Anyone know any ex-Nazis?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sure the first few thousand jews wouldn't have stood a chance, even if armed, but can you imagine how quickly they would have organized and resisted if those first few thousand had made enough noise when fighting back?

Things like Waco, and Ruby Ridge are no joke. We can't sit here and pretend that's past history and no important anymore. When the government blatently exterminates it's political enemies for the purpose of making examples, they are no better than Nazis.

It could happen here, people that think it couldn't are absolutely deluded.

------------------
The Alcove

I twist the facts until they tell the truth. -Some intellectual sadist

The Bill of Rights is a document of brilliance, a document of wisdom, and it is the ultimate law, spoken or not, for the very concept of a society that holds liberty above the desire for ever greater power. -Me
 
Saw a program on this subject and the answer was the Luger was not a reliable as the p38 a so it was not the favored weapon.It was very sensitive to dirt and ammo, not good for a service weapon.
 
My old man wetbacked here from Germany in 1922. I was born in 1933 (thanks for emigrating Dad!). We used to go up to the Yorkville section in NYC a lot and I got exposed to many of the "Old Country" types, all WWI vets. After the war I ran into a bunch of WWII guys.

Funny thing. None of the latter were Nazis and ALL of them always fought the Russians. Reminded me of how you couldn't find a Republican who voted for Nixon after the impeachment broke,

The few times these Germans talked about guns, it was always the KAR98 - none were officers (or would admit it), so no pistols were involved. They HATED Russian artillery and those damn submachines that worked in any weather while theirs froze.

I remember, in the 50s, asking one guy why their machine guns had such a high cyclic rate (600-800 rpm?) compared to ours. He just said, "You Americans never had to face those Russian 'Human Sea' attacks". That was just as we were facing the Chinese version in Korea.

Topic Drift - There's a great book out called "The Forgotten Soldier" - the life of an Alsatian Frenchman that fought with the Das Reich (I think) SS division in Russia. Not any detail on guns, but plently of hair-curling "adventures" - especially during the retreat.

Topic Drift redux - Dangus touched on the Ukranians welcoming the Germans as liberators. While there are a few books out on it, it is generally unknown that the Germans had whole battalions of Russians of various stripes fighting for them against the Communists. They were getting volunteers as late as 1944(!) Since this was at cross-purposes with the Nazi untermenchen philosphy, they never did take full advantage of it.

Some of the returning GIs told me, "Gee, it must be pretty rough living in Russia. The Russians we captured were being sent back to Russia. These guys were slitting their wrists or jumping off the ship." Such was our innocence. I learned later that Stalin struck a deal with Roosevelt to send ALL Russians we captured "back home". They were immediately shot on arrival or sent to Gulags for betraying the Motherland.




[This message has been edited by Oatka (edited August 26, 2000).]
 
Can't answer your question, but thought I would throw this comment in anyway.

I used to work with a former member of the Hitler Youth. He was a very nice person, and easily to like. He was 14 years old when told to fight.

Closest he came to fighting was being assigned to a bridge with a group of other Hitler Youth, and one tough sergeant who had fought on the Russian Front.

The sergeant told them, if they had any sense they would surround as so as the first American troops came in sight. The war was lost, and there was no reason to throw their lives away.

They were armed with panzerfausts, and a MG-42. As soon as the first tank appeared, they surrounded.
 
Shadow Walker,

"Surrounded?"

Huh?

Do you mean that they surrendered, gave up and let themselves be taken prisoner?

Sorry, just a bit confusing...

------------------
Beware the man with the S&W .357 Mag.
Chances are he knows how to use it.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Lavan:
Someone, somewhere MUST know someone who was in the German Army in WW2.
I would like to know if the guys in the field PREFERRED the Luger or the P-38 since both were issued at that time.
Just curiosity. Have never seen any comments about which one the actual soldiers preferred.
Any comments appreciated.[/quote]

Go visit www.gunandknife.com. They have a German weapons board.
 
I'll second the recommendation of the Forgotten Soldier. The book is the the story of Guy Sajer, conscripted at 15 or 16 yrs old into the Wehrmacht, he later volunteered for training with The Gross Deutchland ID (M)
He served on the Eastern Front, for several years and managed to survive. Fantastic story, well written, y'all should read it.
 
I won't get into the Nazi issues here.

An interesting note is that the US Army looked at the Luger as a potential service weapon, but it was rejected as being too "complex" for the average enlisted soldier to use.

I've shot both, and though the Luger is legendary, the P 38 is by far the superior weapon.

------------------
Panzerführer

Die Wahrheit ist eine Perle. Werfen sie nicht vor die Säue.

Those that beat their swords into plowshares will plow for those that don't.
 
If you ever get a chance, read the series of books by an ex-German soldier named Sven Hassel. He was a dutch kid, who joined the German army and served all the way through.
He was on the eastern front, in Italy, and with a prisoner punishment regiment.
He tells, in no uncertain terms, the thoughts and feelings of the average soldier.
Great reading!
On the whole, the soldiers liked the Russian burps guns, P-38s, anything automatic.
They felt the K-98 was outmoded by the other full auto guns.
They also respected and feared the Russians, despite their leaders telling them they were subhuman and could be easily beaten.
 
I've read one of Hassel's books, and it's pretty interesting. Another neat series is the Gunner Asch series by Hans Hellmut Kirst

In answer to your original question, I know several Wehrmacht veterans. I have known some ex-Nazis, but they're all dead now. I never heard any Wehrmacht veteran talk about his pistol one way or the other. I have heard them talk lovingly about their K98s.

At one point, about 1940 I think, the government ordered manufacturers to stop making the Luger and switch to the P 38 because it was simpler and more reliable. American soldiers also liked picking one up to fight with.

[This message has been edited by RHC (edited August 27, 2000).]
 
Beemerb: There's punishment and then there's punishment. The dollar value of war reparations that Germany was supposed to pay--in gold--per the Treaty of Versailles exceeded the above-ground world supply of gold. Physically impossible to do!

Considering the mud and grunge of battlefield conditions, the P-38 has always been regarded as more reliable than the Luger. The Luger, to me, feels better in my hand, FWIW.

Art
 
One of my great-uncles served in WWII and was captured by the russians, returning many years after the end of the war. You might like to read the last chapter of Coopers "To ride, shoot straight and speak the truth" for an idea of how caring the russian army was for their prisoners.

Stalin said of the Wehrmacht: The comradeship, especially of the Austrian soldiers, is exceptionally good.

Remember that the US loaned heavily to Germany and in effect paid for the pre-WWII industrialization.

In the Hitler-Stalin pact of nonaggression and to divide Poland between themselves, both had the idea of attacking the other party at the most convienient moment. The Soviets had introduced mass production of tanks which were superior to german tanks, and german industry could not match the rate of production, so it would have been only a matter of time before the soviets invaded Germany.

Both WWI and WWII could have been cut short. The Czar's army could have captured Berlin easily in WWI, but were not allowed to - neither the Czar and the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy had not been destroyed.

After Italy had been taken, an attack on the south flank would have finished off the Third Reich, but was not allowed to continue. German Generals around Admiral Canaris fed up with Hitler offered a coup and capitulation, but that offer was not even acknowledged. The Japanese Emperor wished to capitulate, but then the atom bomb would never have been tested.

War is big business. It costs a lot to wage war, and then even more to rebuild the damages, just make sure the public applauds when Uncle Sam starts shooting.

And since there is no First Amendment here in Austria, I can't tell you about the really interesting things that didn't happen.

------------------
I see no elephant in my cellar. If there were an elephant in my cellar, I would surely see it. Therefore, there is no elephant in my cellar.

http://www.ety.com/tell/why.html
 
FWIW, when I was in college in Germany in 94, I met and drank with a German WWII vet at Oktoberfest. (This was way before I had any interest in firearms)...
...this guy musta been the oldest guy in that particular beer tent. Ironically, his granddaughter was doing an exchange program in the U.S. at the same time I was in Germany. So we drank a bunch of beer and sniffed a lot of peppermint snuff (I'm starting to sneeze just thinking about it) and had a great time.

I asked him about his stint in the war, but he didn't dwell on it. In retrospect, he didn't seem to be very happy with what he had done (was forced to do).. and he just kinda left it at that.

...wish I could remember his name and had taken a picture with him. Just a memory now, I guess.

Anyway, nothing to do with the topic at hand, but thought I'd just throw it out there.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>The Czar's army could have captured Berlin easily in WWI, but were not allowed to - neither the Czar and the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy had not been destroyed.
[/quote]

Wasn't the Russian army soundly defeated at the battle of Tannenburg?
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Gunter:

Both WWI and WWII could have been cut short. The Czar's army could have captured Berlin easily in WWI, but were not allowed to - neither the Czar and the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy had not been destroyed.
[/quote]

Wasn't Brusilov's offensive running out of steam due to poor logistics anyway?
 
Actually a book was written not that long ago that exposed the myth that "most Germans did not know about the atrocities". Actually once it got started the people were like sheep, even the civilians got into the Jew thing. There is plenty of documentation to back this up. Not picking on the Germans, I think it could happen anywhere, in fact continues to happen in industrialized and third world countries alike. People are like sheep, get a few of them to go along and the rest will follow. Of course the smart thing to say now is "we hated Hitler" what do you think someone is going to say!!! Like I said, there is plenty of documention.
 
I know the son of one of the atypical SS officers - Seems that the officer, unlike many of his comrades, wasn't too intensely thrilled about the whole thing. Since he was in an elite unit, he could get away with quite a bit, so he got his family out of the country in the late thirties.
 
Matt, Oleg: The Czar had realised that the russian army needed to be reformed if it was going to stand against the modernised German and Austrian armies. The only hope of victory was to quickly capture Berlin before reinforcements could arrive. International financial interests could not allow this, so the russian army was told to hold their advance, and subsequently defeated.

"even civilians could see it": see middle sentence of my signature...

------------------
I see no elephant in my cellar. If there were an elephant in my cellar, I would surely see it. Therefore, there is no elephant in my cellar.

http://www.ety.com/tell/why.html
 
Art thats what I was thinking also.

Its a good thing the Germans made all those mistakes (dunkirk) for had they prevailed in europe I think this country would be in trouble one day. Based on the acceptance of all the sheeple thinking the CHI-COM and old Soviets are our buddies.

Glocker, yeah maybe Lavan should study some Dresden history. What was count? 200-250K civilians?

As I have always said the Germans were the best bad guys that ever lived.

As to guns dont know about the pistols but the MG-42 was possibly the best belt gun of the war. While all the U.S. ord/weapons people were laughing at the stamping the chief machine gun guy said it was one of the best designs he had seen. "Dump sand in the thing and it crushes it into silica and lubricates itself." To bad we had too much pride to use the thing in Korea, might have saved some lives. But we couldnt be seen taking the weapons of our enemies, maybe the Jet engines they invented but not the weapons!
Maybe the liberals should sue the Geramans for all the firearms deaths since they invented the Assault Rifle to.

[This message has been edited by oberkommando (edited August 30, 2000).]
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top