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

Remembered Today:

Souveniers taken from the dead in time of war


Beau Geste

Recommended Posts

My Lai wasn't "condoned by the Pentagon," it was a case of a platoon-sized element running amok.

That's the way I have always viewed the My Lai massacre. I have friends in The US (from my days teaching out there on the west coast) and they were all ex military men who are embarrassed and ashamed of what happened.

Calley was a man who should never have been commissioned in the first place.

Yes that was their opinion too. No recruitment selection system, be it for the armed forces, the Church of England or whatever , can guarantee that it will always get it right. My friends agree with you, he was a BIG mistake.

Harry

Just to clarify: that's "Alfa" as in Alfa Romeo, not Alpha as in "Alpha Male" - I'm not quite that big headed!

And there was me thinking you were something really special!!!!!

Sorry Alfa

Harry

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a deep cultural aspect to this topic also.

I'm sure you're right Des. Why should we assume that everyone thinks as we do ?

We rightly abhor the thought of a British Tommy killing a wounded and defenceless German but it seems that this doesn't stretch to other cultures and races.

I think you're right. I wish I knew enough to make a really meaningful response to what is a highly relevant point . However Des, I will stick my head out and run the risk of it being shot at. Everything I've said on the Forum so far on this thread applies to the Germans as well. I believe that their sense of what is right and acceptable and what is wrong and unacceptable matches our own. In other words, I'm confident that if this thread was on a German WW1 Forum someone like me would be arguing the same point and would be receiving similar responses.

For those of you who feel an inclination to oppose that view by reference to The Holocaust etc let me say that every society has its element that is evil to the core. Alfamale made that point very clearly indeed in a recent posting.

There are though some races that are "different" in this respect. You mention the Japanese and everything I've read supports your view. The Ghurkas, perhaps the finest fighting men to grace the British Army for years, are also different. Yes, a good point Des.

The My Lai massacre in Vietnam was condoned by the Pentagon with the platoon commander, the odious Lt. William Calley, getting a Presidential Pardon for allowing his men to slaughter non-combatants. Women and girls were raped and men and boys shot out of hand. Calley lives in Texas now and is apparently happy to give interviews as long as the price is right. Would Calley have been pardoned for butchering Westerners?

I don't know Des. I will resist the urge to respond to your question because I don't know enough about how and why the American Administration and The Pentagon saw this issue. Perhaps others might feel less restrained.

Harry, Your earlier mention of Rousseau is apt.

Thank you Des.

I wonder if he got that one wrong and that it is in man's nature to be bestial whether in nature or otherwise.

No Des, I don't think so. If you want to read something that supports that view try Thomas Hobbes' "Leviathan"

Harry

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My Lai wasn't "condoned by the Pentagon," it was a case of a platoon-sized element running amok. Calley was a man who should never have been commissioned in the first place.

Well they didn't exactly throw the book at him did they? How many men were actually charged with taking part in the massacre and how many were actually convicted? If memory serves me, something like 25 men walked away leaving Calley to carry the can.

After he was sentenced by the court-martial tribunal, Nixon ordered Calley released pending an appeal, which was successful and his sentence was reduced to 20 years and later to ten. Calley wasn't even jailed. He was under house arrest at Fort Benning for less than 4 years. If it was just one case of a platoon "running amok" then why was Calley denied the right to subpoena certain defence witnesses? Why did the House of Representatives keep the lid on testimony it heard during its investigation? The events of My Lai were subject of a cover up which in my book is tantamount to condoning the offence committed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As We are now Delving into the Human Psyche,a Book which Deals with the Subjects of War,Violence,Aggression is "A Criminal History Of Mankind"..By Colin Wilson..a very Powerful and in Depth Examination of the Human Condition.Harry as a passing thought did you ever see the very First Episode of the BBC1 Comedy Series "You Rang M,Lord ?"....The opening Scenes being Set Somewhere in France..and Two Tommies finding a Dead Officer in a Shell Hole who is Wearing a Large Diamond Encrusted Signet Ring,and a very Expensive Wrist watch..if you havent seen it i can Burn you a Copy...Regard Russ...Personally i think that the Atavistic,Hunter,Killer..Lurks just beneath the Surface in all of us,but by being conditioned by Centurys of enforced Laws etc it has been pushed deep into our sub consciouness,but does not take that much Stimuli to reawaken our most inherent Violent and Aggresive Traits,Warfare being the Perfect Trigger for these Suppresed Emotions to come rushing back to the Surface,and manifest Themselves in what we as so called Civilised People call Atrocities,and the breaking of some Enshrined Taboos in Western Society.I seem to recall that Our Men at Agincourt were not averse to Killing French Prisoners to get at their Possessions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Harry, now you're taking me back a few years and I take your point. I first encountered Hobbes at school when one of the questions on an exam was about the theory of 'political obligation'. Anyway, I'm not sure where I'm going with this but didn't Hobbes propound the theory that society (humankind) functions best under a system where obedience to a power above the civil law was the way to secure civil peace? That would, as you say, suggest that man is inherently bad, needing the firm hand of an 'enlightened despot' to keep his homicidal urges in check. I'm looking at my old lecture notes here and they're not that detailed so if I'm off track, forgive me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First Episode of the BBC1 Comedy Series "You Rang M,Lord ?"....The opening Scenes being Set Somewhere in France..and Two Tommies finding a Dead Officer in a Shell Hole who is Wearing a Large Diamond Encrusted Signet Ring,and a very Expensive Wrist watch..if you havent seen it i can Burn you a Copy...Regard Russ.

Yes please Russ.

Personally i think that the Atavistic,Hunter,Killer..Lurks just beneath the Surface in all of us,but by being conditioned by Centurys of enforced Laws etc it has been pushed deep into our sub consciouness,but does not take that much Stimuli to reawaken our most inherent Violent and Aggresive Traits,Warfare being the Perfect Trigger for these Suppresed Emotions to come rushing back to the Surface.

Your postings are always worth waiting for Russ even if I do choose to disagree with you. I'm not a qualified psychologist so I can't respond to your excellent contribution with any degree of certainty. All I can say is that if you're right, it's a sorry indictment of human nature. Another point that occurs to me is how, if man is as you describe him, are we to explain away the existence of people like Jesus Christ, Pope John Paul, President Mandela and - during WW! - RAChD officers like TB Hardy and Geoffrey Studdart Kennedy? Was it just a case of these "saints" having a thicker veneer of humanity than the rest of us. C' mon Russ, to say that 'man' is basically bad but has been conditioned to act, most of the time, in a relatively civilised way leaves me feeling terribly depressed.

You're having me on aren't you ?

quote]

Harry

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Harry, now you're taking me back a few years and I take your point. I first encountered Hobbes at school when one of the questions on an exam was about the theory of 'political obligation'. Anyway, I'm not sure where I'm going with this but didn't Hobbes propound the theory that society (humankind) functions best under a system where obedience to a power above the civil law was the way to secure civil peace? That would, as you say, suggest that man is inherently bad, needing the firm hand of an 'enlightened despot' to keep his homicidal urges in check. I'm looking at my old lecture notes here and they're not that detailed so if I'm off track, forgive me.

You're not at all off track Des. If you read PBI's latest excellent posting you will see its relevance.

As I see it, this thread has gradually focused in on one extremely important question: is man's nature basically "good" or is it "evil". It's fascinating that highly intelligent and sensitive members of The Forum don't seem to be able to agree on this crucially important point.

Thanks for your contributions,

Kind regards,

Harry

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Harry,Wilson shows in His Research that the "Right Man" condition exists for Good and Evil..as You rightly mention we are,and have been Blessed with People who Care and Help Their Fellows and are capable of Great Kindness and Compassion,and equally cursed by Human Beings that are only capable of the Direct Opposite..then what becomes of the Man to the Left of Middle who feels the Urge towards Violence and Depravity,but who can only keep Himself in Check by Excercising Iron Self Control.....Harry if you can PM Me Your Address i will get Cracking on the DVD for You and should be able to post it out for Next Week...Dont Forget Sat and Sun on the History Channel,some interesting WW1 Items on there...If you Happen to Miss them dont worry as i wil be recording them.Regards R.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Harry,Wilson shows in His Research that the "Right Man" condition exists for Good and Evil..as You rightly mention we are,and have been Blessed with People who Care and Help Their Fellows and are capable of Great Kindness and Compassion,and equally cursed by Human Beings that are only capable of the Direct Opposite..then what becomes of the Man to the Left of Middle who feels the Urge towards Violence and Depravity,but who can only keep Himself in Check by Excercising Iron Self Control.....Harry if you can PM Me Your Address i will get Cracking on the DVD for You and should be able to post it out for Next Week...Dont Forget Sat and Sun on the History Channel,some interesting WW1 Items on there...If you Happen to Miss them dont worry as i wil be recording them.Regards R.

A fascinating question Russ. Do I discern though a slight shift in the "black and white" stance that seemed to dominate in your previous posting?

I think that what you say here is something I can relate to. Correct me please if I have misunderstood your point of view but you seem to be saying that some people are good and some evil. There are of course others who aren't blessed with the level of humaity shown by a Nelson Mandela or a Pope John Paul but who nevertheless resist any negative or evil temptations and live normal lives. (They form the vast majority of the population. - but this is my idea and wasn't part of what you said). There are also those, fewer in numbers hopefully, who cannot resist the evil vibes that they feel and these are the ones we sometimes talk about as we did in alfamale's recent posting.

Stimulating Russ. Thank you. There's a programme on TV tonight (just noticed) on The Somme. It starts at 9 pm.

Harry

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Couple of points about My Lai that are rarely mentioned:

Two days before the massacre, the unit involved was hit by a booby trap that killed a popular sergeant, blinded one man, and wounded several others. My Lai was identified as the village harboring the people who set the trap. The night before the raid, the troops were given a blood-and-guts "pep talk" about showing the enemy who was boss.

None of this excuses the actions of the U.S. troops, but it shows that the massacre didn't take place in a vacuum. The men were enraged and wanted revenge. They weren't random nutters like the one who just shot up a mall in Omaha, Nebraska.

Second point: During the massacre U.S. Army helicopter pilot Chief Warrant Officer Hugh Thompson arrived at My Lai and immediately reported the killings to brigade headquarters. He then landed his ship and began evacuating villagers, ordering his crew chief to open fire on the American troops if they approached.

After 9/11 we in the U.S. were told over and over that we must not allow the actions of a few to color our view of an entire group of people.

The same standard ought to be applied to American soldiers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread is in danger of being closed by a moderator if there are many more messages about My Lai. Three weeks ago a thread on the Tomb of the Unknowns at Arlington National Cemetery was closed when the discussion turned to the subject of the empty tomb of the Vietnam unknown.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All this moral relativism is simply maddening. As mentioned "stripping" the dead is as old as warfare itself. Whole conquered armies of dead/captured had their clothes , equipment and weapons used to equip the victor or as spoils for the king and even the individual soldiers.

Sure those fellows that would cut off a finger for a ring or knock some teeth out may seem repulsive. But , be there , be dehumanized , and as often fight an enemy with no problems about hacking you to bits for glory and goodies in the 'process'.

It's great to hear of the stories of those in the position to be chivalrous to the dead and or the captured , but make no mistake - such actions are not the norm in warfare.

I have been told by many veterans themselves of their souveniring everything from uniform bits , weapons , all manner of enemy kit & personal things right down to ears , gold teeth... you darn near name it I've heard it from the horses mouth.

In this "MODERN" era the wars seem to be fought more and more with stone age like ignorants. When the atrocities are recounted of their barbarism to our modern troops found dead or captured we are disgusted.. are'nt we. To the vast majority of these people in those "worlds" is quite acceptable to strip the dead of everything to include their dignity and or body parts. It's a barbaric mindset for sure , war just brings it to the forefront.

We are shocked by it in our "modern" society to see it in this day and age in places like Iraq & A'stan , we should'nt be.

In the great war when you had millions of conscripts , the majority with a very below average education whom tended to exhist on a base level ( very poor , not well fed or clothed ) it escapes me how the looting of the dead , wounded or prsioners is so appalling to some.

I've seen plenty of pictures of all manner of KIA from about any war that photographs exhist with their pockets turned out , kit dumped about them etc etc.

One picture always stuck in my mind from 1914 - two very freshly dead soldaten whom were still with their packs on their backs - minus their pickelhaube's , pants & boots !.

War even for the educated is so dehumanizing that "morals" as we would like to know them tend to become luxuries ,not necessity therein.

A good passage from Stephen Graham's "A PRIVATE IN THE GUARDS" relates to his examining a very dead boche whom was over a period of a few days quickly stripped of even uniform !.

I have read alot of the Australian experiance in fighting the turks and they in general had respect and thought "johnny turk" a good , clean adversary. You do not see this at all in the australian experiance of WW2 with the japanese , quite the opposite in fact.

Anyhow I digress. The fact is that war will bring out the lowest common denominator in man....more often than not. Time will change nothing on this. It's not all black and white nor rose colored...cannot nor ever will be.

That one's enemy pilfers the dead , and or your comrades do same would not bother me at all..... "das ist Krieg" to use a quote if I may. It's the enemy that makes a habit of not taking prisoners and or mutilating the dead/wounded we can all agree upon are the truly ugly features of war.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Couple of points about My Lai that are rarely mentioned:

During the massacre U.S. Army helicopter pilot Chief Warrant Officer Hugh Thompson arrived at My Lai and immediately reported the killings to brigade headquarters. He then landed his ship and began evacuating villagers, ordering his crew chief to open fire on the American troops if they approached.

He was some guy !

After 9/11 we in the U.S. were told over and over that we must not allow the actions of a few to color our view of an entire group of people.

The same standard ought to be applied to American soldiers.

I couldn't agree more. I'm proud to call quite a few ex US soldiers and fliers my friends and a more humane bunch it would be difficult to find. Your posting simply reinforces the point I've been making since I originated this thread, that man is basically good and that the exceptions we read and otherwise hear about are tragic aberrations and not the norm.

Thank you Edward

Harry

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread is in danger of being closed by a moderator if there are many more messages about My Lai. Three weeks ago a thread on the Tomb of the Unknowns at Arlington National Cemetery was closed when the discussion turned to the subject of the empty tomb of the Vietnam unknown.

Thanks Pete. Please note everybody.

Harry

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All this moral relativism is simply maddening. As mentioned "stripping" the dead is as old as warfare itself. truly ugly features of war.

Hello Gew98,

Thank you for your contribution. It was obviously "from the heart".

Most of what you say relates to the taking of souveniers from the dead. However, the thread has already concluded that that was a common and understandable practice especially when the articles taken were seen as a means of enhancing one's chance of survival. It's the cold blooded killing of an injured adversary simply to gain access to his private belongings, or stealing from one's own injured and helpless colleagues when one is tasked with the resposibilty of helping him that many of us find repugnant.

We also agreed in earlier posts that not all ethnic groups behave in the same way, that we don't necessarily have the same levels of what we would call morality. Are you saying though that because one's enemy acts in a repugnant way, that we must do likewise ? That man's behaviour must follow the pattern of "an eye for an eye......etc, that there's no code of conduct that should govern the way "civilised" people act ?

Or perhaps Gew I've misinterpreted completely and you are saying that we have no alternative, no freedom of action, that man, wherever he comes from, is evil and there's nothing he can do about it ?

Harry

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My grandfather, a gentle and gentleman, brought a whole host of stuff back from WW2. ....I think that deep down the only thing that he actually regretted was not stopping a group of Canadian troops leading away and shooting German prisoners shortly after D-Day**

Andy

** Of course, Kurt Meyer was convicted by a Canadian court for his part in the illegal killing of Canadian prisoners shortly after D-Day....a case of victors justice??

What makes you think he could have stopped them? They had reasons by then. Meyer's guilt was established beyond any doubt, by the testimony of his former comrades. And of course, he got the victor's punishment too: a few years with 3 square meals a day then released to his "loving family". Pity they didn't put him on the same ration scale as at Bergen-Belsen.

As for looting, from our comfortable chairs, things look a bit different. Consider the poverty in which the majority of men lived and died in those times - in fact, in just about all times except our own. Consider that most of them knew they would probably not survive the trenches of WWI and who would care for their families in those days? It's a bit like hunger. Can you understand men eating rats and dead dogs if you're not starving to death? No.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What makes you think he could have stopped them? They had reasons by then.

It is the responsibility of leaders, officers and NCOs, to prevent things like this from getting out of hand. When real or perceived atrocity is followed by retaliation in kind things can rapidly descend into an endless cycle of revenge. Retribution can get ever more perverse as time goes on. Small unit leaders need to take charge of things before that cycle starts up. If it does indeed start up leaders need to end it and if necessary send the worst offenders to the rear. It's not only the moral thing to do, it's also for the good of the service and the honor of one's regiment.

Robert E. Lee forbade the Army of Northern Virginia from theft or pillage during the Gettysburg campaign. By and large the Confederate army was gentlemanly during that campaign, although there were a few recorded examples of bad behavior. My point is this: the reason Lee gave for his order was not morality, it was, according to him, to maintain the discipline of the army.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Robert E. Lee forbade the Army of Northern Virginia from theft or pillage during the Gettysburg campaign. By and large the Confederate army was gentlemanly during that campaign, although there were a few recorded examples of bad behavior. My point is this: the reason Lee gave for his order was not morality, it was, according to him, to maintain the discipline of the army.

Worth remembering, perhaps, that the stalling of the German spring offensive in March 1918 is often attributed, at least in part, to long-deprived German troops stopping to indulge in the spoils of war ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All this moral relativism is simply maddening. As mentioned "stripping" the dead is as old as warfare itself.

I have been told by many veterans themselves of their souveniring everything from uniform bits , weapons , all manner of enemy kit & personal things right down to ears , gold teeth... you darn near name it I've heard it from the horses mouth.

We are shocked by it in our "modern" society to see it in this day and age in places like Iraq & A'stan , we should'nt be.

That one's enemy pilfers the dead , and or your comrades do same would not bother me at all..... "

Fancy....

Somebodies living next door to this

Pilfering off the dead don't bother him at all ..........

He needs reporting ............. I think

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As for looting, from our comfortable chairs, things look a bit different. Consider the poverty in which the majority of men lived and died in those times - in fact, in just about all times except our own. Consider that most of them knew they would probably not survive the trenches of WWI and who would care for their families in those days? It's a bit like hunger. Can you understand men eating rats and dead dogs if you're not starving to death? No.

Hello 2ndCMR

Good point.

It helps to explain something that, I think, all of us have agreed has been a feature of war since time immemorial

It does not, however, explain or condone the murder of an injured and helpless adversary just to get at his personal possessions. Nor does it explain or condone the theft of items from one's own injured who is being transported to an aid station.

Harry

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is the responsibility of leaders, officers and NCOs, to prevent things like this from getting out of hand. It's not only the moral thing to do, it's also for the good of the service and the honor of one's regiment.

I agree absolutely !

Harry

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Worth remembering, perhaps, that the stalling of the German spring offensive in March 1918 is often attributed, at least in part, to long-deprived German troops stopping to indulge in the spoils of war ...

I have to admit SG that that's a new one on me. Can you point me in the direction where you read this ?

Harry

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fancy....

Somebodies living next door to this

Pilfering off the dead don't bother him at all ..........

He needs reporting ............. I think

Nice touch of humour nor.d.

Thank you.

Harry

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My Mums Dad,had been in the Gallipoli Campaign,and also took part in the 3 Battles for Gaza,and the Subsequent Actions in the Holy Land.He always told me that it was a Waste of Time bothering to "Rummage" Dead Turkish PBI as they had precious little on them in the Way of Personal Possessions,on the other Hand He mentions many of the Senior Turkish Officers they Captured,had Surrounded themselve with some opulence and Pomp,so they were always worth having a "Rummage".

Heard this Little Gem last Night in the Pub from an Old Black Watch Veteran.He told me that He and 2 of His Pals came across a House in the Reichswald Forest,which hadnt been to Badly Damaged...an ideal place to brew up and bivvy down for the Night says Harry.This They proceeded to do without Delay.The German Owner of the Property looked Decidedly Shifty and Nervous and kept trying to get through the House into the Small Garden at the Rear.Harry noticed that the Earth Here had recently been Dug Over...so curiosity got the better of Him and His Pals ,so they Began to Dig..not long before they came across your classic Treasure Chest,after forcing the Lock they were confronted with an Aladdins Cave of Solid Gold and Silver Table Ware,at which point the Hovering German went Ballistic,so to calm Him Down 1 of the Trio shot Him.They then resumed their job of Digging up the Swag,only to realise that the Haul was far to large and Heavy to move by manual Means...while debating what to do with their Loot One of the Chinless Wonders from Brigade H.Q. roars up in a Jeep,and Says "Well Done You Men,that Stuff will Look Splendid in the Officers Mess, load it onto the Jeep,Thanks Awfully"..Harrys and Friends Replies were not Recorded and Said Plunder NEVER made it to the Officers Mess,and was never seen again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to admit SG that that's a new one on me. Can you point me in the direction where you read this ?

Harry,

The 'spoils of war' I referred to were mostly food, drink and personal supplies like warm clothing, decent footwear, etc, which by 1918 had become scarce or unobtainable in Germany due to the success of the Allied economic blockade. As a recent thread on the contents of a captured German dugout has shown, the Germans were enthusiastic collectors of Allied 'comforts' that came their way in local actions — and when they punched right through the front lines into the rear in the spring of 1918, their troops came upon supply depots and abandoned supplies that must have made them think Christmas had come early. The extent to which this factor truly affected the progress of the German advance is no doubt arguable, but numerous accounts mention it. I cannot immediately point you to an authoritative source, but I'm sure that other pals will be able to cite examples.

Mick

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...