The Second World War. - Page 824

Thinkwell · June 23rd, 2018, 09:17 AM

A couple of weeks ago, there was some discussion about the killing of prisoners, and I wondered about how such a thing has been shown in popular entertainment. I have thought of three examples, all in films made long after the War. I describe two from memory, so I may not be quite correct.

Saving Private Ryan (1998)

(from memory) This concerns two soldiers, a young American, an innocent weakling, and a very tough German, a battle-hardened warrior. The German kills an American, as battle-hardened as he is, in hand-to-hand combat. Leaving the building where this has happened, he passes the weakling, but ignores him: he isn't worth killing.

Later, the German is among a group of prisoners being guarded by the young American. He has learnt the American's first name, and addresses him by name in a friendly, even intimate tone. The American suddenly turns his gun on him and shoots him dead.

In the film, one's feelings - I mean my feelings - are cleverly manipulated, and my first thought was, "Good. Now he's a man. He's killed a German." Later, I realised he had committed a crime.

Band of Brothers (2001)

On the afternoon of D-Day, a group of prisoners is being guarded in a wood, by a track, some distance from the village where the forces are now assembling. A lieutenant walks steadily away from the village alone along the track.

He offers the prisoners American cigarettes, which they take appreciatively, and lights them.

Then he kills them all. We don't see it, but hear the shots.

This incident is spoken about, and rumoured about, for the rest of the War. The lieutenant never admits or denies it, but enjoys the reputation it has given him.

Flags of our Fathers (2006)

(from memory) On Iwo Jima, a couple of prisoners are being guarded by two soldiers. They are alone. One of the soldiers says they might as well kill the prisoners, and overrides the hesitation of the other. They kill them, not in anger, or with any strong feeling, but simply because their assignment is a nuisance, and they would prefer to be doing something else.

- - - - -

I assume that the incident in Saving Private Ryan is fiction, but that the others are based more or less closely on fact.

A couple of questions occur to me. I suppose that such things could not be shown in popular entertainment for many years after the War - people did not want to know about them. So I wonder when they were first shown?

And assuming that the British and other Allies also committed such acts - have they been shown in films?

A subject for a PhD thesis, or perhaps it's already been done.

**scoundrel** · June 23rd, 2018, 10:18 AM

Allied war crimes were never documented in the sense of there being court cases, because as we all know, only the defeated party committed war crimes. But there are many things which happened which would certainly have been investigated afterwards by the Axis side had they been the winners.

There were several films made by British film companies celebrating the work of RAF Bomber Command - such as Target for Tonight; One of Our Aircraft is Missing; The Dam Dusters. Generally these films have little to say about the sheer brutality of this campaign, the horrors which it created. Any such campaign would certainly be illegal today. But Winston Churchill vetoed an attempt to have the German Blitz on Britain declared a crime, because if it was, this would mean Allied retaliation was equally a crime; and he certainly was committed to retaliating for Coventry and similar attacks.

But do you know what? The biggest law of war is "Don't lose" - because if you lose the winners will pay you out for anything you did. If you win, you get to carry on just as incompetently as you did before and to make films about the heroism of RAF Bomber Command.

BTW, those bomber crews were very brave men. It was incredibly dangerous; your chance of being killed on your first 30 mission tour of duty was well over 50%. If you survived, there would be second 30 mission tour of duty to follow after a nice rest break somewhere really safe, such as Coastal Command.

It wasn't a job for the timid or nervous of disposition.

There were other actions Britain took which could be cited as crimes. For example the anti-submarine warfare expert, Captain Frederick John Walker RN was willing to rescue German U Boat survivors. But if they refused to answer questions on his deck once rescued, he would throw them back again. He wasn't bluffing; he bloody did it. You told him what you knew or else; no messing about. FJ Walker would probably have pointed out that he was doing them a favour by rescuing them at all (plenty of Allied ships would have left German submariners to drown) and he was not taking any shit from the enemy. They would talk, or they would swim home.

**Rogerbh** · June 23rd, 2018, 05:59 PM

Regarding the from memory movie prisoner bits

Saving Private Ryan - They aren't the same German as stated in the memory. The first German - who is referenced as "Steamboat Willie" in Wikipedia - is met when Captain Miller orders an attack on a German machine gun nest protecting what looks to be a radar site. The proposed attack is resisted by several of his men, but their objections are overruled. The medic Wade dies from wounds received in this attack, putting the men into a dark mood. The above mentioned German is captured in the attack and several of the men want to kill him as they are in basically no man's land and can't really watch a prisoner. While they make the German dig a grave for Wade (and two unknown Americans who had been killed by the MG nest previously) it becomes quite apparent that some of the Americans want to kill the German. The first German starts to speak in broken English about how he loves America and hates Hitler. Since Upham, the innocent weakling described in the earlier post speaks German, the first German begs him in German to spare him. Upham is one of the primary reasons why Captain Miller lets the German go. This first German is a Wehrmacht soldier.

The second German, who speaks no English, overpowers and kills the smaller Mellish in close quarters combat with Mellish's own bayonet in the final battle of the movie. The second German is an SS soldier. Upham is nearby and too scared to intervene. Why the German afterwards doesn't kill Upham as Upham stands quaking in his boots puzzled me. I guessed that since Upham didn't interfere in the man on man fight with Mellish, the German repaid him by letting him alone. The memory's view that he left him alone because he was harmless and not worth killing is probably a good or better reason. All I remember is that I hated Upham from that moment on.

The first German later reappears in this subsequent fight and he is shown shooting Captain Miller who will eventually die from these wounds. Since Upham was cowering in a depression, I didn't think he saw this. He does later surprise the group of Germans and forces them to drop their weapons. The first German recognizes his savior and calls him by name. Upham responses by killing him. I thought this was because the first German hadn't surrender to other Allied troops and was still in the fight. Upham does let the other Germans go which didn't make much sense to me as American reinforcements were pouring into the battlefield.

The third memory I thought was from the companion piece - Letters from Iwo Jima - where the ex-Kempeitai Shimizu was executed by his guard. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Letters_from_Iwo_Jima I don't remember that scene in Flags of our Fathers.

**Rogerbh** · June 23rd, 2018, 06:16 PM

Regarding Allied troops killing surrendering enemies - I recall in Men in War (1957) Aldo Ray's character kills a surrendering N Korean - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Men_in_War - against orders, but it is shown the N Korean had a pistol in his hat.

In the Dirty Dozen (1967) an order is given to free the French and kill the Germans - so offscreen two Germans are presumably executed.

In Breaker Morant (1980) the order to "Don't hamper the column with prisoners" is heard and following the order to execute Boer prisoners is eventually rewarded with being executed yourself.

Don't remember any earlier movies with such scenes.

**Dr Pepper** · June 23rd, 2018, 09:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rogerbh

In Breaker Morant (1980) the order to "Not hamper the column with prisoners" is heard and following the order to execute Boer prisoners is eventually rewarded with being executed yourself.

Don't remember any earlier movies with such scenes.

IMO Edward Woodward's performance in the title role was his finest performance in a movie-interestingly it was the ill feeling generated by his (Breaker Morant's) and Peter Hancock's execution at the hands of the British military authorities in South Africa that ensured Australian forces would not subsequently be placed under British military discipline ever again-New Zealand-which also had a sizeable contingent in the Boer War-did not have the same experience-and as a result several NZ soldiers were shot by British firing squads for various offences in WW1, whereas Australians were not....

**scoundrel** · June 24th, 2018, 07:16 AM

In the same way that some personal things are "unmentionable" [yet people keep giving me information I really don't need]; the killing of POWs in war is rather a guilty secret. I think it went on in WW2 a lot more than is acknowledged. After all, if I myself personally shot a POW without an extremely valid and compelling reason, I would not go shooting my mouth off about it, and I would prefer not to do it in full view of others, not even if I thought I could trust them to cover up for me.

Surrendering in any war is dangerous. Usually you will do it because you have no other choice except certain death. It is actually a soldier's duty to live as long as he can because while he remains alive he may yet experience better fortune (e.g.escape later) - but all the dead are dead alike. When the other choice is death and without even the option of taking one of the enemy with you, then it is logical and not at all dishonourable to surrender. But it is also rather logical that the enemy will kill you if you are a nuisance to them; you are counting on the universal social contract between human beings which prohibits murder in cold blood. If you are not killed at once, there's a very good chance that the enemy will stand by this taboo against premeditated murder in cold blood and will let you live on, though perhaps not very comfortably; however you would be naive to count on it. If Captain FJ Walker asks you what U Boat are you from, FFS just tell him.

**Mal Hombre** · June 24th, 2018, 08:57 AM

In the case of Capt. Walker,He like all convoy escort commanders would have seen British Merchant Seamen who had been left to die in the icy waters of the North Atlantic, That would Strain the quality of Your mercy.

If You know that Your enemy strings up their prisoners for bayonet practice,You aren't
going to be inclined to take any of Them alive.

Talk of taking "One of Them with You" evokes memories of the Great War maxim,"Too Late,Mate" When a German tried to surrender after carrying on killing til the last minute -And got a bayonet for His pains.

**rupertramjet** · June 24th, 2018, 11:39 AM

In the height of battle you are not the person you were before, or the person you will be afterwards, when the blood cools and the adrenaline level lowers, the incident involving a senior NCO of the Royal Marines killing a Taliban prisoner who was close to death is a complex example, he was wearing a helmet camera, so it was being filmed, but in the stress of the situation he ignored that, the outcome was that he was convicted at courts martial and imprisoned, the public outcry and the subsequent diagnosis of a mental health condition which effected him at that precise time, has caused that to be overturned and him to be released. As a squaddie my sympathy is with the bootneck, as a former senior officer my view becomes seriously complicated, can this be seen by others as an excuse, an option, to ignore the rules and kill prisoners? If he is seen to walk away scot free, then will others follow his example and use him as an excuse, complicated! He had been involved in a serious firefight at the time, although technically that was over, yet another question!

Without doubt there were incidents of prisoners being shot out of hand, and I can not argue with any of the comments above, but to answer the question posed, I think the general public today, is much better educated, far more savvy and switched on, but most importantly I think post war, nobody wanted to even consider that their Dad or husband, brother or uncle had murdered prisoners, which is I think the main reason producers and writers would have created a taboo around the subject!

**Rogerbh** · June 24th, 2018, 03:35 PM

There is a scene in Saving Private Ryan where two German soldiers have their hands up and try to surrender to Americans who minutes before were being slaughtered on Omaha beach.

https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-e...-a7582926.html

When the Americans gunned them down, a woman behind me in the audience gasped and said "NO!" rather loudly. Most people in the audience snickered. It is interesting to know now that he was speaking Czech - “Please don’t shoot me! I am not German, I am Czech, I didn’t kill anyone! I am Czech!" I didn't wonder why Spielberg failed to subtitle that part - I was only wondering why they would shoot them like that when American soldiers were behind the Germans and could be hit by the rounds as they passed through the targets.

I wonder now if the lady understood Czech.

Thinkwell · June 25th, 2018, 07:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by scoundrel

it is logical and not at all dishonourable to surrender. But it is also rather logical that the enemy will kill you if you are a nuisance to them; you are counting on the universal social contract between human beings which prohibits murder in cold blood. If you are not killed at once, there's a very good chance that the enemy will stand by this taboo . . . however you would be naive to count on it.

This partly summarises why the subject is so interesting. The law on the treatment of POWs is such a crazy anomaly. One moment, your duty is to wound or kill these men, the next it is to give them food and shelter, and even treat the wounds that you have caused. The law is written by scholars - lawyers, ethicists, and philosophers - but it cannot be scholarly in practice.

Quote:

the killing of POWs in war is rather a guilty secret. I think it went on in WW2 a lot more than is acknowledged.

And torture, too, I suppose - of prisoners, in cold blood, for information; and, in hot blood, for revenge.

June 23rd, 2018, 09:17 AM	#8231
Thinkwell Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2013 Posts: 192 Thanks: 1,554 Thanked 2,263 Times in 193 Posts	American soldiers killing POWs, as seen in films and on television A couple of weeks ago, there was some discussion about the killing of prisoners, and I wondered about how such a thing has been shown in popular entertainment. I have thought of three examples, all in films made long after the War. I describe two from memory, so I may not be quite correct. Saving Private Ryan (1998) (from memory) This concerns two soldiers, a young American, an innocent weakling, and a very tough German, a battle-hardened warrior. The German kills an American, as battle-hardened as he is, in hand-to-hand combat. Leaving the building where this has happened, he passes the weakling, but ignores him: he isn't worth killing. Later, the German is among a group of prisoners being guarded by the young American. He has learnt the American's first name, and addresses him by name in a friendly, even intimate tone. The American suddenly turns his gun on him and shoots him dead. In the film, one's feelings - I mean my feelings - are cleverly manipulated, and my first thought was, "Good. Now he's a man. He's killed a German." Later, I realised he had committed a crime. Band of Brothers (2001) On the afternoon of D-Day, a group of prisoners is being guarded in a wood, by a track, some distance from the village where the forces are now assembling. A lieutenant walks steadily away from the village alone along the track. He offers the prisoners American cigarettes, which they take appreciatively, and lights them. Then he kills them all. We don't see it, but hear the shots. This incident is spoken about, and rumoured about, for the rest of the War. The lieutenant never admits or denies it, but enjoys the reputation it has given him. Flags of our Fathers (2006) (from memory) On Iwo Jima, a couple of prisoners are being guarded by two soldiers. They are alone. One of the soldiers says they might as well kill the prisoners, and overrides the hesitation of the other. They kill them, not in anger, or with any strong feeling, but simply because their assignment is a nuisance, and they would prefer to be doing something else. - - - - - I assume that the incident in Saving Private Ryan is fiction, but that the others are based more or less closely on fact. A couple of questions occur to me. I suppose that such things could not be shown in popular entertainment for many years after the War - people did not want to know about them. So I wonder when they were first shown? And assuming that the British and other Allies also committed such acts - have they been shown in films? A subject for a PhD thesis, or perhaps it's already been done.

June 23rd, 2018, 10:18 AM	#8232
scoundrel Super Moderator Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: England Posts: 26,246 Thanks: 162,418 Thanked 278,571 Times in 26,190 Posts	Allied war crimes were never documented in the sense of there being court cases, because as we all know, only the defeated party committed war crimes. But there are many things which happened which would certainly have been investigated afterwards by the Axis side had they been the winners. There were several films made by British film companies celebrating the work of RAF Bomber Command - such as Target for Tonight; One of Our Aircraft is Missing; The Dam Dusters. Generally these films have little to say about the sheer brutality of this campaign, the horrors which it created. Any such campaign would certainly be illegal today. But Winston Churchill vetoed an attempt to have the German Blitz on Britain declared a crime, because if it was, this would mean Allied retaliation was equally a crime; and he certainly was committed to retaliating for Coventry and similar attacks. But do you know what? The biggest law of war is "Don't lose" - because if you lose the winners will pay you out for anything you did. If you win, you get to carry on just as incompetently as you did before and to make films about the heroism of RAF Bomber Command. BTW, those bomber crews were very brave men. It was incredibly dangerous; your chance of being killed on your first 30 mission tour of duty was well over 50%. If you survived, there would be second 30 mission tour of duty to follow after a nice rest break somewhere really safe, such as Coastal Command. It wasn't a job for the timid or nervous of disposition. There were other actions Britain took which could be cited as crimes. For example the anti-submarine warfare expert, Captain Frederick John Walker RN was willing to rescue German U Boat survivors. But if they refused to answer questions on his deck once rescued, he would throw them back again. He wasn't bluffing; he bloody did it. You told him what you knew or else; no messing about. FJ Walker would probably have pointed out that he was doing them a favour by rescuing them at all (plenty of Allied ships would have left German submariners to drown) and he was not taking any shit from the enemy. They would talk, or they would swim home. __________________ To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

June 23rd, 2018, 06:16 PM	#8234
Rogerbh Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Land of the free within reasonable limitations Posts: 10,920 Thanks: 50,549 Thanked 91,274 Times in 10,768 Posts	Regarding Allied troops killing surrendering enemies - I recall in Men in War (1957) Aldo Ray's character kills a surrendering N Korean - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Men_in_War - against orders, but it is shown the N Korean had a pistol in his hat. In the Dirty Dozen (1967) an order is given to free the French and kill the Germans - so offscreen two Germans are presumably executed. In Breaker Morant (1980) the order to "Don't hamper the column with prisoners" is heard and following the order to execute Boer prisoners is eventually rewarded with being executed yourself. Don't remember any earlier movies with such scenes. Last edited by Rogerbh; June 24th, 2018 at 06:45 AM.. Reason: Don't not Not

June 24th, 2018, 07:16 AM	#8236
scoundrel Super Moderator Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: England Posts: 26,246 Thanks: 162,418 Thanked 278,571 Times in 26,190 Posts	In the same way that some personal things are "unmentionable" [yet people keep giving me information I really don't need]; the killing of POWs in war is rather a guilty secret. I think it went on in WW2 a lot more than is acknowledged. After all, if I myself personally shot a POW without an extremely valid and compelling reason, I would not go shooting my mouth off about it, and I would prefer not to do it in full view of others, not even if I thought I could trust them to cover up for me. Surrendering in any war is dangerous. Usually you will do it because you have no other choice except certain death. It is actually a soldier's duty to live as long as he can because while he remains alive he may yet experience better fortune (e.g.escape later) - but all the dead are dead alike. When the other choice is death and without even the option of taking one of the enemy with you, then it is logical and not at all dishonourable to surrender. But it is also rather logical that the enemy will kill you if you are a nuisance to them; you are counting on the universal social contract between human beings which prohibits murder in cold blood. If you are not killed at once, there's a very good chance that the enemy will stand by this taboo against premeditated murder in cold blood and will let you live on, though perhaps not very comfortably; however you would be naive to count on it. If Captain FJ Walker asks you what U Boat are you from, FFS just tell him. __________________ To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

June 24th, 2018, 08:57 AM	#8237
Mal Hombre El Super Moderador Join Date: May 2009 Location: Adoptive Monkey Hanger Posts: 58,144 Thanks: 772,793 Thanked 855,911 Times in 57,575 Posts	In the case of Capt. Walker,He like all convoy escort commanders would have seen British Merchant Seamen who had been left to die in the icy waters of the North Atlantic, That would Strain the quality of Your mercy. If You know that Your enemy strings up their prisoners for bayonet practice,You aren't going to be inclined to take any of Them alive. Talk of taking "One of Them with You" evokes memories of the Great War maxim,"Too Late,Mate" When a German tried to surrender after carrying on killing til the last minute -And got a bayonet for His pains. __________________ To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. If in doubt, Just ask Yourself What Would Max Do ? It is a porn site,But its a Classy porn site. To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

June 23rd, 2018, 05:59 PM	#8233
Rogerbh Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Land of the free within reasonable limitations Posts: 10,920 Thanks: 50,549 Thanked 91,274 Times in 10,768 Posts	Regarding the from memory movie prisoner bits Saving Private Ryan - They aren't the same German as stated in the memory. The first German - who is referenced as "Steamboat Willie" in Wikipedia - is met when Captain Miller orders an attack on a German machine gun nest protecting what looks to be a radar site. The proposed attack is resisted by several of his men, but their objections are overruled. The medic Wade dies from wounds received in this attack, putting the men into a dark mood. The above mentioned German is captured in the attack and several of the men want to kill him as they are in basically no man's land and can't really watch a prisoner. While they make the German dig a grave for Wade (and two unknown Americans who had been killed by the MG nest previously) it becomes quite apparent that some of the Americans want to kill the German. The first German starts to speak in broken English about how he loves America and hates Hitler. Since Upham, the innocent weakling described in the earlier post speaks German, the first German begs him in German to spare him. Upham is one of the primary reasons why Captain Miller lets the German go. This first German is a Wehrmacht soldier. The second German, who speaks no English, overpowers and kills the smaller Mellish in close quarters combat with Mellish's own bayonet in the final battle of the movie. The second German is an SS soldier. Upham is nearby and too scared to intervene. Why the German afterwards doesn't kill Upham as Upham stands quaking in his boots puzzled me. I guessed that since Upham didn't interfere in the man on man fight with Mellish, the German repaid him by letting him alone. The memory's view that he left him alone because he was harmless and not worth killing is probably a good or better reason. All I remember is that I hated Upham from that moment on. The first German later reappears in this subsequent fight and he is shown shooting Captain Miller who will eventually die from these wounds. Since Upham was cowering in a depression, I didn't think he saw this. He does later surprise the group of Germans and forces them to drop their weapons. The first German recognizes his savior and calls him by name. Upham responses by killing him. I thought this was because the first German hadn't surrender to other Allied troops and was still in the fight. Upham does let the other Germans go which didn't make much sense to me as American reinforcements were pouring into the battlefield. The third memory I thought was from the companion piece - Letters from Iwo Jima - where the ex-Kempeitai Shimizu was executed by his guard. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Letters_from_Iwo_Jima I don't remember that scene in Flags of our Fathers.

June 24th, 2018, 11:39 AM	#8238
rupertramjet R.I.P. Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Cloud cuckoo land Posts: 4,300 Thanks: 26,852 Thanked 54,117 Times in 4,288 Posts	In the height of battle you are not the person you were before, or the person you will be afterwards, when the blood cools and the adrenaline level lowers, the incident involving a senior NCO of the Royal Marines killing a Taliban prisoner who was close to death is a complex example, he was wearing a helmet camera, so it was being filmed, but in the stress of the situation he ignored that, the outcome was that he was convicted at courts martial and imprisoned, the public outcry and the subsequent diagnosis of a mental health condition which effected him at that precise time, has caused that to be overturned and him to be released. As a squaddie my sympathy is with the bootneck, as a former senior officer my view becomes seriously complicated, can this be seen by others as an excuse, an option, to ignore the rules and kill prisoners? If he is seen to walk away scot free, then will others follow his example and use him as an excuse, complicated! He had been involved in a serious firefight at the time, although technically that was over, yet another question! Without doubt there were incidents of prisoners being shot out of hand, and I can not argue with any of the comments above, but to answer the question posed, I think the general public today, is much better educated, far more savvy and switched on, but most importantly I think post war, nobody wanted to even consider that their Dad or husband, brother or uncle had murdered prisoners, which is I think the main reason producers and writers would have created a taboo around the subject!

June 24th, 2018, 03:35 PM	#8239
Rogerbh Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Land of the free within reasonable limitations Posts: 10,920 Thanks: 50,549 Thanked 91,274 Times in 10,768 Posts	There is a scene in Saving Private Ryan where two German soldiers have their hands up and try to surrender to Americans who minutes before were being slaughtered on Omaha beach. https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-e...-a7582926.html When the Americans gunned them down, a woman behind me in the audience gasped and said "NO!" rather loudly. Most people in the audience snickered. It is interesting to know now that he was speaking Czech - “Please don’t shoot me! I am not German, I am Czech, I didn’t kill anyone! I am Czech!" I didn't wonder why Spielberg failed to subtitle that part - I was only wondering why they would shoot them like that when American soldiers were behind the Germans and could be hit by the rounds as they passed through the targets. I wonder now if the lady understood Czech.