PDA

View Full Version : Malmedy



Gangster Amerikana
09-04-2009, 05:15 PM
The thing that interests me about this clip is the fact that the writer of the script attempted to recreate the incident taking both sides claims into account. That being the German claim that Us soldiers had attempted to escape and or had smuggled arms and had shot at armed guards. The American claim being that unarmed prisoners were massacred in cold blood many of who were killed at close range with bullets to the back of the head.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rXVOtfKinaM&feature=related

flamethrowerguy
09-05-2009, 05:30 AM
I know this movie (the opening sequence about the Malmedy incidents is certainly the better part of it) and I always wondered about Hollywood choosing the most German-friendly version of what might have happened.

Gangster Amerikana
09-06-2009, 01:44 AM
Well from what I heard the people who made this film were mormon. Deacon, the main character is supposed to be a mormon (remember him speaking of going on a "mission"). And there was more of a religious undertone to the movie.

I think the film makers felt that after 60 years regardless of what really happened, it was best to take the neutral ground

VonWeyer
09-07-2009, 02:06 AM
I have this movie in my collection. I found that the filmakers have tried to stretch one incident into 80 minutes of cinema which i felt became a little long winded at times. I agree that they have tried to keep as neutral as possible. All said though i feel that the whole package is well presented(cinematography,sound,realism).

flamethrowerguy
09-07-2009, 04:29 AM
I have this movie in my collection. I found that the filmakers have tried to stretch one incident into 80 minutes of cinema which i felt became a little long winded at times. I agree that they have tried to keep as neutral as possible. All said though i feel that the whole package is well presented(cinematography,sound,realism).

They should've picked German actors for the Germans. Instead they picked the ugliest Americans they could find and put them in German uniforms.:lol:

VonWeyer
09-07-2009, 05:16 AM
Good point...a common mistake when it comes to WW2 movies.

Chevan
09-21-2009, 08:17 AM
They should've picked German actors for the Germans. Instead they picked the ugliest Americans they could find and put them in German uniforms.:lol:
You haven't seen yet the faces of "russians" that they loves to pick into their holliwood movies:)
I was frighten to death whan i at first time watched it (http://www.battlefield.ru/books/enemy/012.jpg)

flamethrowerguy
09-21-2009, 09:30 AM
You haven't seen yet the faces of "russians" that they loves to pick into their holliwood movies:)
I was frighten to death whan i at first time watched it (http://www.battlefield.ru/books/enemy/012.jpg)

You'd prefer the German version?;)

Chevan
09-21-2009, 01:14 PM
You'd prefer the German version?;)
the German version is just fine for me;)
I'm not a racist, the chinamans and mongols look not so bad in Red Army , compared to monsters with steel jaw (http://i36.tinypic.com/2h58haq.jpg) and finished imbecils (http://www.battlefield.ru/books/enemy/011.jpg).
Mongols might to fright only few naive german fraus:)

flamethrowerguy
09-21-2009, 03:22 PM
Mongols might to fright only few naive german fraus:)

Not more than Afro-American soldiers at the other side of Germany back then I assume.
BTW, that Asian soldier of the Red Army was actually the good guy in that scene. Guess what his comrades were just doing...

Chevan
09-21-2009, 11:45 PM
Not more than Afro-American soldiers at the other side of Germany back then I assume.
BTW, that Asian soldier of the Red Army was actually the good guy in that scene. Guess what his comrades were just doing...
bet, the comrides just raped and killed all boy's family?
And mongol feels sorry for comrides?:)

VonWeyer
09-22-2009, 02:30 AM
He looks like he should be fighting for the Japs.;)

flamethrowerguy
09-22-2009, 03:44 AM
bet, the comrides just raped and killed all boy's family?
And mongol feels sorry for comrides?:)

Well, almost, they were "only" raping a woman. Don't you know the film? "Die Blechtrommel" (aka "The Tin Drum"). A supposed classic...

Chevan
09-22-2009, 08:00 AM
Well, almost, they were "only" raping a woman. Don't you know the film? "Die Blechtrommel" (aka "The Tin Drum"). A supposed classic...
of course i watched the Tin Drum.
nice film , the sexual scene were especially fine:)
And Red Army mongols- it's definitaly classic..since at least Deutche Wolhenau times:)

flamethrowerguy
09-22-2009, 08:15 AM
nice film , the sexual scene were especially fine:)


Same here.:)
That has always been a highlight when we had to watch the film at school.

VonWeyer
09-23-2009, 07:53 AM
They showed you sexual scenes at school.;)

flamethrowerguy
09-23-2009, 10:43 AM
They showed you sexual scenes at school.;)

In upper grades, sure. This is Europe, not the US!;)

Nickdfresh
09-23-2009, 01:09 PM
The thing that interests me about this clip is the fact that the writer of the script attempted to recreate the incident taking both sides claims into account. That being the German claim that Us soldiers had attempted to escape and or had smuggled arms and had shot at armed guards. The American claim being that unarmed prisoners were massacred in cold blood many of who were killed at close range with bullets to the back of the head.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rXVOtfKinaM&feature=related


I'm not sure where this claim came from exactly, and the film is completely inaccurate in the small details which tells me this is mostly a "controversial" revisionist rendering. The unit that was wiped out was from an artillery support unit of the 106th ID I believe IIRC. They were green troops captured largely without much of a fight and I doubt they had much inclination to "smuggle weapons" in or to capture their guards' weapons. Secondly, if the Americans had tried a mass escape, then more than three would have survived IIRC and such occurrences are rare in War.

I am more inclined to believe the overall story most historians now believe, that the Waffen SS Romanians and Germans under "Blow Torch Battalion" leader Jochen Peiper were simply disinclined to bother with prisoners as they were on a mad dash to Antwerp, while suffering heavy casualties, having their routes blocked and bridges blown --and most critically--running low on precious and rare fuel. Fuel for their precious and rare panzers Hitler decided to piss away in a futile, desperate fantasy offensive achieving nothing but a hastened collapse on both the Eastern and Western Fronts, mostly the Eastern one though. Of course, shooting or disposing of prisoners was nothing new to hardened SS troopers with extensive experience on the Eastern Front. And this certainly was not the first instance of the SS shooting problematic numbers of Allied mouths to feed and guard as they also massacred numbers of British soldiers around the time of Dunkirk...

Nickdfresh
09-23-2009, 01:20 PM
Incidentally, Malmedy was not the only massacre alleged to have taken place. Numerous instances of retaliatory executions of smaller groupings of surrendering GIs are recounted. It also should be noted of Allied testimony of SS shooting numbers of Belgian civilians in full view of American combat engineers as a sort of "retaliation" for their blowing of several key bridges...

Chevan
09-23-2009, 02:00 PM
Incidentally, Malmedy was not the only massacre alleged to have taken place. .
endeed,for sake of true i have to add that GLs also had a lot of possibilies to murder the GErmans POWs for "retrebution".real or virtual.
Remember Dachay massacre?
see also Jack Bushyhead (http://www.ww2incolor.com/forum/showpost.php?p=89826&postcount=52)

Nickdfresh
09-23-2009, 02:41 PM
endeed,for sake of true i have to add that GLs also had a lot of possibilies to murder the GErmans POWs for "retrebution".real or virtual.
Remember Dachay massacre?
see also Jack Bushyhead (http://www.ww2incolor.com/forum/showpost.php?p=89826&postcount=52)

The Dachau massacre, although real, is a poor comparison on moral grounds or otherwise. The best estimates are that only 17 German SS were killed, the massacre was a spontaneous crime of passion carried out with the primary responsibility of junior officers (although I concede Malmedy probably was also to an extent) and reluctantly by those under their command. The massacre was halted --before it became any larger of a blood bath than it was-- by a senior officer threatening to shoot his own men if they continued. But you should know this already as this has been discussed in a thread I started on the subject (http://ww2incolor.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3671) and don't really need reminding of it.

I would also state that the motivations of each of the killers is in question are a key distinction. Yes, US soldiers shot a few SS troopers after overrunning a concentration camp filled with the festering dead whereas the Waffen SS simply murdered numbers of US soldiers simply because they were a nuisance. But another question is: what is your point?

I've never stated that Americans are any better necessarily than anyone else. And how does the Massacre at Dachau episode in any way legitimize or lesson the actions of the Waffen (German and Romanian) SS actions during the Ardennes Offensive - much of which involved the wanton murder of Belgian civilians. I might also remind you that there are similar instances of Soviet Red Army soldiers who shot concentration camp guards outright and "stories" or their rampages through German towns where anyone found living in a house adorned with Waffen SS regalia --an indication a serving family member-- were almost automatically killed. I might also point out that like the American soldiers who were the ringleaders in the "Vengeance at Dachau" episode, the soldiers serving under Peiper and indeed Peiper himself, all had their death sentences commuted and they were largely exonerated mainly due to procedural errors in the trial and during the investigation conducted (very poorly) by the US Army Counterintelligence Corp and various questionable interrogation tactics they used that amounted to torture. So in the end, they got off. But that doesn't mean history should exonerate them and the memory of the killed anymore than any other victims of WWII atrocities...

Chevan
09-24-2009, 12:39 AM
The Dachau massacre, although real, is a poor comparison on moral grounds or otherwise. The best estimates are that only 17 German SS were killed, the massacre was a spontaneous crime of passion carried out with the primary responsibility of junior officers (although I concede Malmedy probably was also to an extent) and reluctantly by those under their command. The massacre was halted --before it became any larger of a blood bath than it was-- by a senior officer threatening to shoot his own men if they continued. But you should know this already as this has been discussed in a thread I started on the subject (http://ww2incolor.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3671) and don't really need reminding of it.

yes we had disscussed it before, i have to notice - the figures of killed that day was much more then 17.
up to 40-50 we agreed.
Not need to ignore that, and call the any source that claims the figures , different from officially admitted, as "revisionist".


I would also state that the motivations of each of the killers is in question are a key distinction. Yes, US soldiers shot a few SS troopers after overrunning a concentration camp filled with the festering dead whereas the Waffen SS simply murdered numbers of US soldiers simply because they were a nuisance. But another question is: what is your point?

My point is not wich you might to fear, Nick.
I/m not going to start the trolling.
Revisionists claim there was a "lost million" of German pows that were supposedly murdered by both Red Army and Allies.
We can't take it as serious, but hardly we might to present the the violence to Germans as "rare episodic" from Allies.
Now to the happines we have learned more about violence by Red Army in GErmany.This is very right.
IBut i strongly doubt that the Red Army , Wermact and SS was only the bad side of this war.
I hope you've understood.


I've never stated that Americans are any better necessarily than anyone else. And how does the Massacre at Dachau episode in any way legitimize or lesson the actions of the Waffen (German and Romanian) SS actions during the Ardennes Offensive - much of which involved the wanton murder of Belgian civilians. I might also remind you that there are similar instances of Soviet Red Army soldiers who shot concentration camp guards outright and "stories" or their rampages through German towns where anyone found living in a house adorned with Waffen SS regalia --an indication a serving family member-- were almost automatically killed. I might also point out that like the American soldiers who were the ringleaders in the "Vengeance at Dachau" episode, the soldiers serving under Peiper and indeed Peiper himself, all had their death sentences commuted and they were largely exonerated mainly due to procedural errors in the trial and during the investigation conducted (very poorly) by the US Army Counterintelligence Corp and various questionable interrogation tactics they used that amounted to torture. So in the end, they got off. But that doesn't mean history should exonerate them and the memory of the killed anymore than any other victims of WWII atrocities...

I think , the war criminals should be judged.
Recently in Baltic states there were a process against former soviet partisan Vasiliy Kononov, who blaimed in murdering dozen of civils as "retrebution" for colloboration with GErmans SS. The man is about 70 age old and he still considering as "war criminal".This is positive step IMO. The war is war , but war crime is crime.
There a lot also a simular process over world the former Nazic criminals.
I don't realy think the US Counterintelligence Corp actualy cared to judge the criminals at that conditions , when war still went.

VonWeyer
09-24-2009, 04:48 AM
In upper grades, sure. This is Europe, not the US!;)

Very interesting.;)

Nickdfresh
09-24-2009, 10:01 AM
yes we had disscussed it before, i have to notice - the figures of killed that day was much more then 17.
up to 40-50 we agreed.
Not need to ignore that, and call the any source that claims the figures , different from officially admitted, as "revisionist".

It probably is closer to 40 or so. My figure was the number killed when thrown up against the wall and shot (around 17 SS dead). Individuals were said to have summarily executed SS soldiers at various points during the battle and after. I think the estimate total was around 30 to 40 total IIRC.n


My point is not wich you might to fear, Nick.
I/m not going to start the trolling.

I don't think of you as a troll. Hypersensitive sometimes, but not a troll. :)


Revisionists claim there was a "lost million" of German pows that were supposedly murdered by both Red Army and Allies.
We can't take it as serious, but hardly we might to present the the violence to Germans as "rare episodic" from Allies.
Now to the happines we have learned more about violence by Red Army in GErmany.This is very right.
IBut i strongly doubt that the Red Army , Wermact and SS was only the bad side of this war.
I hope you've understood.

Of course. I think the US and British Armies (in Europe, North Africa, and the Med) fought more in accordance to the Geneva Convention than the other armies. That's not to say that small scale massacres and illegal killings didn't happen. I recall that a US Army Captain and Master Sergeant were both tried and convicted under Courts Martial for massacres of German and Italian soldiers (about 15-40 in two separate instances IIRC) in Sicily in order to nip it in the bud early on and to enforce discipline in a relatively new conscript army which lacked it at times.

That's not to say that instances of individual executions didn't happen or that commanders didn't look the other way if German snipers or some SS members were shot outright after surrendering. There was of course also a counter-massacre alleged to have been carried out during the Battle of the Bulge of some SS members. But the truth is that Malmedy was one of the most idiotic things the German could have done because it only stiffened the resolve of GIs that might otherwise have surrendered or ran...

As far as German prisoners, once they managed to be transferred out of the battle areas, they were pretty well treated by their American captors, and probably almost treated too well in continental America as many saw them as being coddled and receiving better food than GIs or even the average US civilian during rationing. It should be said that after the surrender (about 1946), things went the other way and German servicemen were essentially treated as convicts at hard labor with their rations cut for their remaining captivity in the US. As for the German POWs held by the Soviet Gov't, yes they had it very rough, but the Soviets treated German POWs better, or at least no worse, than the Germans treated their POWs captured in 1941...


I think , the war criminals should be judged.
Recently in Baltic states there were a process against former soviet partisan Vasiliy Kononov, who blaimed in murdering dozen of civils as "retrebution" for colloboration with GErmans SS. The man is about 70 age old and he still considering as "war criminal".This is positive step IMO. The war is war , but war crime is crime.
There a lot also a simular process over world the former Nazic criminals.
I don't realy think the US Counterintelligence Corp actualy cared to judge the criminals at that conditions , when war still went.

It was after the War the US CIC carried out the investigation. They botched it severally and used various hard cell methods to extract confessions including mock executions, beatings, and deprivations of various sort. The Germans also received a very good defense and there was political pressure from the extreme "McCarthyist" US right wing to lett them be with time-served. I don't think Peiper was himself involved in the massacres of US troops, he denied it to other US prisoners and there was no overall conspiracy to kill them as most US troops taken prisoner were obviously not killed, some said they were treated relatively well...

forager
10-01-2009, 09:29 PM
Thanks for inserting some ongoing rationality in a thread that needs it.

I suppose most will never come to light, but an awful lot of negotiating and posturing went on the the dark regarding the end of WW2.

One interesting and somewhat sad revelation is, as known, the more McCarthy was right, nutty as he was.