why is Rommel admired by some people?

Discussions on High Command, strategy and the Armed Forces (Wehrmacht) in general.
User avatar
Yuri
Member
Posts: 1327
Joined: 01 Jun 2006 11:24
Location: Russia

Re: why is Rommel admired by some people?

Post by Yuri » 12 Apr 2020 15:45

Aida1 wrote:
12 Apr 2020 14:53

You could at most apply the notion bombardment to tactical air bombardment of a city defended by ground forces. The indiscriminate strategic bombardment of enemy cities in the midst of a country far away from any fighting was something that was not imagined yet in 1907 . Even In 1945 the bombing of Dresden was very controversial . The type of bombing practiced by US bombers achieved more and killed much less civilians.
Actions of officers have to be judged without hindsight and for German officers Hitler was the legal head of state of Germany. No reason to depose him.
You would be hard put to find evidence that Hitler did not have the support of the people.
I wonder what You can say about the bombing of Kiev on June 22, 1941, In the morning without a Declaration of war? or the bombing of Moscow on July 22, 1941, in particular the territory of the Kremlin?
Are these bombings justified by the tactical situation? or banal terrorism?

Sid Guttridge
Member
Posts: 7441
Joined: 12 Jun 2008 11:19

Re: why is Rommel admired by some people?

Post by Sid Guttridge » 12 Apr 2020 17:02

Hi Aida1,

You post, "You could at most apply the notion bombardment to tactical air bombardment of a city defended by ground forces." Why? As explained twice above, the Hague Conventions don't specify what weapons can or cannot be used or where they can be delivered from. They just specify that the bombardment of a place declared "Open", and acting in conformity with that, is illegal. Dresden could have been declared "Open" but Hitler would not countenance that anywhere, not just there.

You say, "The indiscriminate strategic bombardment of enemy cities in the midst of a country far away from any fighting was something that was not imagined yet in 1907." It was imagined by the German military, who were sponsoring (if reluctant to pay for) the development of the Zeppelin, three of which already existed in 1907, but it was still apparently remote. Yet, within eight years Zeppelins were undertaking "strategic bombardment of enemy cities in the midst of a country far away from any fighting".

You say, "Even In 1945 the bombing of Dresden was very controversial." Yup, it was even raised in the British parliament and reflects well on British society that this could be discussed openly even while the war was still on. (I see no equivalent public soul searching in Nazi Germany. Do you?) However, it doesn't mean the controversy was justified. In fact, it was a triumph for Goebels, because it was based on his massively falsified 250,000 dead announcement. As already explained to you above, Dresden was full of dozens of legitimate targets and, as long as it wasn't declared "Open" and the war continued, it was an entirely legitimate target.

You post, "The type of bombing practiced by US bombers achieved more and killed much less civilians." The former is certainly true of the targeting of oil and ball bearing production, but again I would ask where is your hard evidence that they killed less civilians? In many major raids the Americans bombed in daylight exactly the same area targets as the British did at night, including at Dresden. Even in daylight, only the first bombers on target might have, weather permitting, have a clear view of it.

You post, "Actions of officers have to be judged without hindsight and for German officers Hitler was the legal head of state of Germany." Nope. All judgements of any sort can only ever be in hindsight. (Prejudgement is not generally recommended.) That said, it is true that for most "German officers Hitler was the legal head of state of Germany." Whether they were right to be so unquestioning is another matter.

You post, "No reason to depose him." Hmmmm. the so-called "Holocaust" doesn't give you pause to question that? General Blaskowitz was already questioning the SS's murder of Jews in Poland before the end of 1939! Was he wrong to do so? I don't think so. Do you?

You post, "You would be hard put to find evidence that Hitler did not have the support of the people." Similarly, in the absence of any freely contested elections or independent opinion polls, you would be hard pushed to definitively prove the opposite. However, anecdotage tends to indicate that Hitler probably did have clear majority support among Germans in the second half of the 1930s, and very probably significantly more than the minority of votes he turned into outright dictatorship in 1933. More fool them!

Cheers,

Sid.

User avatar
Aida1
Member
Posts: 1013
Joined: 04 Aug 2019 08:46
Location: Brussels

Re: why is Rommel admired by some people?

Post by Aida1 » 12 Apr 2020 17:58

Sid Guttridge wrote:
12 Apr 2020 17:02
Hi Aida1,

You post, "You could at most apply the notion bombardment to tactical air bombardment of a city defended by ground forces." Why? As explained twice above, the Hague Conventions don't specify what weapons can or cannot be used or where they can be delivered from. They just specify that the bombardment of a place declared "Open", and acting in conformity with that, is illegal. Dresden could have been declared "Open" but Hitler would not countenance that anywhere, not just there.

You say, "The indiscriminate strategic bombardment of enemy cities in the midst of a country far away from any fighting was something that was not imagined yet in 1907." It was imagined by the German military, who were sponsoring (if reluctant to pay for) the development of the Zeppelin, three of which already existed in 1907, but it was still apparently remote. Yet, within eight years Zeppelins were undertaking "strategic bombardment of enemy cities in the midst of a country far away from any fighting".

You say, "Even In 1945 the bombing of Dresden was very controversial." Yup, it was even raised in the British parliament and reflects well on British society that this could be discussed openly even while the war was still on. (I see no equivalent public soul searching in Nazi Germany. Do you?) However, it doesn't mean the controversy was justified. In fact, it was a triumph for Goebels, because it was based on his massively falsified 250,000 dead announcement. As already explained to you above, Dresden was full of dozens of legitimate targets and, as long as it wasn't declared "Open" and the war continued, it was an entirely legitimate target.

You post, "The type of bombing practiced by US bombers achieved more and killed much less civilians." The former is certainly true of the targeting of oil and ball bearing production, but again I would ask where is your hard evidence that they killed less civilians? In many major raids the Americans bombed in daylight exactly the same area targets as the British did at night, including at Dresden. Even in daylight, only the first bombers on target have might, weather permitting, have a clear view of it.

You post, "Actions of officers have to be judged without hindsight and for German officers Hitler was the legal head of state of Germany." Nope. All judgements of any sort can only ever be in hindsight. (Prejudgement is not generally recommended.) That said, it is true that for most "German officers Hitler was the legal head of state of Germany." Whether they were right to be so unquestioning is another matter.

You post, "No reason to depose him." Hmmmm. the so-called "Holocaust" doesn't give you pause to question that? General Blaskowitz was already questioning the SS's murder of Jews in Poland before the end of 1939! Was he wrong to do so? I don't think so. Do you?

You post, "You would be hard put to find evidence that Hitler did not have the support of the people." Similarly, in the absence of any freely contested elections or independent opinion polls, you would be hard pushed to definitively prove the opposite. However, anecdotage tends to indicate that Hitler probably did have clear majority support among Germans in the second half of the 1930s, and very probably significantly more than the minority of votes he turned into outright dictatorship in 1933. More fool them!

Cheers,

Sid.
You are still ignoring that the rules of 1907 were completely outdated by ww2. So trying to invoke them to defend carpet bombing cities is very silly. Actually, there was a court case in Japan which ended with a judgement in 1963 (the Shimoda et al v. The state case) in which the District court of Tokyo applied the Hague convention on aerial warfare and clearly defined what was allowed and not. It concluded that blind aerial bombardment is only permitted in the immediate vicinity of the operation of land forces. A city even with defense installations and armed forces cannot be considered a defended city if it is far from the front and not in immediate danger of occupation by the enemy. The court therefore considered the bombing of Hirioshima and Nagasaki illegal acts.https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Special: ... _The_State Very interesting and a very correct application of the spirit of the The Hague convention on aerial warfare.
And German officers had no reason at all to not consider Hitler the legal head of state. They did not really like the wording of the oath but that is a side issue.
You Will have difficulty finding historians that would pretend Hitler had no wide support along the German people.
Last edited by Aida1 on 12 Apr 2020 18:27, edited 2 times in total.

ljadw
Member
Posts: 10273
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: why is Rommel admired by some people?

Post by ljadw » 12 Apr 2020 18:04

Sid Guttridge wrote:
12 Apr 2020 14:44
Hi ljadw,

I don't think money was a primary motive for the German officer corps. Nationalism, however, was.

As they shared their nationalism with Hitler, they became his fellow travellers in a joint enterprise. Unfortunately for their reputations, the Nazi side of this joint enterprise came to include such unsavoury activities as attempting to kill every Jew to hand. However, they were already committed to the joint enterprise and the primacy of their nationalism made it difficut for them to detach themselves from it and Hitler, and very few did so.

Cheers,

Sid.
I did not say that they followed him because of the money they received from him ,but that he bought their loyalty, or tried to buy their loyalty . Napoleon did the same with his generals , And after the death of Hitler, his generals said that he alone was responsible for the holocaust and the defeat, that he was a criminal and an incompetent one, but they hided the millions they received from the Führer and did not give them back .
It is even worse : the military commanders in the East never officially protested against the mass murders from the SS and never resigned . It was the opposite : they exhorted their men to kill Jews and Russians and to help the SS ,what they did ( see Babi Yar )
Leeb received a big estate in Bavaria,was fired in 1942 but still congratulated Hitler for having escaped from the attempt to kill him in July 1944 .Something he hided wisely after the war when he cursed Hitler for the defeat .

User avatar
Aida1
Member
Posts: 1013
Joined: 04 Aug 2019 08:46
Location: Brussels

Re: why is Rommel admired by some people?

Post by Aida1 » 12 Apr 2020 18:12

ljadw wrote:
12 Apr 2020 18:04
Sid Guttridge wrote:
12 Apr 2020 14:44
Hi ljadw,

I don't think money was a primary motive for the German officer corps. Nationalism, however, was.

As they shared their nationalism with Hitler, they became his fellow travellers in a joint enterprise. Unfortunately for their reputations, the Nazi side of this joint enterprise came to include such unsavoury activities as attempting to kill every Jew to hand. However, they were already committed to the joint enterprise and the primacy of their nationalism made it difficut for them to detach themselves from it and Hitler, and very few did so.

Cheers,

Sid.
I did not say that they followed him because of the money they received from him ,but that he bought their loyalty, or tried to buy their loyalty . Napoleon did the same with his generals , And after the death of Hitler, his generals said that he alone was responsible for the holocaust and the defeat, that he was a criminal and an incompetent one, but they hided the millions they received from the Führer and did not give them back .
It is even worse : the military commanders in the East never officially protested against the mass murders from the SS and never resigned . It was the opposite : they exhorted their men to kill Jews and Russians and to help the SS ,what they did ( see Babi Yar )
Leeb received a big estate in Bavaria,was fired in 1942 but still congratulated Hitler for having escaped from the attempt to kill him in July 1944 .Something he hided wisely after the war when he cursed Hitler for the defeat .
Hitler rewarded some of his commanders and Napoleon was not the only other one who did that. There was a lot of historical precedent for this practice. And you are again simplifying what hitlers generals write after the war without giving any source or quote which is not surprising. And Hitler was responsible for the Holocaust because he ordered it. You cannot deny that.

User avatar
Andy H
Forum Staff
Posts: 15127
Joined: 12 Mar 2002 20:51
Location: UK and USA

Re: why is Rommel admired by some people?

Post by Andy H » 12 Apr 2020 18:15

Hi All

Can we please keep the thread focused on the question at hand, as were wondering way off and if continues the thread will be locked

Regards

Andy H

User avatar
Yuri
Member
Posts: 1327
Joined: 01 Jun 2006 11:24
Location: Russia

Re: why is Rommel admired by some people?

Post by Yuri » 12 Apr 2020 18:40

Andy H wrote:
12 Apr 2020 18:15
Hi All

Can we please keep the thread focused on the question at hand, as were wondering way off and if continues the thread will be locked

Regards

Andy H
Field Marshal Rommel-an outstanding military leader is the product of Dr. Goebels.
Field Marshal Rommel's most outstanding achievement was that he died on time.
Rommel received the rank of field Marshal for the fact that in the Red Army would not have given the rank of Lieutenant Colonel

User avatar
Aida1
Member
Posts: 1013
Joined: 04 Aug 2019 08:46
Location: Brussels

Re: why is Rommel admired by some people?

Post by Aida1 » 12 Apr 2020 18:47

Yuri wrote:
12 Apr 2020 18:40
Andy H wrote:
12 Apr 2020 18:15
Hi All

Can we please keep the thread focused on the question at hand, as were wondering way off and if continues the thread will be locked

Regards

Andy H
Field Marshal Rommel-an outstanding military leader is the product of Dr. Goebels.
Field Marshal Rommel's most outstanding achievement was that he died on time.
Rommel received the rank of field Marshal for the fact that in the Red Army would not have given the rank of Lieutenant Colonel
Oh really. :lol: i call this an unsourced personal opinion. Obviously you are not biased against Rommel :lol: I think Rommels biographers have more balanced views on him. You should read them.

Peter89
Member
Posts: 429
Joined: 28 Aug 2018 05:52
Location: Hungary

Re: why is Rommel admired by some people?

Post by Peter89 » 12 Apr 2020 18:58

Yuri wrote:
12 Apr 2020 18:40

Field Marshal Rommel-an outstanding military leader is the product of Dr. Goebels.
Field Marshal Rommel's most outstanding achievement was that he died on time.
Rommel received the rank of field Marshal for the fact that in the Red Army would not have given the rank of Lieutenant Colonel
Hardly the product of Göbbels. He is rather a product of the Anglo-Saxon literature.

His military achievements were not marginal, but he wasn't a hero as a lot of historians depict him in the Anglosphere.

I can't understand how did you make that comparison with his otherwise indeed funny promotion.

Leprechaun
Member
Posts: 33
Joined: 21 Feb 2018 09:44
Location: Cardiff

Re: why is Rommel admired by some people?

Post by Leprechaun » 12 Apr 2020 19:06

I thought it was the UK war time press that gave him his fame in Africa ?
Why can you not give a balanced view of Rommel if you have read all the biographers Aida ?

Tom from Cornwall
Member
Posts: 2093
Joined: 01 May 2006 19:52
Location: UK

Re: why is Rommel admired by some people?

Post by Tom from Cornwall » 12 Apr 2020 19:23

Peter89 wrote:
12 Apr 2020 18:58

His military achievements were not marginal
But, in the end, weren't all his so-called "military achievements" on behalf of Hitler's Nazi Germany very much "marginal"?

Regards

Tom

User avatar
Aida1
Member
Posts: 1013
Joined: 04 Aug 2019 08:46
Location: Brussels

Re: why is Rommel admired by some people?

Post by Aida1 » 12 Apr 2020 19:45

Leprechaun wrote:
12 Apr 2020 19:06
I thought it was the UK war time press that gave him his fame in Africa ?
Why can you not give a balanced view of Rommel if you have read all the biographers Aida ?
No. They only reported what he actually did which was impressive. Everybody does his own reading.

User avatar
Aida1
Member
Posts: 1013
Joined: 04 Aug 2019 08:46
Location: Brussels

Re: why is Rommel admired by some people?

Post by Aida1 » 12 Apr 2020 19:49

Tom from Cornwall wrote:
12 Apr 2020 19:23
Peter89 wrote:
12 Apr 2020 18:58

His military achievements were not marginal
But, in the end, weren't all his so-called "military achievements" on behalf of Hitler's Nazi Germany very much "marginal"?

Regards

Tom
With the limited means at his disposal he achieved a lot in Africa. It is because he has a lot of admirors that he comes in for a lot of flak on internetforums.

Sid Guttridge
Member
Posts: 7441
Joined: 12 Jun 2008 11:19

Re: why is Rommel admired by some people?

Post by Sid Guttridge » 12 Apr 2020 19:53

Hi Aida1,

You post, "You are still ignoring that the rules of 1907 were completely outdated by ww2." Outdated or not, they were still in force. We still have laws in the UK that are hundreds of years old. For example, Habeus Corpus is over 800 years old and yet remains valid.

You post, "So trying to invoke them to defend carpet bombing cities is very silly." The bombing was justified because of the dozens of military targets in Dresden, some of which I have listed for you above. Hitler could have stopped the bombing, or at least have gained some badly needed moral high ground if it had continued, by declaring the city "Open" under the Hague Conventions and stopping all military activity there. He did not do so there, or anywhere else. This makes Dresden's fate ultimately his responsibility. He was prepared to see the destruction of every city in Germany just to buy himself a little extra life.

Dresden still administered 8% of German Army manpower, had 19 military depots, barracks and headquarters, carried the only north-south railway line still in German hands behind the front east of Berlin, produced most of the optics used in Luftwaffe bomb sights, Heer artillery range finders and Kriegsmarine periscopes and was defended by anti-aircraft artillery. How much more legitimate a target could Dresden be?

The Japanese case has no legal bearing in Germany, the UK or USA and was about the use of atom bombs in Japan, not conventional bombing.

You post, "And German officers had no reason at all to not consider Hitler the legal head of state." Maybe, maybe not, at the time, but we have no excuse now that we have fuller facts.

You post, "They did not really like the wording of the oath but that is a side issue." Given that almost all of them had already taken at least one previous oath, and many three previous oaths, it rather looks as though they thought so too! And yet almost all of them stuck by their oath to Hitler personally.

You post, "You Will have difficulty finding historians that would pretend Hitler had no wide support along the German people." We are not in disagreement there.

Cheers,

Sid
Last edited by Sid Guttridge on 12 Apr 2020 20:02, edited 1 time in total.

Tom from Cornwall
Member
Posts: 2093
Joined: 01 May 2006 19:52
Location: UK

Re: why is Rommel admired by some people?

Post by Tom from Cornwall » 12 Apr 2020 19:57

Aida1 wrote:
12 Apr 2020 19:49

With the limited means at his disposal he achieved a lot in Africa.
Really, I thought he ended up losing an entire army?

Regards

Tom

Return to “German Strategy & General German Military Discussion”