Sorting Myth from Fact- The Aces.

[tcrean7828]

Originally Posted by alex_revell

Well said, Thomas. You summed it up very nicely.
Regards
Alex

Mates,
I agree with Thomas and Alex on this - here here!

ttfn

tcrean7828

tom

[RussGannon]

Thomas & Kai

Alex hit the nail on the head. I have no beef with the German military in either war - If I seem to be having a go at the GAF, it is as Alex points out - a reaction to the systimatic denigration of the RFC/RNAS/RAF by what might be better termed neo-Germanophiles - their right wing element so to speak. My main aim is to place the performance of GAF into perspective, which requires exposing what I have long termed the Jasta Myth.

And contrary to the picture painted by these neocons, the British & Dominion troops and their German opponets most often treated each other with respect - I've seen the war in the desert between the 8th Army & the Afika Korps described as thw 'war without hate'. And even beyond the Desert, I know of many instances when cease fires have been called so that wounded & dead of both sides could be cleared away - with Fallschirmjaeger on Monte Casino with Waffen SS at Rauray in Normandy.

I think there is an element of propaganda within both the German & British record, but on the whole I trust the 'Official' recording of both sides. The problem is that the German record has not survived as intact as the British record and what is available can easily be mis-interprited & mis-represented by those who cannot rise above viewing the airwar from a peroachally German perspective.

People I dare say, who cannot see the humour in Monty Python.

Cheers Russ.

[RussGannon]

Kai

I wasn't trying to resurrect MvR's fateful downing. Look leave your postal address in my Private Message and I'll gladly send you a copy of the Bean appendix.

Cheers Russ.

[Pete Hill]

Hello Thomas,
well done, very well said. You mention that you think your English is 'rusty'? Far from it, let me assure you. I worked as a secondary school teacher for 10 years and trust me, you write better English than many of my local-born students ever managed to do!
It is an interesting thing you mentioned about how the English often admire their former foes, or at least certain ones. It has happened throughout history. Many English people had a great respect, even awe for the great Muslim General Saladin during the Crusades and as a consequence he is now (ironically) better remembered in the West than he is in the Islamic world. Likewise many English historians were, and are, still admirers of Napoleon. And, of course, during WW2, more than a few British senior commanders became fed-up with their men's reverance and near-hero worship of their nemesis in North Africa- Rommel. As Clive James put it, "the British love a winner, so long as he isn't one of their own..."
I have heard how the recent passing of some of the famous Axis fighter ace pilots of WW2 received more attention in the UK and the USA than they did in their home countries. When the great Japanese ace Saburo Sakai passed away in 1996 (?), it was widely reported in the Western media but his death rated barely a mention in the Japanese press. Interestingly, one of my country's major newspapers ran a half-page obituary (with a photo) for the famous German ace Adolf Galland when he died in 1996. However, when the highest-scoring Australian ace of WW2, Clive Caldwell, passed away a year or two later, it didn't even get a mention in the very same newspaper!
I remember reading an article written by an American historian about the Gallipoli campaign and he wrote how amazed he was that there is a memorial in the grounds of the Australian War Memorial in Canberra (Australia's capital) dedicated to the memory of Mustafa Kemal, the Turkish General who defeated the Allied invasion of his country in 1915. Why, the writer wondered, would we build a memorial to the man who defeated our army? It was because Kemal had been amazingly gracious and chivilarous, sending a kind message to the Australian people praising the courage of the Australian troops, promising to show respect and care to the graves of the Anzacs still buried there ("by being buried here, they have become our sons, too") and agreeing to rename the landing zone- 'Anzac Cove'.
The writer asked "could anyone imagine a memorial in Washington DC being built to honour George III, Santa Anna or Ho Chi Minh?" It seems our British heritage has rubbed off on us as well.
It is interesting how you described how the German army who fought WW1 were viewed by the succeeding generations of Germans after the war. It seems a similar thing happened in Japan in the decades following WW2. Most veterans of the war were suddenly viewed by many of the civilian population with deep contempt. As recently as the 1980s, it was considered better to be a garbage-collector in Japan than get a job in that country's armed forces.
However, in more recent years, there has been a turn-around with a renewed interest in Japan's war history. Two recent major films, both of them highly successful in Japan, portrayed her war effort. However, after viewing these films on dvd, I am very worried. If, by watching these, that is how young people in Japan are gaining knowledge of their nation's experiences in WW2, then I feel I have cause to be worried.
"Yamato", about the epic sacrifice of Japan's biggest warship and "To Those We Love", about a unit of Kamikaze pilots, are both absurdly romantized and idealized.
Both films seek to almost justify and even nobilize the horrific culture of suicidal codes of honour and warrior-worship that gripped Japan and brain-washed so many of her young. Of course, there is no mention of Japan's atrocities or even the causes of the war. In one scene in the latter film, a Japanese officer remarks "we have only sought to make the Pacific free for all Asian peoples"...
Such selective memory and manipulation of history should not be welcomed or encouraged. Thats why I have some reservations about what I feel to be the increasingly glorified and patriotic fashion we are commerating Gallipoli down here. In the last decade, there has been an explosion of interest amongst the younger people of Australia in the history of our armed forces in WW1 & 2 but, sadly, many myths and mis-conceptions remain firmly in place. I would be interested, Thomas, to read your thoughts on how the younger people of Germany remember WW1 today?
Kind regards Pete

[Thomas Trauner]

Hello Pete,
your wrote: “I would be interested, Thomas, to read your thoughts on how the younger people of Germany remember WW1 today?”

Well, well. I have to admit that I don’t think that I’m really good informed about the current knowledge of the German youth.
The general knowledge of history is, I fear, no better then everywhere within the western societies. It’s a common lament that even “easy” questions cannot be answered correctly by the generations since the ´70s. Concerning the WWI, well, some of them may have heard about the “Roten Dreidecker” but that’s it.
Within the “published knowledge or meaning”, that is newspapers; TV etc. there seem to be a slightly better situation. It is published and discussed, that the WWI is seen more and more as the prime catastrophe of the 20th cent. The connections between the result of this war and what followed are worked out better. But this is still more ore less a topic for an interested group, not common knowledge.
A bookshelf about “History” in a large, but average German bookshop contains:
- Egyptian, Roman, Greek early history 9 feet.
- Medieval Age 9 feet
- 16th-19th cent. 0 feet
- 1870-1918 0,5 feet
- 1918-1933 0,25 feet
- 1933-1945 30 feet
- Post 45 25 feet of books.
Currently you find not more then say, 5-10 books about WWI in a bookshop. Of course there are more, but you have to know about and you have to order them.

This and the understandable aversion against any German nationalistic themes (incl. military) leads to this situation.
The problem is that the otherwise available information about German nationalism, warfare etc. is often very incorrect, biased and often contaminated with very right-wing thoughts.
There was a rather big discussion on the “Red Baron” movie in the newspapers, asking if we reached the point that we fall back to German heroes and all that. It’s also unthinkable that German “aces” are getting more than normal, private death announcements.
In Nuremberg we have five streets named after WWI “aces”. This are Richthofen, Immelmann, Boelke, Fritz von Röth and Max von Müller. But I think the meaning of the names is unknown, with the exception of MvR, perhaps.

But I think we reached a turning point, now. The new historians are no longer from the wartime generation and are getting a fresh, unbiased point of view. I don’t mean they will get more nationalistic, but they have less of emotion when working on the first half of the 20th cent. They act more as normal historians.

But there is some interest in aeronautical history. The crates of WWI are getting very popular in the modelling scene. But this does not, of course, mean that the original background is known or understood.

My German colleagues on this forum may add their meanings, too. I don’t think that I get the whole point.

Kind regards
Thomas

[RussGannon]

Whilst I'm not into hero worship, contrary to the belief of my Germanophile 'friends', I certainly admire German wartime efforts. I remember recently watching a History Channel special on Johannes Stienhoff, and felt really sad that in the post-war NATO footage, neither he or Gunther Rall were able to wear any of their many hard earned & well earned WW2 decorations on their uniforms.

Cheers Russ

[Thomas Trauner]

Russ - thank you for your point of view. By the way, I understand your views concerning the "German-centred" WWI aeronautical history. As I tried to express already I just think, that this is based on the interest of still unknown facts, due to the widespread lack of official German sources and the “individuality” of the Fighter planes. Counted together this sum of question/answers simply makes more then the sum for the allied side. And, well, if some of the “tactical successes” some pilots achieved are repeated again and again, well, I think we all know they have been beaten at the end. Soundly.

To the post-WWII era: Various “Aces” served in the Bundeswehr. Rall, Steinhoff, Hartmann, to name a few. The East German forces (NVA) also included men with their background in the Wehrmacht. But it was (and is) damned clear that they fought in a wrong, aggressive and criminal war. If they had worn their full decorations it had shown a “proudness” to be in it. And they would have run around with full Nazi regalia, Swastika and all that.
I cannot imagine a meeting of NATO-Generals from all (Western) Europe say in Cologne, the inviting one, leading the meeting with the “Ritterkreuz, Eichenlaub und Brillanten” around his neck, the breast decorated with various forms of Eagles and Swastikas. Or being in one of the Nazi-occupied countries with all the decorations….unthinkable.
(You may see that (West) Germany did not fully break with the German military history..they still use the Iron Cross ...)

So – Russ, thanks for your fairness while separating (and honouring) personal deeds from their sad background.

Kind regards from still warm Nuremberg to the “wintry” down under…..

Thomas

[Billy_Bishop]

I have seen pictures of German WWII vets with medals on their civilian clothes. These medals were apparently made post war, as they did not have the Swastika embedded on them. I see no problem with that. In their case, the received those medals for bravery. Not for running concentration camps.

And criminal war or not, they fought for their country. That at least, deserves some recognition.

In my humble opinion that is.

[rexee]

How do you know they didn't run concentration camps?

[Billy_Bishop]

Originally Posted by rexee

How do you know they didn't run concentration camps?

Because they were fighter pilots and U-boat commanders.