A new thread . . .

Jim:
>And I am merely supporting my view that
>Germany was fighting for the wrong reasons in WW1.

If you read my first postings carefully, you will see that THIS position was never in doubt. I only stated that the Allied, including the US, were fighting for the wrong cause, too.

To which I stand.

regards

Axel

Axel,
' So that they may be easily distinguished, military hospital ships are painted white overall, with a horizontal band of green, about a metre and a half wide, around the hull. Hospital ships equipped wholly or in part by private individuals or by officially recognized societies are also white but their horizontal band is red. In addition, all have red crosses painted on the sides fore, aft and amidships and they fly their national flag as well as the Red Cross flag.
To ensure that they are distinguishable at night the hulls are brilliantly illuminated and there are usually long rows or red and green lights along the sides. Identified this way, they are protected from attack under the Geneva Convention.
Even when atagonists obeyed the Geneva Convention, hazards still faced the gleaming white hospital ships. In the years 1914-1917 seven military hospital ships struck mines and were either sunk or badly damaged. In 1917 the Central powers decided to disregard International Law and hospital ships no matter how prominently marked-were no longer protected by the Geneva Convention. In 1917 and 1918 eight hospital ships were torpedoed. The resulting casualties were indeed tragic.'
http://mzone.mweb.co.za/residents/wingj/descript.htm

Please tell me how you can mistake a vessel this CLEARLY MARKED? As I stated before the sinkings were DELIBERATE.
There is proof that there were no civilian resistance fighters in Belgium in 1914. Read 'The First World War' by John Keegan.
And I was unaware of the Russian atrocities on the Eastern Front for WW1 however, two wrongs do not make a right.
VBR,
Jim

Originally Posted by Jim 'ACE' 04 Jan 00 17:39 Re: Submarine deaths

As far as Allied "war crimes" being publicly prosecuted, I don't think you'd find a whole lot of sympathy for any perpetrators. However in the light of some of the things that (for instance) the Germans did in WW1 or even WW2, it is understandable why some of the incidents occurred on the Allied side.

Then:

Originally Posted by Jim 'ACE' 07 Jan 00 09:24 Re: Hospital ships & subs

And I was unaware of the Russian atrocities on the Eastern Front for WW1 however, two wrongs do not make a right.

Which is it Jim?

BTW, there was plenty of sympathy for William Callie and quite a bit of cover up by the military.

Tobias,
Nowhere at any time have I said that ANY perpetrators were excusable. And while you're on my Johnson, I stated that some of the atrocities committed by the Allies against POW's were understandable, but I did NOT say excusable. The most flagrant breaches were committed by the Central Powers upon their entry into Belgium, and the sinking of the hospital ships. As far as Cally and My Lai, I can understand why he did it, but it still doesn't make what he did right. You keep wanting to "lawyer" this down to the nth degree. No WAR Crime is right, but the winners sometimes get away with what the losers pay for. But I guess in your eyes the Allied shootings of POW's equates to the massacre of unarmed civilian non-combattants. To me, when you join and put on a uniform and go off to fight ... you pay your money and take your chances. If you are captured and get snuffed while a POW, that's the chance you took when you went off to fight. But for civilians to get massacred ... a whole different ballgame. For clearly identified hospital ships being sunk, another matter all together. I know if I was being shot at and watching my buddies die, I sure wouldn't have a whole lot of warm fuzzy feelings towards any enemies that were captured.
VBR,
Jim

Two wrongs do not make a right.

I can only subscribe this.

Sadly, the atrocities did not really lie at the bottom of the conflict. It was fought for other reasons, the atrocities of the other side were only used (or abused) to stiffen the own motivation.

I will look into the history of the subwar of WWI to get more info on the hospital ships, especially wether they were sunk deliberatley AFTER identification (and what on earth motivated the sub crew which sunk the Llandover to try to cover up this, when it was backed by official policy).

There were wars with a JUST cause. I would probably give this label even to Vietnam, but certainly not to the Great War (excepting, as usual, Belgium, who had no choice).

Lets agree on your statement.

regards

Axel

Axel,
Covering up for war crimes isn't anything out of the ordinary for any country. Let's look at what the Japanese did after committing the Rape of Nanking in December of 1937. They killed and massacred between 270,000 and 350,000 civilians (men, women, children, and the elderly) in about a six or seven week terror spree. Mass rapes and indescriminate shootings, beheadings and bayonettings of the Chinese inhabitants were the order of the day. There was photographic evidence made of these atrocities made and smuggled out of Nanking, and the photos were taken by the Japanese Army itself! Duplicates were made of the film, and these were the pictures secreted away and ferretted out of the city and around the country of China for 9 years. Journals were kept by the foreign missionaries who ran the Safety Zone for the Chinese people. Rabe, a prominent Nazi in Nanking helped to save some of the inhabitants also kept a journal, and made diplomatic reports to Berlin. A reporter from the New York Times, one from a Chicago Daily News, and another from the Associated Press (Frank Tillman Durden, Archibald Steele, and C. Yates McDaniel respectively) All wrote press releases of what they were witness to before they left. The Japanese booted out all of the foreign newsreel men from Nanking, and even went so far as to impede the returning of any foreign diplomats to cover up their actions before the outside world would get wind of what was done there. The Japs also started a massive propaganda campaign to show the world how beneficent they were being to the Chinese populace. A lot of this was all directed under a Top Secret plan that was issued by the Imperial Japanese High Command. The Nazi's tried to cover up all of their crimes by mass executions and the movement of Jews from one camp to miles behind their lines during the last days. So it would really no big task for a Sub commander to falsify his log to have all the appearances of a "legitimate" sinking. You have to remember that when the side committing the Official massacres and genocide loses, they become like rats on a sinking ship, each one determined to save his own skin. They also know that if the truth comes out about their crimes, it will go very hard on them. Unfortunately it is usually the really big fish that get away, and the small fry are left to take the rap. So in that instance, you could understand why a sub skipper would "doctor" his ship's log.
VBR,
Jim

[leo]

I do not know whether the sinkings of Hosptital ships was deliberate or not. I rather suspect that after unrestricted submarine warfare was declared they were deliberate. What was far worse was the way survivors were treated. In one case it is claimed that a U boat sailed among life boats swamping them with its wake. In another two cases it is claimed that survivors were lined up on the U boat deck and the boat submerged with them still on deck.

Why unrestricted submarine warfare? The admiralty ordered merchant ships to ram uboats. Merchant ships were armed, making it difficult for a U blao to stop a merchant man. Q ships and the tactic of British ships to fly neutral and specifically US flags.

Russian atrocities by the Russians begn with the Russisn invasion of East Prussia by Rennenkampf and Samsonov. Civilians were raped, killed and injured by the invading Russians.

War is a nasty business. Every counry has skeletons in its closet. They don't need to be enumerated.

Leo, actually there are NO reports (that I know) of Russian atrocities in 1914 against Prussian civilians. The imperial army of 1914 was not the soviet army of 1944.

Jim, the covering up of war crimes is certainly a usual habit. But if sinking hospital ships is official policy, there is nothing to cover up, especially since it seems that there were a lot of unmolested survivors by the other incidents.

Ignoring the war crimes of the own side, and mopping up the own history is also a common threat to all nations. In Germany a full discussion on these only started in the late sixties, and other nations have not yet even started, like Japan. Democratic nations are also prone to forget the darker places in their own history. Please remember that the events in the Phillipine "insurrection" (some Phillipinos prefer to call it a war) are virtually unknown to most people. Even I was not aware of them until I started to look into the history of genocides.

Well, I think there is somewhere a book on the Leipzig-trials (the process in 23 in which Germany handled some of their suspected war criminals). When I can get an example I am sure there will be some backgound info on the juristical side of the submarine campaign and hospital ship.

mfg

Axel

[leo]

Axel:

I refer you to, "The First World War,Germany and Austria 1914-1918" by Holger H Helwig, Arnold, London 1997 pp.128-129 for a discussion of the actions of the Russian Army in Domnau, Abscwangen, Ortelsberg and Bartelstein among many others. They conducted themselves in a similar manner during the retreat from Galicia in 1915.

Well, the only thing that I could find immediately states that the sinking of the Llandovery Castle was against standing orders of the Naval HQ, and that this was the reason why the captain tried to kill all survivors. BTW: THIS was the incident in which the sub tried to swamp the rescue boats and shot survivors.

In 1923 the captain and his officers were convicted to four years.

If there were later deliberate sinkings, this order must have been changed. When were the later incidents?

mfg

Axel