the Germans in the early war, and (at least until 1942, in the case of the French) they were treated in accordance with the accepted rules of war. There were escapees who could report the conditions. It wasn't exactly a "gentlemanly" war, with paroles and exchanges and the like, but there was no expectation of brutality, until you start getting near the end and the SS divisions in particular would often execute prisoners.
the allies specially FDR wanted to imposed unconditional surrender over gemany , that means that there is no guarantee of what will happen to the territory , the population , the current regime anything , the allies could've done( and they eventually did ) anything they want with germany , so the regime and the leadership and the germans has all the arguments to keep fighting till the very end, I mean the irony is that when Churchill in 1940 was crying never surrender everyone considered that as heroism (while there were englishman that wanted to make peace with germany and they were sent to jail in England ) but when the situation is reversed and AH is saying the same thing then is supposed to be a evil act against his people , the other example was France , germany didn't impose an unconditional surrender to the french , and compared to the behavior of the allies in 1945 is an act of a gentleman.
Yeah, if you surrender too soon you are called weak, if you take too long to surrender you are called a fanatic -- damned if you do, damned if you don't. But the "unconditional surrender" demand must have been made knowing it would not happen until the end, because the allied leaders did not want a repeat the Dolchstoss, the propaganda that Germany only lost WW1 because of political betrayal and not from being defeated fair and square. So a demand was made that could only be achieved if you *broke* the enemy and brought them to their knees in total submission (Which, sure, in the case of actual Nazis they *do* deserve that, mind you.)
@@chedelirio6984 good point ,but is hard to believe that that propaganda had that much an effect on the German people during that time , I mean the French occupied the Ruhr in 1923 , with African troops what a disgrace to do that to a fellow european , that event contradicts the Dolchstoss propaganda, I wonder if that wasn’t just another cheep pretext by FDR to break down Germany’s military power and independence by destroying their best assets the population , their moral and culture, to become a much more submissive and get them out of history, because with that you are sure that they will not create more leaders or elites that will try to build an independent and strong Germany that won’t try that again (that’s the reason why NATO is still in Europe today ) , they did that with Napoleon’s France so is not only Germany , Churchill said it "it doesn’t matter if is the Spanish crown , the French empire or the German Reich , what really matter is between the most powerful country and the one the is becoming the most powerful" , that’s the truth imo
well to be fair surrendering to soviet communists was mostly a death sentence in a very brutal way,once the soviets captured a makeshift hoispital on the eastern front they threw the wounded germans trough the windows,they spalsh them with watter and lef tthem in open winter to freeze to death,when a german unit recaptured th earea they found a place full of dead german prisoners with their genitals cut off and stuffed in their mouths,there is aot of stories of brutality,so surrendering to soviet communists was not an option for the german soldiers
Surrender is never an option, that leaves you like a lamb in a slaughterhouse
sad but true :(
Bastiaan is Dutch. He also sounds very Dutch. LOL
Well there's a link between being Dutch and sounding Dutch, I guess ;)
@@bastiaanwillems2252
Bedoelde meer dat ik er op gokte dat je Nederlands bent. Je kon ook een Vlaamse zijn. Sommigen van die separatisten kunnen nog wel eens Nederlands klinken als ze Engels spreken. ;)
no gg no skill
The well dokumented behavior of sovjet soldiers in occupation areas(no matter if german territory or not) would be more than enough to convince most people to fight on. Every minute you hold off the enemy is a minute more for women and children to escape a... bad fate
Communism. The end.
Otto Skorzeny had the gauleiter of Konigsberg hanged for fleeing the city in 1945 when Skorzeny encountered him in Schwedt during the effort to repel the Red Army there. When the fate of the nation hangs in the balance everyone must do their duty.
That's another Königsberg - there were two places called Königsberg. You're referring to the small town of Königsberg/Neumark, but I talk about the city of Königsberg in East Prussia. Don't worry - I've seen the confusion before. Both pretty brutal actions in 1945...
Otto Skorzeny did the right thing. Every man must do his utmost to defend the nation and anyone who fails to do so, must be shot.
thanks Bas for clearing this up!
@@danielc.7295 And then hid and fled himself to live a comfy life...
@@HistoryGameV ouch you killed him
The Wagnerian Götterdämmerung atmosphere of the Nazi regime's collapse in '44 and '45 affected all levels of rank within both the Wehrmacht and the civilian populace that had been fed that all that drama for more than a decade. It was really no different from the fanaticism of the Imperial Japanese. This sickness of the mind is difficult for us to really understand all these years later, but it played a huge role in the terrible inability to surrender when the war was clearly already lost, which led to more death & destruction in the last 9 months of the war than even the savagery of 1941-42.
It’s not a “sickness of the mind” to fight to the death to protect your homes from a ruthless, pitiless, Bolshevik dictatorship. What a pathetic notion.
It was a"sickness of the mind"until the mass rape & murder by the bolshevik hordes made if a "sickness of the body".& 🇺🇲&🇬🇧fed it by giving them surrendered Germans & Russians.This after Soviets kept downed allied airmen in the east.
Seeing what was being done to the civilians over run by the soviets was a big motivator to fight to the end.
If you surrender Germany will die... well... yes...
Don't forget that we have the benefit of hindsight, Hitler ordered everything destroyed his hate turned ultimately to the German people, and the Russians and French who suffered the most did indeed want to destroy all German industry reduce it to an agrarian subsistence society.
Because they were patriots and had honour!
Blame shifting was the national sport of Germany 1945
Fanaticism and/or fear. PS sad how many comments are about how hard done by surrendering German forces were. They got off lightly.
Your avatar suits you
They knew what would happen to Germany if they gave up. And they were proved correct.
The propaganda was telling them that Germany will be wipe out, and that didn't happen.
I always struggle to answer that question, because it's an interesting "what if?" Had the Germans surrendered in mid-1944, what would that have meant? More Germans died in the last year of the war than all previous years combined. So, at least you still have your population intact to a greater extent - especially the younger generation that would be called to serve in the Volkssturm.
Then: it seems likely that the Soviets would have taken out a lot of the industry, but what they took out in the early post-war years is obviously just a fraction of what was bombed by the Allies in the final year of the war.
Than: the "German culture is lost" argument. That would be true in every occasion, but the only thing to get lost of that culture was the Nazi element of it. Neither the Americans, Brits, French, or Soviets wanted to take Lederhosen or Pretzels away from Germany, so to speak. All non-hateful culture can just stay, of course.
So they knew that Germany would become a democratic society with more wealth than ever before and decades of peace? Sounds more like a reason not to fight though.
@@bezahltersystemtroll5055 If I explained what is wrong with Germany today, youtube would just delete my comment for hate speech, but you know what that country has become. It is like Weimar on steroids and that was exactly what they were fighting against.
@@Willy_Tepes Yes, I know what you mean. It's truly terrible that I am able to wear what I want, date who I want and read what I want. I cry myself to sleep most nights because of this, especially knowing I will never be a tool for the military adventures of an emotionally crippled postcard painter.
The answer is simple, because of the Prussian military school.
It's funny to watch millennials and Xrs trying to explain honor, duty and bravery. For them, including me, nothing is justified, there is always some authoritarian forcing them to fight against their will... Not sure if we come from the same men who fought in wwii.
because they are true patriotic soldiers and love their father land.
Respect.
Yes, fighting for a bunch of nazis that were busy commiting crimes left and rights and multiple genocides, is patriotic.
Amen brother.
100%
At first but they weren't idiots. A time comes when individuals, as patriotic as they may be, see no point in giving their life for a lost cause. Most of the top military commanders had seen Hitler and knew he was in decline and losing his grip on reality.
@@projectpitchfork860 god help you to get rid of all this hatred.... poor soul.
Germans-"let's start a fight with everyone" also Germans- "Everyone's picking on us".....never your fault,always someone else. Laughable, though a good video nonetheless.
your comment is utter nonsense
They fought to death because once you fight a war of extermination if you give up you and your will be tortured to death.
Only the Allies were fighting a war of extermination
@@Ras_al_Gore Only a Nazi thinks that the Nazis were victims.
@@TomTom-rh5gk only a brainwashed fool would say a thing like that
@@Ras_al_Gore I am glad that you admit it. You learned something about your self today.
Quite a bit of revisionist history here. "Treated worse than those who surrendered earlier"? The Germans were correct in knowing that if the surrendered to the Soviets that their country and their history would be eliminated while they would be lucky to survive with their lives. It wasn't just the holdouts that were mistreated by the Soviets.
Throughout history have holdouts usually got worse treated. Medieval cities that instantly surrendered got better peace terms. While cities that fell after its walls had been stormed became victim of plunder, rape, arsony, slavery, and mass killings on the civilian population.
And there was no difference between warfare in antiquity and the 1600s in that sense. When you lose many of your friends by storming a city then will the sympathies with the enemy go away. And the feelings of anger and revenge takes over.
@@nattygsbord @Nattygsbord True with holdout cities through Napoleonic times. However, not relevant to this topic. The Soviets either shot or sent nearly everyone off to the Gulag to be worked to death after being pillaged and raped. It didn't matter when you were captured or how you were captured. They even did it to many of their own citizens when liberating them from the Nazis. They did much the same when conquering Poland at the beginning of the war. There was no retribution aspect there, it was just another example of how brutal socialism is.
@@pallen2980 Did the German soldat know that the Russians left German solidiers to die? If not, then why not surrender when the situation is hopeless and death is certain? Then you did at least have some chance of survival.
If you surrendered instantly, then would the Russian troops at the spot not beat you up. That treatment would have to wait until you got to Siberia.
And at the end of the war was the food shortage problem not so bad as it was in the past before lend lease and the liberation of Ukraine. Many Germans would survive the war in Russian captivity and return 10 years after the war ended, like Erich Hartmann.
Germany and its history were annihilated? You learn something new everyday I guess 🤔
and he didnt say that only the holdouts where mistreated but that they where treated WORSE
How stupid are modern civilians?
You fight like hell, because cities, towns, buildings can be rebuilt; you cannot say the same about your culture and your people. Specifically, you are talking about Kaliningrad NOT Konigsberg. There is no Kornigsberg, thus the price of surrender.
Ive long felt that all the excuses given by the Germans post war as to why they kept fighting are just that. Excuses. The Germans fought on because they wanted to. It's that simple
Thats nonsense.
Talk about naivety/propaganda fanatic
And what prove or even evidence do you have for that wild assumption?
And why did they want to keep fighting? It was not looking good for them. They would not have done it without a good reason.
@@humamtaher9039 Germanic Law.