Jump to content
Free downloads from TNA ×
The Great War (1914-1918) Forum

Remembered Today:

"Why We Should Upset the Germans" - Daily Mail Article


ph0ebus

Recommended Posts

A perfectly balanced and logical view Martin, well put. Memories of other countries' transgressions are regrettably short.

Dave.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Dear friends,

very obvious - I am German. And neither me nor anybody else I now is or will be offended by any of the 100years celebrations. There are plenty reasons for it. Only some of them from my perspective:

  • First World War is absolutely forgotten in our society. There is nobody alive who is consciously remembering it - even hard to find real Second War participants.
  • Germany's role in both wars seems for most of us so unreal like a trip to the moon. Military, the use of military force, the own Bundeswehr are issues which do not play a role in the day to day life of a German. The only exception are some politicians and the soldiers of the Bundeswehr but who are equally uninterested in military history.
  • The social implications of the First War, its relation and lead in to the Second World War is also not part of a common German memory.

It seems to me that somebody has pushed the "delete bottom" and raised the memory from our national "hard drives".

I whiteness this fact these days while I am participating in the preparation of a conference about the Turkish-German relations in First World War in Istanbul. There is almost no official support because neither the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Auswärtiges Amt) not the Ministry of Defence want to expose itself to this matter. Even the participation of me - an active serving officer - in any event remembering the War id highly restricted. There is this unwritten fear of being perceived as "reaktionär" and just celebrating old stories of heroes or not enough underlining Germanys guilt.

My effort to have at least one place in Gallipoli to remember the some 500 German casualties in the campaign are neglected. So Germany will be the only nation in the campaign even the Chief in Command was a German and Thousands did participate - who will have not a single national monument in or around Gallipoli. What a poor truth!!!

I would be more than happy if there would be any reaction - even a protest or negative outcry - to such articles in Germany. But, it is even worse - there is nothing, there is deadly silence, ignorance and the unwillingness to face the past without taken it as a personal guilt but take it as the common part of our history, of acts of our fathers and grandfathers and research, how these memories had indirect impacted even on us - the generation of the grandchildren.

I hope I was able to express myself - kind regards

(and - by the way - I love Blackadder and Faulthy Towels "don't mention the war.."...;-)))

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your post is very interesting El Shahin. It evokes memories from about 1988 working with a particular German (in Italy) who was convinced that Germans taking holidays in the UK must be very few and far between because he thought that the ports, airports etc. would be mobbed with British people waiting to beat up Germans as retribution for the wars! His first meeting with me he stated "You must hate me" and when I asked him why he responded "Because of the wars". He was initially unshakable on his thoughts however after a few months I managed to swing him around and we parted the greatest of friends.

But your comments also sadden me as I am today about to try and make contact with Waldshut archives regarding WW1 POWs and reading your post, I fear the response I get might be quite negative. I will however make my phone call because nothing ventured, nothing gained and if I don't try, I will never know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi s@Seaforths,

Waldhuts archives - you mean the village Waldhutes and an archive there? Perhaps I can help you with this.

But let me give you some examples:

  • In Berlin we have an special archive where are all records from the military hospitals in First and Second WW are kept. Almost all handwritten books from the war zones - can you imagine this treasure? There are sitting two old men and keeping them and a friend, who did some research there, told me that he was almost the only one over years who visited them and took some pictures. I will go there and research about the Germans in Gallipoli and Istanbul by end of this September but you see how big the interest in our country is.
  • Second example: My book "Gallipoli 1915" which is the first new German record of our engagement with the Turks on the peninsula was printed 2000 times - now it is sold out but even in the coming anniversary there seems no interest to reprint again or translate it into English language.

There are some dozens of historical interested people who care and research but that is it - a common memory - as I said - does not exist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi s@Seaforths,

Waldhuts archives - you mean the village Waldhutes and an archive there? Perhaps I can help you with this.

But let me give you some examples:

There are some dozens of historical interested people who care and research but that is it - a common memory - as I said - does not exist.

Hi El Shahin,

Waldshut is now called Waldshut-Tiengen (near the border with Switzerland) I believe and I I did try to make contact today but I do not speak German. I asked if he spoke English and he said "a little" then said something very quickly in German and hung up (twice). I have another number to ring and got no answer today I will try again tomorrow. I believe there were POWs there but it is not on the list of known camps.

Perhaps these archives you know about would be visited by more curious people if only there existance was known more widely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a complicated issue I think for what it`s worth.

The Germans were an invading army, and have to hold their hands up regarding the invasion of a neutral country, and for atrocities committed against Belgian civilians, as well as being first to use chemical weapons, flamethrowers etc. I will not mention their conduct in WW2, as I don`t want to detract away from this being a WW1 forum.

However, whilst I feel it justifiable to be outraged against the men who carried out these actions, I am a grandfather of a two year old girl, and would not like to think that people would be prejudiced against her for any wrongs that I have committed in my lifetime.

That said, I couldn`t help but notice Dan Snow`s shall we say "reservations" about his somewhat inept ancestor General, after it dawned on him what he had been responsible for.

Much the same as I felt, when I visited Culloden as an Englishman. What occurred there, followed by the highland clearances, happened hundreds of years ago, but that didn`t stop me from still feeling a profound sense of shame for the actions of my fellow countrymen.

I think that what I am saying basically, is that some of us will bear the guilt for the sins of our fathers for generations to come, but we in turn shouldn`t hold responsible the descendants of others for the sins of their fathers.

I hope that makes sense. :poppy:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When do you stop going on about invaders? Now, how about a nice thread about blaming Boadicea for massacring lots of Romans (most would not have been Roman, but other assorted foreigners from the Empire9, women, children and civilian men.

Or should we blame the Romans for bringing it all on themselves? After all, whatever did they ever do for us?

I me one Scotsman (and he is by no means the only one) who was still up in arms at the clearances that were fomented, naturally, by the English.

I have Irish who KNOW that the famine was fomented by England and that there was plenty of foodIn fact, the absent landlords were mostly Irish and lived in Dublin., but absent landlords in England stole it all.

I was recently at a dinner and three Catholic priests somehow got on to the subject of the reformation. They KNEW that it was totally illegal to be a Catholic in England from 1558 to 1832. It wasn't. They found it utterly intolerable that the British monarch may not marry a Catholic. I pointed out that whoever it was could only marry one person.

Queen Elizabeth 1 was, naturally, a tyrant who burnt Catholics at the stake every day. They refused to hear a word against Bloody Mary.

We can all go on about events in history (although I have heard Spaniards sounding off about Gibraltar, none have ever gone on about the Armada), but there are limits, especially when the people going on don't know what they are talking about.

Isn't it about time we stopped going on and on about the awful Germans. I know man, many. I know some who were in WW2 and many who were born afterwards. I worked with them for over 30 years. The present generation is horrified at what their parents got up to, but can't understand why the British still harp on it all (it isn't something you normally find in, say, France).

As I type this a Japanese friend is sitting on my terrace. She was born just after the war, but so what. Should I throw her over the side?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When do you stop going on about invaders? Now, how about a nice thread about blaming Boadicea for massacring lots of Romans (most would not have been Roman, but other assorted foreigners from the Empire9, women, children and civilian men.

Or should we blame the Romans for bringing it all on themselves? After all, whatever did they ever do for us?

I me one Scotsman (and he is by no means the only one) who was still up in arms at the clearances that were fomented, naturally, by the English.

I have Irish who KNOW that the famine was fomented by England and that there was plenty of foodIn fact, the absent landlords were mostly Irish and lived in Dublin., but absent landlords in England stole it all.

I was recently at a dinner and three Catholic priests somehow got on to the subject of the reformation. They KNEW that it was totally illegal to be a Catholic in England from 1558 to 1832. It wasn't. They found it utterly intolerable that the British monarch may not marry a Catholic. I pointed out that whoever it was could only marry one person.

Queen Elizabeth 1 was, naturally, a tyrant who burnt Catholics at the stake every day. They refused to hear a word against Bloody Mary.

We can all go on about events in history (although I have heard Spaniards sounding off about Gibraltar, none have ever gone on about the Armada), but there are limits, especially when the people going on don't know what they are talking about.

Isn't it about time we stopped going on and on about the awful Germans. I know man, many. I know some who were in WW2 and many who were born afterwards. I worked with them for over 30 years. The present generation is horrified at what their parents got up to, but can't understand why the British still harp on it all (it isn't something you normally find in, say, France).

As I type this a Japanese friend is sitting on my terrace. She was born just after the war, but so what. Should I throw her over the side?

Whilst I agree with some of what you have said, you might feel a bit differently if your family was directly involved in some of those actions, and my generation isn't that far from several of the events you mention.

hazel

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When do you stop going on about invaders? Now, how about a nice thread about blaming Boadicea for massacring lots of Romans (most would not have been Roman, but other assorted foreigners from the Empire9, women, children and civilian men.

Or should we blame the Romans for bringing it all on themselves? After all, whatever did they ever do for us?

Invade us!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Healdav. I think we stop going on about invaders when people stop invading neutral countries. Boadicea was not invading anyone, but fighting to try to prevent invasion.

Most of your comments seem to avoid Germany`s role in WW1. These atrocities cannot be simply swept under the carpet in a process of denial.

I still maintain that I have no love lost for the people who behaved in that way, but at the end of the day do not hold any malice towards today`s Germans for the crimes of their fathers. My previous post kind of touched on that.

It also touched on the fact that I felt shame for my ancester`s actions in the highlands, though I wasn`t part of the atrocities myself. Pehaps this touched a raw nerve or something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

These atrocities cannot be simply swept under the carpet in a process of denial.

But nobody is denying anything. The desire to move forward and away from a period of history is not the same as denying it ever happened.

You've mentioned a sense of shame in acknowledging your heritage at Culludon. Isn't that acknowledgement, be it public or private, enough?

How would you feel if a bunch of Scottish, Irish, South African and Indian newspapers demanded that you MUST be reminded of the appalling actions of your countrymen (and on a pretty regular basis)?

I've mentioned the similarity with Britain and the USA when it comes to their celebrations on Independence day and how it really doesn't offend me at all. However after a few drinks, most yanks can't resist a few gleeful "We won. You lost. We kicked King George's army right back to England" comments. Still doesn't offend but it does get a bit blimmin' tedious after a while.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I started getting hot and bothered about the famine in Ireland, or the Highland clearances I would tear my self apart having ancestors who suffered both disasters (for them) and also English anestors who would have been perceived as the instigators of these disasters.

My sons would have even more wringing of hands about Edward the 1st and his actions in Wales, they have welsh ancestry through their mother.

If we worried about what our and other peoples ancestors did and acted because of it we would never move on. History is full of former allies who are now potential enemies and former adversaries who are now allies, just look at how many NATO countries have been sworn enemies in the past.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, can we now take it that World ar One happened a century ago, and the world has moved on since (except for the Daily Mail)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to put the record straight:

At no point in any of my posts have I set out to "upset the Germans".

Nor do I feel that I have been rude to anyone.

By acknowledging how my visit to Culloden felt to me personally, I was simply offering empathy towards how many Germans may well feel about their particular heritage, whilst at the same time acknowledging that atrocities weren`t a totally "German thing".

I have tried to make it clear that I attach no blame to "Today`s Germans".

I was not suggesting that I should wallow in guilt and shame because of the actions of my ancestors, nor that we should eternally rub the Germans` noses in it.

Merely that it is healthy and positive to remember atrocities etc, and profoundly dangerous to deny, or to forget them.

Move on? Yes, of course, with acknowledgement we can move on, Without it we cannot.

Forget ? NEVER ! "LEST WE FORGET !" :poppy:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Healdav. I think we stop going on about invaders when people stop invading neutral countries. Boadicea was not invading anyone, but fighting to try to prevent invasion.

The Romans invaded sometime between AD43 and AD 50 depending on which authority one wants to rely on. Regardless, Boudicea's rebellion was in AD60, some 10 -17 year later depending on who you believe. The idea that she was 'fighting to prevent invasion' is an interesting stretch of the accepted facts. I am at a loss to describe the historical inaccuracies on this thread. Truly fascinating.

MG (born in Germany and a sometime resident of Roman Landing, the Witterings, West Sussex)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Romans invaded sometime between AD43 and AD 50 depending on which authority one wants to rely on. Regardless, Boudicea's rebellion was in AD60, some 10 -17 year later depending on who you believe. The idea that she was 'fighting to prevent invasion' is an interesting stretch of the accepted facts. I am at a loss to describe the historical inaccuracies on this thread. Truly fascinating.

MG (born in Germany and a sometime resident of Roman Landing, the Witterings, West Sussex)

So I may have been up to 17 years out with the Roman Invasion eh? What a good thing this isn`t a Roman Conquest Forum, or I would feel really stupid.

Considering that there are so many "historical inaccuracies on this thread", it is so kind of you to single this one out Martin.

And such a valuable contribution to the matter in question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So I may have been up to 17 years out with the Roman Invasion eh? What a good thing this isn`t a Roman Conquest Forum, or I would feel really stupid.

Considering that there are so many "historical inaccuracies on this thread", it is so kind of you to single this one out Martin.

And such a valuable contribution to the matter in question.

Neverforget,

I am sorry that you have taken this personally. I didn't want to single you out but the 'facts' were so glaringly wrong. In the interests of time it wasn't practicable to list every error. I think it was a 'valuable contribution' as it highlighted a very large inaccuracy -equivalent to mixing 1918 with 1901, just imagine confusing the Boer War with the Great War. That is the magnitude. Hopefully my comment prevented your comments from being perpetuated by people who cant be bothered to do very simple and basic research. This is an interactive Forum and when people pontificate about 'facts' they need to get their 'facts' right. I have been shot down many times when my long held beliefs have been proven to be utter nonsense. On these occasions, I hope I always have had the decency and humility to accept I have been talking rubbish and take it on the chin. On a public forum when people make sweeping statements one needs to be prepared to be challenged. If one does not like it I would suggest either doing some basic research before posting or preparing oneself for some kind of debate. MG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Neverforget,

I am sorry that you have taken this personally. I didn't want to single you out but the 'facts' were so glaringly wrong. In the interests of time it wasn't practicable to list every error. I think it was a 'valuable contribution' as it highlighted a very large inaccuracy -equivalent to mixing 1918 with 1901, just imagine confusing the Boer War with the Great War. That is the magnitude. Hopefully my comment prevented your comments from being perpetuated by people who cant be bothered to do very simple and basic research. This is an interactive Forum and when people pontificate about 'facts' they need to get their 'facts' right. I have been shot down many times when my long held beliefs have been proven to be utter nonsense. On these occasions, I hope I always have had the decency and humility to accept I have been talking rubbish and take it on the chin. On a public forum when people make sweeping statements one needs to be prepared to be challenged. If one does not like it I would suggest either doing some basic research before posting or preparing oneself for some kind of debate. MG

Puzzled as to how you can be sorry that I took your comments personally, since you "quoted" me, and adressed me directly.

Still, I`m not going to get too bogged down here "off topic".

Believe me, I may have got it wrong that Boadicea was fighting an invasion, (pedantically speaking) when perhaps I would have been more correct to say that she was fighting invaders, but I am not quite dumb enough to confuse the Boer War with WW1 thank you very much.

If there are any "facts" that I have got wrong about WW1, which is my real interest, and not the Roman Empire, then I have always been more than happy to be enlightened, as enlightenment was a major reason for my joining the forum in the first place. I hope that I have always conducted myself with politeness and respect, and have always felt humble in the company of so many experts.

I have received much helpfulness and insight since joining the forum, but I`m afraid that I don`t count your contribution here amongst either catagory, seeing it instead as a rather petty dig over an insignificant matter, especially when you mention that the thread is so full of "glaring inaccuracies", and then single out the one that you chose to.

I feel sure that fellow members would have been far more interested to see any opinions you may have had on the topic in question, rather than whether or not the Romans had finished invading us or not by the year AD 43.

Such a great Forum. It`s a shame to see it wasted on pettiness like this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...