The Rape of Belgium

[De Petrowski Alexander]

I am a mature student doing a Masters in War Studies. According to a paper presented by one of my classmates, the German army had a great distaste for irregular & guerrilla warfare. Germany had tried unsuccessfully to have this form of warfare outlawed by the Hague Convention. Despite this failure, the official policy of the Germans was to respond to francs-tireurs with brutality & reprisals. There was no suggestion, however, of there being any truth in the more lurid stories such as the bayonetting of babies.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The mutilation stories were mostly added later for propaganda purposes, also the number of victims was artificially raised, this was successfull to some effect during the war, although it is a hotly debated issue to what extent.

It had unfortunate side effects in the 1920s when in Germany these atrocity stories were carefully investigated and a effective attack was launched at the weak points (propaganda), with the no doubt expected effect that the entire atrocity story was discredited, even these events which were true,

This was very painfull for many people in these countries and regions which had been under German occupation or had German armies passing through their region.

[truthergw]

Hm, I have the impression that most of the people here on the forum seem to easily accept all horror stories about the Germans without any criticism.

The situation of the German Army in Belgium in 1914 can be compared to the US and British Army in Iraq nowadays. They are operating in a hostile environment with a lot of civilians with possibly hostile intentions. It is very natural that certain situation get out of hand and that civilians are harmed and civilian building etc. are destroyed.

There are a lot of stories of ill-treatment of civilians by the British army too in 1914 (especially millers).

The execution of women was not something solely done by the Germans.

The Germans did lose the war and their sins were afterwards well researched etc. while allied sins were more or less covered up.

Just a few remarks to think about perhaps...

Jan

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I cannot, of course, talk for most people on the forum. There can be no doubt that atrocities were committed on all sides. However, official acts of reprisal by the German authorities are undeniable. The deliberate destruction of Louvain is but one example.

[AOK4]

I cannot, of course, talk for most people on the forum. There can be no doubt that atrocities were committed on all sides. However, official acts of reprisal by the German authorities are undeniable. The deliberate destruction of Louvain is but one example.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The deliberate destruction of Louvain?

That was not delibarate, things got quite out of hand according to what I read about it. The Germans started shooting (apparently mostly at other Germans) and were under the impression that it was guerilla warfare so in their fury, they started searching the houses, some of them looting and then stting the houses on fire from which they thought they were shot at (in some of them there were other Germans as one can read in publications). Favourable weather conditions then caused an enormous fire sea in which also the library burnt.

A deliberate burning of certain cities etc. never happened.

[Max]

The deliberate destruction of Louvain?

That was not delibarate, things got quite out of hand according to what I read about it. The Germans started shooting (apparently mostly at other Germans) and were under the impression that it was guerilla warfare so in their fury, they started searching the houses, some of them looting and then stting the houses on fire from which they thought they were shot at (in some of them there were other Germans as one can read in publications). Favourable weather conditions then caused an enormous fire sea in which also the library burnt.

A deliberate burning of certain cities etc. never happened.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

What you are involved in is semantics, pure and simple. The plain fact is that the German army destroyed Louvain with senior officers making very little or no effort to stop it happening. This in my book constitutes tacit approval and therefore a deliberate act.

Andy

[Paul Hodges]

In other words, what was the Wilhelmine equivalent of "zero tolerance"?

_____________________________________________________________________

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

In reply to J L A Hartley over a year ago (!), I don't know - please let me know if you have found out or do so!

Best wishes

Paul

[Jarmstro]

There are those (and websites) who stll deny the Turkish attrocities against the Armenians.

[marina]

Wasn't Senlis burned down?

Marina

[AOK4]

You are entitled to your opinion. Perhaps you might consider being a little less selective in your reading.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hey! I studied in Louvain, so I know very well it was burned, I just say it wasn't burned intentionally, it just happened by a series of events. And I am probably the only one here (apart from a few others) who have read both sides about the events...

[egbert]

Jan, it is a fact that some pals here will always be biased no matter what other sources say; remember: the victor is always right even if he is not; it must be the depressing weather that stirs up some pals; uh -before I forget: have fun with this British research

Those who are depressed: have a nice day -its 25 Celsius over here (lots of atrocities here ongoing against the mosquitos)

[truthergw]

Hey! I studied in Louvain, so I know very well it was burned, I just say it wasn't burned intentionally, it just happened by a series of events. And I am probably the only one here (apart from a few others) who have read both sides about the events...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

As one of the very few people in posession of the facts, could you tell me what the University of Louvain says? About Louvain in particular and Belgian reprisals in general. The German army seems to have been very accident prone. Barbara Tuchman devotes several pages to the " sack of Louvain ", quoting sources in USA and Germany as well as Great Britain.

[Max]

Jan

I find some of your responses on both this thread and the one regarding the "attrocity" at Hooge to be contradictory. In the Hooge thread you said that "No German officer would allow his men to treat an adversary (even being the corpse of one) in such a manner...". If we accept this as true then why didn't they maintain control at Louvain?Regardless of what you say, the deliberate killing of civilians is not as a result of "unfortunate happenings" it is murder under any circumstance.

No one in their right mind denys that attrocities are committed by both sides in any war, to deny it would be to dishonour the victims. In July 1944 my Grandfather was in a position on two occasions to stop the summary execution of captured 12th Panzer "Hitler Jungen", he turned his back both times. It was murder, I accept it, he accepted it.

An officer class that served its apprenticeship in the Great War later participated or sanctioned the extermination of millions of Jews, gypsies or catholics during the 1930s and 40s. Any group of men who are capable of this are capable of anything. This is not anti German, rather anti Nazi and an acceptance of the truth.

Andy

[2ndCMR]

Could you please stop to be so anti-German.

I'm afraid you misundertand. I am not "anti" or "pro" anyone or any people. I am against cultures which promote and condone brutality, moral blindness, and viciousness. It so happens that IMO that is or was a predisposition of German culture and I will present information in due course to back that up.

I understand that some feel impelled to condone and excuse/deny the behaviour of the German military. For those of German descent this is somewhat predicatable. Others such as Walloons etc. may share that sentiment for whatever historical reasons.

The apologists of non-German descent are a mixed bag of course, some probably suffer from a variety of what has been called "Stockholm Syndrome", a compulsion to identify with the percieved strongest. This of course is a widespread human tendency, especially for those who feel themselves weak. Then there are the effiminates & adolescents who are drawn to the exaggerated masculinity of uniforms, Aryan imagery etc., ad nauseam.

And of course, one cannot forget the snobbery so popular these days of pretending to be morally and intellectually superior to one's predecessors, nor that little vanity, so beloved of self-described intellectuals: the pretence of being above the passions of the 'common herd'.

Some of course, just want the quiet life. Holding strong feelings about these matters is onerous and the impulse of apathy and moral laziness is too much to resist.

My view is that to forget is betrayal of and an insult to those who suffered. Forgive if you wish, but never forget, unless you wish the lesson to be repeated, in some other place and time.

As for your comments about Dresden; had the Germans succesfully invaded Britiain their plan was to deport to the Continent as slave labour, every able-bodied male between the ages of 16 and 40 (for a start). That amounts to the extermination of the British people. Let us have no whining from defeated aggressors, they were treated with excessive leniency, again.

Some young Japanese friends of mine were in Germany a few years ago, and the husband remarked to me later, quite unprompted, about how often favourable and friendly comments were made to them about "we were on the same side during the war" etc.

As for the British, their condition is the subject of contemptuous amusement beyond the Rhine, with much of their industry German and Japanese owned and soon the London Exchange it seems. How long before their economy is completely controlled from the Bundesbank?

Reminds me of the British officer in Singapore who called out to one of his former guards who was going into captivity as he came out: "This war last one hundred years!?" (A slogan this Japanese officer was fond of) The Japanese called back "Ninety-six still to go!"

Tokugawa Ieyasu had a wise slogan: "After victory, tighten your helmet strap".

[egbert]

An officer class that served its apprenticeship in the Great War later participated or sanctioned the extermination of millions of Jews, gypsies or catholics during the 1930s and 40s. Any group of men who are capable of this are capable of anything. This is not anti German, rather anti Nazi and an acceptance of the truth.

Andy

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hi Andy, nice to read again from you here after a long pause (see page 2 of this thread); hope you will not "moderate" this thread, since actively participating

Besides that- well, I would say= it's ANTI-GERMAN here; I read mostly "...the Germans..." and "an officer class..."(not every officer after 1933 was a NAZI, or maybe they were? Maybe I missed something in my father's bio as an AAA officer) etc.

What else should I say since other than Brit sources are not acceptable: Yes it's in their genes, the Huns are all murderers, criminals, rapists and....did I forget something? I could easily add other stuff on your input by editing my own post. Oh, and something more: do you guys read the other thread "This is the secret of Granddad's trunk"? Better not - it's possibly the trunk of an atrocity-associate.

[Max]

And please don't accuse 'the German officer corps of WWI or even WWII' of genocide, there were men who opposed nazism and a lot more who had no real idea about what was really going on (either because they didn't really wanted to know or because they really had no means of knowing it).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

With the greatest respect I find this statement insulting to both my intelligence and the victims of the slaughter. Who killed the 9 million? The genocide fairies?

Andy

[2ndCMR]

And please don't accuse 'the German officer corps of WWI or even WWII' of genocide, there were men who opposed nazism and a lot more who had no real idea about what was really going on (either because they didn't really wanted to know or because they really had no means of knowing it).

Yes, what percentage was that again? .000000001 perhaps? I've seen the photos of happy Stauffenburg in Poland in 1939. He didn't look a man with a troubled conscience. As for Rommel, he was the former commander of the Fuhrerhauptquartier and only opposed Hitler, like the most of the others, when it became clear Germany was going to lose.

Now what was that quote from Col. Gen. Von Hammerstein-Equordt again?

"A nation and an army which has so lost all humanity deserves to be exterminated" (1943)

Probably one of our German scholars has the exact quote?

[Chris_Baker]

Please remember to that others are entitled to express opinions you may disagree with. By all means argue but keep it away from personal insult. You have been warned.

[Max]

Hi Andy, nice to read again from you here after a long pause (see page 2 of this thread); hope you will not "moderate" this thread, since actively participating

Besides that- well, I would say= it's ANTI-GERMAN here; I read mostly  "...the Germans..." and "an officer class..."(not every officer after 1933 was a NAZI, or maybe they were? Maybe I missed something in my father's bio as an AAA officer) etc.

What else should I say since other than Brit sources are not acceptable: Yes it's in their genes, the Huns are all murderers, criminals, rapists and....did I forget something? I could easily add other stuff on your input by editing my own post. Oh, and something more: do you guys read the other thread "This is the secret of Granddad's trunk"? Better not - it's possibly the trunk of an atrocity-associate.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hello Egbert

I didn't suggest that every German officer in the 1930s and 40s was a Nazi or culpable, but an awful lot were. Only when we accept that both sides are capable of the most inhuman things during war will we ever be able to move on.

You know I have been to your Grandads grave and laid flowers, I wouldn't do that for anyone I considered an associate of atrocity.

Andy

PS I will not be moderating this thread

[egbert]

You know I have been to your Grandads grave and laid flowers, I wouldn't do that for anyone I considered an associate of atrocity.

Andy

PS I will not be moderating this thread 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Andy that is truly telepathy; i was just thinking of your highly appreciated gesture of laying some flowers on to Granddad's grave in Merville!!!! Thank you again.

The trunk itself contains lots of field letters. One describes Granddad Sept 1914 driving with a supply carriage being shot through the canvas by Franc-tireurs. He wrote it happened in a village ca 20km behind the fighting forces

[truthergw]

..............

thrutergw,

They don't look for guilt any more in Louvain, they're just trying to find out what happened. We were there with the Belgian WFA and the town archivists even said: "whether there were Belgian soldiers or civilians in the city that shot at the Germans cannot be said with certainty, they concentrate more on what exactly happened (which houses were destroyed, what happened to the civilians, what happened to the city etc.).

Jan

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The Catholic University of Leuven is unequivocal on its website, but we have both had our say and this exchange of views could probaply go on for ever. I do not think that further discussion will be beneficial so I will wish you well and withdraw.

[bob lembke]

Guys;

I have to say that the tone that has developed on this thread is the most unpleasant that I have seen on the Great War Forum. I was reluctant to post, but I think I will throw out a few observations and run for my foxhole.

It is distressing to see Jan (AOK4) being beaten on the head and shoulders. I think his contributions should be considered seriously and given due weight. I am probably going to embarrass him, and maybe annoy him, but he is an exceptional student of the Great War.

First of all, he is Belgian, and, seemingly he has actually studied in Louvain. (He seems to be one of the few, if not the only, Belgian contributing to this thread.) He is effective in a number of languages; I have one of his books, of about 400 pages, on the fighting in Flanders and thereabouts; unfortunately for me, it is written in Flemish, which I can only read slowly and quite incompletely. He has had a leadership position in an international society of military archeology. He has an astonishing collection of military histories that might be considered world class. I believe that he has resigned his position with the Belgian Senate to be a full-time student of WW I.

And I might add that he is probably less than half my age.

I also have to observe (and probably appear rather pompous) that there are several reasons why someone who can only function in English would find it difficult to get into this topic in a useful fashion. First of all, the English, or English-speaking people, had next to nothing to do with these matters. Hardly any useful primany sources would have been written in English.

Secondly, the English, and to some extent the Americans, produced an astonishing tidal wave of propaganda on this issue, some of it blatantly and crudely propagandistic, and some of it material of greater subtleness. This effort served the Allied cause well during the war, but probably has poisoned the historical well so badly that it is unlikely that anything close to the historical truth could ever be arrived at. The practical result is that if you are reading contemporary sources, and they are in English, you almost certainly are either reading commissioned propaganda, or the second-degree product of propaganda.

Tuchman was a historical fly-weight, not a real historian, but a publicist, as my excessively wise and bookish wife describes her. And she is blatantly, openly, almost cartoonishly anti-German.

I have something useful to contribute if the tone of name-calling settles down. My grand-father was a German staff officer on the Generalkommando of III. Reserve Korps, which besieged and took Antwerp and then pushed across central Belgium. I have his letters from the front, and he wrote a good deal about this topic. If we can wash the blood off the school-yard pavement I will be happy to share this material with you guys.

Bob Lembke

[Max]

Bob

What are you trying to say? That we should take Jans statements as fact that the burning/sacking of Louvain was a tragic accident based somehow on adverse weather conditions and in fact had nothing to do with German reprisal? That no WW1 or WW2 German Army officer had anything whatsoever to do with the deliberate and systematic killing of several million civilians in the 1930s and 40s? These dastardly acts lose nothing in the translation and have nothing whatsoever to do with an ability to read primary source in the language in which it was written, it is a matter of fact. Genocide is not an intellectual exercise. It has to be accepted that German officers who served in WW1 took part in the final solution, any other conclusion would be an act of denial.

Jan, are you stating that German officers in either world war did not take part in war crimes either by turning a blind eye like my Grandfather or active participation?

I haven't seen the program about the Somme aired on Channel 4 last night but my wife was impressed with the description of war by one of the main "characters". He said that man " was like a mischevious ape, tearing the image of God". If we deny the truth that men are often brutal and primal in war then we are in real danger of repeating history.

Andy

[De Petrowski Alexander]

My impression of the burning of louvain (Leuven) is caused by several interacting reasons and events

Firstly the German Army's pre-war obsession with "Franc tireurs", it had the nasty side effect that every shooting that they could not readily explain became too quickly "Franc Tireur"

The Belgian Army being outnumbered and outgunned used to a great extend ambush, raiding and sniping as tactics to damage and slow down the German Army, this was done by soldiers who naturally used all available cover, adding unintentionally to the myth of the "Franc Tireur"

Another reason was the panic caused by the major Belgian Counterattack that came near the town of Louvain

The brutality of war in general, at the time the outdated German infantry tactic of the massed infantry attack had already caused massive casualties.

It's effect on the troops could hardly have been foreseen before the war.

One side effect was heavy drinking, many Germans were seen to be stone drunk during these events

It is so that while several German Officers made efforts to control their troops others simply did not bother. That units were spread out over many streets and building surely did not help control and discipline.

Many German Officers believed in the theory that an enemy's resistance could be broken by terrorising his population, thinking that he would give up when the suffering became too great, this caused matters to escalate fast.

[healdav]

To get back to basics.

There is absolutely no doubt whatsoever that the German army committed some pretty horrible atrocities in Belgium and in France in 1914.

Whether they were orchestrated from the top is a moot point, but there was certainly very little attempt to stop them.

Understandably perhaps, many German soldiers and officers were very nervous at going into battle (or war). However, the things they did and the way they carried on were utterly ridiculous and could only reflect on them and their descendants.

For example, a book published locally in Belgium details the invasion of the Gaume (south and west of Arlon). One German officer wrote home describing how he and his men were being spied on continually by Belgians. The spying consisted of civilians who were walking down the country roads taking one look at these advancing columns and disappearing over the horizon as fast as they could go!

Later skirmishes with the French army were obviously all their fault.

In Longuyon several people were shot, among them the village priest. His crime? He had been working in the German field hospital tending the GERMAN wounded. He was shot for, apparently, he might have become a leader of resistance.

Throughout the St. Mihiel salient area the blossom on the trees was requisitioned thus making it a death sentence to pick up a windfall apple (and that went on right through the war). In lots of the villages in that area men were simply taken out and shot and with the admitted object of cowing the rest of the population (that they had killed the men who would have done most of the farm work was a bit beyond their comprehension). They are all commemorated on the local war memorials.

In Rossignol a whole group of people (mostly men) were marched off to Germany as hostages (for what, heaven knows). When they got to Arlon the Germans got fed up with the marching, so the whole lot were shot (there is a plaque on the spot near the railway station and a memorial at Rossignol).

Go through the French army death certificates database (not easy, I know) and you will find hundreds of certificates for civilians who were killed during the first few weeks of the war (not during the fighting). Their ages range from a few weeks to 80 odd years.

If this was random killing by a few rogue units, the concept of random has been somewhat expanded and there were an awful lot of rogues in the German army.

[Max]

About 80% of your post seems to be focused on the Holocaust. I had thought that the topic of this thread was "The Rape of Belgium, a hoax? Or atrocity denial?" (or sonething close to that.) I had not realized that the Great War Forum was focused on the Holocaust. I assume that bringing that OT issue into this discussion is a form of ad hominum attack tactic.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Bob

I raise the point regarding the holocaust because I feel it can be assumed that elements of the officer class that sanctioned or expedited the murder of millions of innocent men, women and children where the same elements of the officer class who Jan suggests would not allow attrocity to take place either in the trenches or the wider community. Jan himself also presented part of his case by referring to events from Britains past which fall outside the period that we are specifically discussing and therefore I feel free to do the same.

I am not an apologist, I have stated that my Grandfather took part in what would today be described as a war crime. I have admitted it, it is time that others felt able to admit the same. As for ad hominem, this is not a personal attack on either you or Jan but rather on the idea that the German officer class was not capable of attrocity.

You say that one can just as easily read about these "dastardly acts" in translation. Unfortunately, since England, in the course of pursuing the war, absolutely flooded the world with fabrications and atrocity propaganda on this topic, and since 99% of the primary sources are in Flemish/Dutch, French, and German, trying to study this topic from English sources is a fool's errand.

When I said that these dastardly acts lose nothing in the translation I was being metaphoric and not literal. An act of brutality is an act of brutality in whatever language the act is recorded in. I would also respectfully suggest, whilst accepting that Britain pumped out some pretty nonsensical propoganda (babies on bayonets, crucified Canadians etc) during the war the Germans did precisely the same and therefore the primary sources that you allude to are just as tainted as anything written in English. A link that Egbert supplied much earlier in the thread demonstrates my point, "The Belgian People's war - A violation of international law" http://www.jrbooksonline.com/HTML-docs/BPW_1.htm. Chutzpah.

My jaw dropped when I read "The Imperial German Government is of opinion that the evidence published in the appendix proves convincingly that the actions of the German troops against the civilian population were provoked by the franctireur war which was a violation of international law". No mention of the gross violation of international law committed by the Imperial German Government in the unprovoked invasion of a neutral country. Balanced ??

Andy

[squirrel]

For what it is worth............

There is an account of the battle of Loos by a soldier from the 1/18th County of London Battalion in which he says that after they had been relieved and were on their way back to billets a german POW called them Irish Murderers. The soldier replied "What about you in Belgium?"

and the German could give no reply.