verboten: “Nazi ideology placed great importance upon qualities such as courage, endurance, resourcefulness and strength of character, as well as upon comradeship.” - [PEACE]

[Zenaan Harkness]

The Treaty of Versailles Was ‘Too Tough on Germany’ - Professor
https://sputniknews.com/analysis/201906211076005554-the-treaty-of-versailles-was-too-tough-on-germany-professor/

  The Treaty of Versailles was signed on 28 June 1919. It was just
  one of a series of treaties between the victorious allies and the
  defeated nations - Germany, Austro-Hungary, Turkey and Bulgaria.
  Professor Richard Overy explained why Versailles was partly to
  blame for the rise of Hitler.

  Friday, 21 June, marks the 100th anniversary of the moment when the
  commanders of the former Imperial German Navy scuttled most of the
  fleet while at anchorage at Scapa Flow naval base in Scotland.

  They were enraged by the terms of the Treaty of Versailles.
  https://peacemuseum.org.uk/special-blog-on-the-treaty-of-versailles/

  The day before - on 20 June 1919 - Philipp Scheidemann resigned as
  Chancellor of Germany’s new Weimar Republic, which he helped
  establish following the abdication of Kaiser Wilhelm II and the
  dissolution of the German Empire.

    This day 100 years ago 74 ships of the German High Seas Fleet
    (Hochseeflotte) scuttled, in Scapa Flow, on the orders of their
    commander Rear Admiral (Konteradmiral) Ludwig von Reuter. 9
    German sailors were killed and 16 wounded by the Royal Navy in
    the confusion that day. https://pic.twitter.com/vZNqOFxrho
    — Brian Alexander (@kirkwallwalking) 21 June 2019

  Scheidemann, a Social Democrat, believed the treaty was
  unfair to Germany and he refused to sign it.
  https://www.firstworldwar.com/bio/scheidemann.htm

  Richard Overy, a History Professor at Exeter University, said:

    "The treaty was certainly too tough on Germany - and later
    treaties were tougher still on Austria and Hungary - but it
    reflected the mood at the time that there must be visible
    punishment to recompense for the horrors of the conflict. Recall,
    too, the Brest-Litovsk Treaty imposed (by Germany) on Russia,
    which was punitive in the extreme."

  As for the scuttling of the German fleet, which led to the deaths
  of nine sailors, Prof. Overy noted that there had been plans since
  May 1919 to sink the ships, and he said the admirals saw it as "an
  honourable challenge to the shame of surrender."

  ...



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Versailles





On Sun, Jun 16, 2019 at 08:56:55PM +1000, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
> Very interdasting ...
> 
> 
> 
>   German WW2 Soldiers Were the Best, Outfighting by Far Their
>   English, US, Russian Foes
>   https://russia-insider.com/en/german-ww2-soldiers-were-best-outfighting-far-their-english-us-russian-foes/ri27242
>   http://www.ihr.org/other/bestsoldiers
> 
>   The German soldiers of World War II have often been portrayed, both
>   during the war and in the decades since, as simple-minded,
>   unimaginative and brutish. Hollywood movies and popular U.S.
>   television shows have for years contrasted confident, able and
>   “cool” American GIs with slow-witted, cynical and cruel Germans.
> 
>   … Like so much else that the public has been told about the Second
>   World War, this demeaning image bore little relation to reality. As
>   specialists of military history who have looked into the matter
>   agree, the men of Germany’s armed forces -- the Wehrmacht --
>   performed with unmatched ability and resourcefulness throughout the
>   nearly six years of conflict.
>   Trevor N. Dupuy
> 
>   Trevor N. Dupuy, a noted American military analyst, US Army
>   Colonel, and author of numerous books and articles, studied the
>   comparative performance of the soldiers of World War II. On
>   average, he concluded, 100 German soldiers were the equivalent of
>   120 American, British or French soldiers, or 200 Soviet soldiers.
>   “On a man for man basis,” Dupuy wrote, “German ground soldiers
>   consistently inflicted casualties at about a 50 percent higher rate
>   than they incurred from the opposing British and American troops
>   under all circumstances [emphasis in original]. This was true when
>   they were attacking and when they were defending, when they had a
>   local numerical superiority and when, as was usually the case, they
>   were outnumbered, when they had air superiority and when they did
>   not, when they won and when they lost.” / 3
> 
>   Other respected military historians, such as Martin van Creveld and
>   John Keegan, have made comparable assessments. Max Boot draws a
>   similar conclusion in his detailed book, War Made New.  “Man for
>   man,” writes this influential author and military historian, “the
>   Wehrmacht was probably the most formidable fighting force in the
>   world until at least 1943, if not later.  German soldiers were even
>   known for showing more initiative than the soldiers of democratic
>   France, Britain, and the United States. / 4
> 
>   Another scholar who has written about this is Ben H. Shepherd, an
>   author of several books who teaches history at Glasgow Caledonian
>   University in Scotland. In a recent detailed work, Hitler’s
>   Soldiers: The German Army in the Third Reich, he dismantles the
>   image of “zombie-like obedience popularly ascribed to the German
>   military.” In fact, the Wehrmacht “stressed qualities such as
>   flexibility, daring and independent thinking,” and “Nazi ideology
>   placed great importance upon qualities such as courage, endurance,
>   resourcefulness and strength of character, as well as upon
>   comradeship.” He also takes note of “the stress that the German
>   army placed on superior organization. At all levels, the German
>   army was more effectively organized than all the opposing armies it
>   faced ...” / 5
> 
>   Looking at the 1940 campaign in France, Shepherd writes: “...  It
>   was the Germans’ own strength that enabled them to triumph so
>   spectacularly. Among other things, they profited from an
>   imaginative and daring operational plan. But if one single, overall
>   reason for the German army’s triumph in the west can be pinpointed,
>   it is that its doctrinal approach to tactics and operations far
>   outclassed that of its opponents. At all levels, it possessed
>   qualities of daring and adaptability, and a capacity to react to
>   the rapidly changing battlefield situation ... The qualities of the
>   German soldier, and the ability of commanders at all levels to
>   think and act independently and effectively, were indeed key to
>   German victory ...” / 6
> 
>   Even after the tide of war had turned, he writes, German troops
>   fought well. “The army sustained its initial success thanks to high
>   levels of training, cohesion and morale among its troops, and
>   thanks also to excellent coordination with the Luftwaffe [air
>   force] ... Much has been made of the German soldier’s qualitative
>   superiority in the [June-July 1944] Normandy campaign, and there is
>   indeed much to be said in this. One especially exhaustive study of
>   the [German] Westheer in Normandy concludes that, all other things
>   being equal, a hundred Germans soldiers would have made an even
>   fight against 150 Allied soldiers.” / 7
> 
>   “As a result of all this,” says Shepherd, “German army units
>   exhibited great staying power in defense [that is, especially
>   during the final year of the war]. They also exhibited great
>   resourcefulness and flexibility ... From 1943 onwards, the German
>   army executed a fighting retreat of unparalleled tenacity, against
>   an increasingly formidable Red Army in the east, and a Western
>   Allied coalition powered increasingly by the economic and military
>   might of the United Sates.” / 8
> 
>   ...