Tyska & ryska krigsfångar

Jag tänkte starta en tråd om förlustsiffror bland ryska och tyska krigsfångar under andra världskriget. Kunde kanske lika gärna posta den på Historieforat, men eftersom politiskt organiserad massdöd och varierande versioner av vad som hände diskuteras på detta fora lägger jag den här.
Ett par länkar:

http://www.gendercide.org/case_soviet.html

http://www.fpp.co.uk/History/General/HnetPrisoners1.html

Intressant ämne! Jag kan bidra med några siffror

Enligt de tyska krigsarkiven i Freiburg rapporterdes 356 000 tyska soldater ur Wehrmacht saknade fram till den 31 augusti 1943. Av dessa så överlevde 50 000 krigsslutet.

Tyskarna å sin sida tog 5 miljoner fångar ur Röda Armén (fram till 1 maj 1944), av dessa dog 2 miljoner. Runt 40% av fångarna. Det hela blir dock riktigt intressant om man jämför siffrorna med dödligheten bland tillfångatagna amerikanska och brittiska soldater, som var 3,5%.

Dessa extrema siffror kan väl delvis förklaras med att tyskarna inte hade en chans, i alla fall i början av fälttåget, att bemöta krigsfångarnas behov av bespisning, kläder, logi, vård och så vidare. Att man sen avancerade i oerhörd takt gjorde det hela ännu svårare. Fast nu hade ju Hitler utfärdat sitt direktiv om att detta var ett utrotningskrig, så det spelar kanske ingen större roll.

Varför bara dessa två nationer? De andra deltagande nationerna i kriget är de inte intressanta?

Vad gäller dödstal bland krigsfångar så är det väl förutom tyska och ryska massmord (mestadels genom försummelse och likgiltighet) endast den japanska behandlingen av allierade fångar som väger särskilt tungt statistiskt.
Samt den amerikanska och franska behandlingen av tyska soldater i fångenskap. Japanernas sätt att fara hårt fram med de besegrade kan förslagsvis diskuteras i en separat tråd, gärna även lägren på amerikansk mark där japanskättade amerikaner tvångsinternerades under kriget.

En sida om britternas tyska fångläger, där dödligheten var jämförelsevis låg och knappast kännetecknad av nämnvärda övergrepp:

http://www.fortunecity.com/campus/dixie/921/PoWs/pows.htm

Jag ympar in detta ämne i denna tråd i stället för att starta en ny, det gäller alltså de allierade planerna och funderingarna på att slutgiltigt kuva eller rentav fysiskt helt utrota tyskarna som straff för att de utkämpat två världskrig och till sist förlorat:

http://vho.org/tr/2004/2/Nordbruch171-180.html

"---Calls for persecution of Germans were the order of the day and not only in the Soviet Union. Both in England and the USA many propaganda writings appeared calling for the persecution of Germans and Germany. In England Sir Robert Vansittart was one of the most influential inciters of Germanophobic acts. As First Diplomatic Councilor of the British Foreign Ministry he was known in diplomatic circles as the "German-hater." In his books Black Record (1941) and Lessons of my Life (1943) he put forth the idea that the German people were the eternal disturbers of world peace, the "killer bird" among the civilized nations. For this reason, it was necessary to destroy this barbaric, aggressive criminal people with a killer instinct. Vansittart's influence was enormous. He was a key figure in the British war clique that advocated draconic measures against Germany.

Likewise in America a series of racist and anti-human publications appeared, such as What about Germany? (1942) by L. P. Lochner, How to treat the Germans, (1943) by Emil Ludwig, and Germany: To be or not to be? (1943) by G. H. Seger and S. V. Marck. When the Americans began the occupation of Germany in 1944/45, a booklet with the presumptuous title What to do with Germany? by Louis Nizer, a New York attorney and chairman of an aid society for Jewish immigrants, was distributed among the American troops for free. In this book, Nizer recommended, among other things, that every German officer of the rank of Colonel and above should be brought before a court, that the German school system should be put in Allied hands and that heavy industry should be taken from Germany. This pamphlet did not represent an unimportant propaganda piece of an insignificant German hater: According to the blurb on its wrapper later US President Harry S. Truman was deeply affected by it recommended that "every American" should read it.---

This neutralization - to be understood literally - could be effected in different ways. One way was the biological extinction of the German people, proposed, for example, by Theodore Nathan Kaufman, president of the American Federation of Peace. He belonged to the circle of Roosevelt's closest advisors and had direct influence on the decisions of the US President. In 1940, ten months before the US officially entered the Second World War, Kaufman published a book with the title Germany Must Perish. This little book dripping with hatred contains what has come to be known as the Kaufman plan, the scheme by which this Presidential advisor recommended the extermination of 70 million people of the German nation, including women and children, and the distribution of the German Empire among its neighbors. Specifically, the book stated:[24]

"Today's war is not a war against Adolf Hitler.

Nor is it a war against the Nazis. [...]

It is a struggle between the German nation and humanity. [...]

This time Germany has forced a TOTAL WAR upon the world.

As a result, she must be prepared to pay a TOTAL PENALTY.

And there is one, and only one, such Total Penalty:

Germany must perish forever!

In fact - not in fancy! [...]

The population of Germany, excluding conquered and annexed territories, is about 70,000,000, about equally divided between male and female. To achieve the purpose of German extinction it would be necessary to only sterilize some 48,000,000. [...]

Concerning the males subject to sterilization the army groups, as organized units, would be the easiest and quickest to deal with. Taking 20,000 surgeons as an arbitrary number and on the assumption that each will perform a minimum of 25 operations daily, it would take no more than one month, at the maximum, to complete their sterilization. Naturally the more doctors available, and many more than the 20,000 we mention would be available considering all the nations to be drawn upon, the less time would be required. The balance of the male civilian population of Germany could be treated within three months. Inasmuch as the sterilization of women needs somewhat more time, it may be computed that the entire female population of Germany could be sterilized within a period of three years or less. Complete sterilization of both sexes, and not only one, is to be considered necessary in view of the present German doctrine that so much as one drop of true German blood constitutes a German.

Of course, after complete sterilization, there will cease to be a birth rate in Germany. At the normal death rate of 2% per annum, German life will diminish at the rate of 1,500,000 yearly. Accordingly in the span of two generations that which cost millions of lives and centuries of useless effort, namely, the elimination of Germanism and its carriers, will have been an accomplished fact."---

The principal deviser of these exotic and diverse schemes for the destruction or expropriation of Germany was, however, the Secretary of the Treasury of the United States of America, Henry Morgenthau, Jr., "one of the leading American Jews."[27] He was the one who convinced Roosevelt to be "tough" with the Germans. The Handbook for Military Government in Germany, issued by the Supreme Headquarters, Allied Expeditionary Forces (SHAEF) in August 1944, which was to be the political guide for occupation forces in Germany, incurred his disapproval because of its "slack places." For example, Morgenthau thought the daily ration of 2000 calories for German workers was too high. The U.S. president was pleased with that kind of "suggestions for improvement." Roosevelt concurred that the Germans should be dealt with roughly: [28]

"We have got to be tough with Germany and I mean the German people, not just the Nazis. You either have to castrate the German people or you have got to treat them in such a manner so they can't just go on reproducing people who want to continue the way they have in the past."

After this general agreement between Roosevelt and Morgenthau, the latter, at a press conference, criticized the authors of the Handbook publicly for being too soft towards the Germans and, therefore, "the Handbook was hastily withdrawn."[29]

Morgenthau, whom Roosevelt backed without reservation, was given nearly a free hand with respect to determining policy on Germany. He wanted to settle the German question once and for all and his method for doing so was to impose a final solution on the Germans, a plan which has come to be called the Morgenthau Plan. By the terms of this plan, Germany should be reduced to a de-industrialized, low population agrarian country. Morgenthau's plans were described as "measures for the prevention of a third world war caused by Germany." The Morgenthau Plan's measures included the demilitarization of Germany, restitution and reparations, education and propaganda, political decentralization, supervision of the economy by the army, control of the German economic development, an agrarian program, the punishment of war criminals, and the breaking-up of the new Germany. On September 30, 1944, the Völkische Beobachter listed the intended measures in detail:

"The entire steel industry, the chemical works and the plants for the production of synthetic benzine should be taken from the Germans and transferred to other countries. [...] The education of children should be put under the control of the United Nations, and the schools should remain closed until sufficient Jewish teachers could be found. Also, new schoolbooks should be written forthwith, whose contents should be agreed upon by Washington, London and Moscow. By the Morgenthau Plan, university studies would be forbidden to German youth, the buildings of German technical schools would be closed and their libraries and research facilities would be divided among America, England and the Soviet Union."

According to Morgenthau's scheme, Germany should be not only totally disarmed, but its entire industrial base should be dismantled or destroyed. The mines and coal works should be flooded. With respect to reparations, Morgenthau had detailed plans: they should be accomplished less through payments and transfer of goods than through surrender of German mineral and other physical resources, in particular by the restitution of property, which the Germans had plundered from the occupied territories, cession of German territory and German private property rights in industries to the countries she had invaded, by transfer and redistribution of industrial facilities and equipment, by forced labor of German workers in foreign countries, and by confiscation of all German landed property of any kind outside of Germany.[30] US President Roosevelt shared Morgenthau's conception of the German collective guilt for war and his belief that Germany should be handled in the harshest manner following the war. So it should be no surprise that during the second conference held in Quebec in September 1944, Morgenthau's plans for the devastation of the heart of Europe were recognized by Roosevelt and Churchill as the official program to be imposed on post-war Germany,[31] or that Morgenthau could write self-satisfiedly on page xii of his book Germany is our Problem that the fundamental principles of this program represent the official viewpoint of the United States.---"

Kors i taket! jag är just här överens med dig Ezzelino!
Däremot så anser jag (med stöd av förklaringar av detta i andra trådar) att vissa länkar som anges i denna tråd är att betrakta som ej säkra källor.
Engelsmännen tror jag inte har ö.h.t gjort krigsförbrytelser inom detta område (Finnarna ligger också i toppen tillsammans med Engelsmännen).

Angående Tyskarna och ryssarnas behandling så var det mycket svält och kroppsarbete till döds, Ryssarna var "duktiga" på psykisk nedbrytning och systematiskt knäckande förhör.
Säga vad man vill om NKVD med vissa saker var dom oerhört "proffesionella" i...

Jag lägger in detta föredrag av Joachim Hoffmann (den sista text han färdigställde innan sin död) i denna tråd i stället för att skapa en ny, om än ämnet är intressant nog för att motivera en egen tråd:
nämligen de rön flera av de mest initierade efterkrigstida bedömarna av situationen 1941 framfört, att Stalins Sovjetunion utan tvivel förberedde ett nära förestående anfall på Hitlertyskland. Därav följer även den märkliga bristen på ett effektivt försvar under de inledande dagarna av den tyska offensiven, eftersom de sovjetiska stridskrafterna formerats för angrepp och inte försvar. Jag vet, texten är på tyska, det kanske inte passar så många på forumet, men alltid finns det väl någon kultiverad herre eller gammalmodig dam som lurar i skuggorna . Jag ska försöka att inte upprepa den språkliga försyndelsen i brådrasket:

http://vho.org/VffG/2002/3/Hoffmann336-339.html

"---Alle Maßnahmen und Planungen auf sowjetischer Seite waren von nun an allein auf das Ziel gerichtet, den Generalangriff auf Deutschland militärisch und propagandistisch vorzubereiten. Die gesamten disponiblen Streitkräfte der Roten Armee und Luftwaffe waren offensiv in einer Weise aufgestellt, die nach Meinung des Oberkommandierenden der NATO, Europa Mitte, General Graf Kielmannsegg, nur einen Schluß zuließ: Angriff auf das Deutsche Reich. Die Notwendigkeit von Verteidigungsvorkehrungen Deutschland gegenüber wurde rundweg ignoriert. Und selbst die mit großem Aufwand geschaffenen Befestigungen der Stalinlinie an der westlichen Staatsgrenze waren längst vollständig abgebaut worden – dies allein ein untrüglicher Beweis dafür, daß Stalin nicht im geringsten mit der Gefahr eines deutschen Angriffs rechnete. Die Hauptstoßkräfte der Sowjetunion, die 100 Panzer- und motorisierten Divisionen, befanden sich großenteils in den weit nach Westen hineinreichenden Frontbögen um Bialystok und Lemberg und Rumänien gegenüber. Die gesamten Luftstreitkräfte der Sowjetunion waren auf unzähligen Flugplätzen in unmittelbarer Nähe der Staatsgrenze zusammengezogen worden und ebenso die strategischen Vorräte der Roten Armee wie Munition, Treibstoff, Verpflegung. Die Truppen der Roten Armee, durch geheime Einberufungen praktisch im Mobilmachungszustand, waren entlang der deutschen Staatsgrenze angriffsbereit aufmarschiert.

Und während die deutsche Führung dem Ausmaß der Bedrohung auf sowjetischer Seite gegenüber fast ahnungslos war, war die sowjetische Führung durch ihre strategische Aufklärung über Stärke und Aufstellung der Truppen der Wehrmacht genau unterrichtet. Das galt insbesondere auch für die gewaltige Unterlegenheit der Deutschen in materieller Hinsicht.

Daß die Sowjetunion unmittelbar vor einem Überfall auf das Deutsche Reich stand, geht aus zahlreichen öffentlichen Reden maßgeblicher Funktionäre des Politbüros wie Kalinin, Schdanow, Berija, Schtscherbakow und anderer hervor. Alle diese Äußerungen enthüllen schonungslos, daß es Stalin eben gerade nicht um die Erhaltung des Friedens und die Sicherung des Sowjetstaates zu tun war, sondern daß er militärisch und politisch mit aller Kraft darauf hinarbeitete, einen Krieg zur Eroberung von ganz Europa vom Zaune zu brechen.

Stalin hat den deutsch-sowjetischen Krieg am 6. November 1941 als einen Vernichtungskrieg bezeichnet. Unmittelbar nach Kriegsbeginn befahl er die Erschießung aller politischen Gefangenen in den feindbedrohten Gebieten. Und noch in den Junitagen 1941 wurden Tausende von Ukrainern, Polen, Russen, aber auch von Juden und Deutschen in den Gefängnissen von Lemberg und an unzähligen anderen Orten der Sowjetunion und der von Stalin annektierten Gebiete auf bestialische Weise ermordet.---"

Helt felaktigt! källa till detta = boken "Thunder on the Dnepr" som varmt kan rekommenderas.

Ezzelino, menar du allvar? nyss påstod du att det var England som orsakade andra världskriget!?

Glädjande vittnesbörd om möjlighet till fri historieforskning i Ryssland:

http://vho.org/tr/2003/4/Strauss366-372.html

"A German order to destroy Novgorod did not exist. The population suffered under Soviet bombings. Novgorod’s church treasures were robbed by the retreating Soviet troops, and its artifacts were sunk on a ship in the Wolchow River. The world famous Novgorod monument "Thousand Year Russia" was saved by the Wehrmacht from destruction. Jasnaja Poljana, Tolstoy’s estate, was under the protection of the German Panzergruppe 2 by order of General Heinz Guderian. The 49th German Gebirgsjägerkorps proceeded against the anti-Jewish pogrom in Lemberg on June 29, 1941. After the occupation of Smolensk in 1941, the population of the local district discovered 135,000 bodies in mass graves, Russians shot by the NKVD during the ‘Chistka.’ The cathedral of Smolensk, damaged by Soviet shells, was restored during the time of German occupation and was reopened for the orthodox believers. Against the advice of the German military leadership, the masses of the rural population attached themselves to the retreating German occupation troops, when in 1944 the big retreat started.

This can be read in the latest book about Russian historical revisionism: The Great Civil War 1941-1945 (Moscow 2002, 642 pages, ISBN 5 941 38015 1). The volume, a collection of separate articles, published by the former Komsomol leader Igor Djakow, includes, among others, articles about the preventive war of June 22, 1941, in which German documents are also quoted. The timeliness of the discussion about the thesis of the preventive war is further indicated in still other new books on the Russian book market, for example Mikhail Melityukhovs 544 pages volume Stalin’s Missed Chances. The Soviet Union in the Fight for Europe 1939-1941. It was published by the well-known national-liberal publisher "Vyeche" (Thing). Different perspectives about "Barbarossa" in Germany and in Russia: While in Germany the raison d’être of the regime defines the borderline of permissible thoughts regarding the research for the cause of the war, one can observe the opposite in Russia, as put forth in The Big Civil War 1941-1945. Yes, in Russia, where a refusal to crawl to foreign dogmas does not cost the head of an historian. Djakow dedicates the book "to all Russian and German soldiers, who were killed in a war that was unleashed by the enemies of the European culture."

"In Russia rules a freedom never known before."

This judgment by the author Leo Rubinstein applies especially to political-historical publishers; otherwise the printing and sale of the Big Civil War could not be imagined. In every chapter of this book, the taboos of the Allies (Dyakov: "The white spots in our history of lies") are destroyed.---"

En recension av Wolfgang Strauss bok om "den ryska historikerstriden", dvs. den historievetenskapliga diskussionen om förspelet till andra världskriget:

http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v19/v19n6p40_Michaels.html

"No two peoples suffered more during the Second World War than the Russians and the Germans. In the carnage of that great global conflict, nothing matched the massive destruction of life and property wrought on the Eastern front by Russian and German forces fanatically driven by irreconcilable ideologies.

Now, more than 50 years after the end of the "clash of the titans," free Russian and German historians are collaborating to ascertain the historical decisions and actions that led to that bloodiest of all conflicts. Wolfgang Strauss, a respected German Slavicist and political analyst, explains this clarifying historical process in "Operation Barbarossa and the Russian Historians' Dispute," his most recent work.[note 1] He examines here the research of revisionist scholars in Russia and Germany on Stalin's role in igniting the German-Russian conflict and his efforts to expand the Soviet empire across Europe. Perhaps most importantly, he also shows how a shared understanding of the war is contributing to reconciliation between these two great European peoples.

Strauss affirms the view of German historian Ernst Nolte that Hitler's militant anti-Communism was an understandable reaction to the looming Soviet threat to Europe and humanity. Put another way, the militancy of the "fascist" movements that arose in Germany, Spain, Italy and other European countries in the 1920s and 1930s was, in essence, a response to the undisguised Bolshevik goal of dominating Europe.---

In no way does Strauss dismiss or whitewash Hitler's brutal excesses. He also holds that Hitler's racist concept of the inferiority of the Slavic peoples and his attempt to colonize their lands was not only wrong but doomed his military campaign, and ultimately the Third Reich, to failure. At the same time, Strauss stresses the monumental brutality of Soviet and international Communism. In this regard he cites The Black Book of Communism: Crimes, Terror and Repression, a recent 860-page work by French scholar Stéphane Courtois and others.[note 4]

As Courtois stresses, many American and European scholars have upheld a morally peculiar view of history that fervently condemns National Socialist Germany while maintaining a meretriciously non-judgmental "objectivity" toward Soviet Russia. But there is no hierarchy of death and suffering. As Courtois writes: "The death of a Ukrainian peasant child, deliberately exposed to starvation by the Stalinist regime, is just as important as the starvation of a child in the Warsaw Ghetto."---"

Ytterligare en recension av ett verk som omvärderar 1941 års tysk-ryska krig:

http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v18/v18n3p40_Michaels.html

"---On May 5, 1941, just seven weeks before the German attack, Stalin delivered another important speech, this one at a ceremonial banquet in the Kremlin to graduates of the Frunze Military Academy. Also attending were the members of Stalin's "inner circle," including Molotov and Beria.

During the war, von Thadden relates, the Germans reconstructed the text of this speech based on recollections of captured Soviet officers who had attended the banquet.

As von Thadden notes, a number of historians have predictably denied its authenticity, rejecting it as a product of German propaganda disinformation. However, several years ago Russian historian Lev Bezymensky found the text of a portion of the speech, which had been edited for anticipated publication, in Kremlin archives. He published this text in a 1992 issue of the scholarly journal Osteuropa.

In this speech, Stalin stressed that the recent peaceful policy of the Soviet state had played out its role. (With this policy, the Soviet Union had greatly extended its borders westward in 1939 and 1940, absorbing some 30 million people.) Now, Stalin bluntly announced, it was time to prepare for war against Germany, a conflict that would begin soon. He cited the tremendous buildup of Soviet military power, both in quantity and quality, during the last few years. The recent German "occupation" of Bulgaria, and the transfer of German troops to Finland, he went on, are "grounds for war against Germany."

Stalin said:

Our war plan is ready ... We can begin the war with Germany within the next two months ... There is a peace treaty with Germany, but this is only a deception, or rather a curtain, behind which we can openly work ...

The peaceful policy secured peace for our country ... Now, however, with our reorganized army, which is technologically well prepared for modern warfare, now that we are strong, we must now go from defense to attack.

In fully defending our country, we are obliged to act offensively. We most move from defense to a military policy of offensive action. We must reorganize our propaganda, agitation, and our press in an offensive spirit. The Red Army is a modern army, and a modern army is an offensive army.

The motto of a peaceful policy of the Soviet government is now out of date, and has been overtaken by events ... A new era in the development of the Soviet state has begun, the era of the expansion of its borders, not, as before, through a peaceful policy, but rather by force of arms. Our country has available all the necessary conditions for this.

The successes of the German army are due to the fact that it has not encountered an equally strong opponent. Some Soviet commanders have falsely overestimated the successes of the German army ...

Therefore, I propose a toast to the new era that has dawned in the development of our socialist fatherland. Long live the active offensive policy of the Soviet state!

In the face of all the new evidence that has become available in recent years, von Thadden contends here, obviously it will be necessary to reexamine the long-standing official interpretation of the war.---"