Germans Demand Apology for War

Post by **spiderfrommars** » Fri Oct 29, 2004 12:12 pm

I got this off aol news:

"The Queen is being urged to apologise to the German people for Allied bombing raids carried out during Second World War.

A major German newspaper piled pressure on the monarch, just days before a state visit, with pictures of the bombing of Dresden and the headline “Will the Queen finally say sorry?”

The inflammatory move is believed to be part of a greater clamour among German politicians and diplomats to get Britain to apologise.

The demands have outraged ex-servicemen and women across the UK, many of whom risked their lives on a daily basis in the fight against Hitler.

War veterans groups were almost unanimous in their condemnation of the Germans' call for an apology.

Peter Storrar, from the RAF’s 610 Squadron Association, said: “They started it and reaped the whirlwind.

“I remember seeing Liverpool absolutely devastated and it was like that all over Britain.”

Col John Goodsir, vice-chairman of the Air Crew Association, said: “The majority of our members who served in the Second World War would not favour the idea of the Queen saying sorry.”

The Queen, who lived in London during the Blitz, is due to begin a royal visit on Tuesday.

She will attend a charity performance of the Berlin Philharmonic intended to raise cash for the restoration of Dresden Cathedral.

The Dresden raids in 1945 claimed about 40,000 German lives.

They were designed to crack German morale with wave upon wave of British and US bombers resulting in firestorms on the ground from which there was no escape.

Supporters say the raids hastened the end of the war, but critics say they may not have been tactically necessary."

So what do you think?

Optimus Prime Rib · Post by **Optimus Prime Rib** » Fri Oct 29, 2004 12:20 pm

F*** them. Its ok to commit genocide but if someone fights back they want an apology? Is Germany planning on sending a hallmark card and some flowers to Israel and saying "our bad". Wouldnt change anything.

Impactor returns 2.0 · Post by **Impactor returns 2.0** » Fri Oct 29, 2004 12:21 pm

No way - "sorry for trying to stop you take over the world and commit mass genocide on a race" - No way.

Post by **Best First** » Fri Oct 29, 2004 1:16 pm

Historically it was our bombing of civilian targets that saved the British air force - Hitler was so incencsed he insisted that more bombing raids did likewise, despite his commanders suggesting military targets - if the luftwaffe had continued to concentrate on airbases etc, we probably would have been screwed.

I think this is balls - most of the world has made its peace with Germany as a nation over WW2, why is salt being thrown on the wound?

Optimus Prime Rib · Post by **Optimus Prime Rib** » Fri Oct 29, 2004 1:26 pm

Because history tends to repeat itself. Perhaps Germany is hitting hard times and are entering elections? Maybe they want someone to blame for thier problems again. Only problem this time is, what are they going to do to the world now? Take away thier admittedly well built but staggeringly expensive cars?

Impactor returns 2.0 · Post by **Impactor returns 2.0** » Fri Oct 29, 2004 2:08 pm

maybe all the realitves of english soilders could send 'sorry cards' to all the realitves of germen soilders?

Also Realitves or survivors could send 'sorry cards' to Germen officers realtives they said nasty words to in the light of being executed.

Russians could say sorry for thie very cold winter and making Stalingrad such a hell hole...

etc...

Post by **spiderfrommars** » Fri Oct 29, 2004 2:10 pm

And the queen was a kid back then! Its not like she gave the bloody order! She was getting bombed like everybody else...

Building bridges is one thing, but this is too one-sided.

Impactor returns 2.0 · Post by **Impactor returns 2.0** » Fri Oct 29, 2004 2:31 pm

plus, are we not still paying for the War?

Post by **Best First** » Fri Oct 29, 2004 3:31 pm

spiderfrommars wrote:And the queen was a kid back then! Its not like she gave the bloody order! She was getting bombed like everybody else...

Building bridges is one thing, but this is too one-sided.

this seems more like an attempt at buring bridges to me...

Leatherneck · Post by **Leatherneck** » Fri Oct 29, 2004 6:15 pm

Nuke 'em.

And by nuke 'em I mean thermonuclear weapons. 20+ megatons.

Pretender Bumblebee · Post by **Pretender Bumblebee** » Fri Oct 29, 2004 7:29 pm

How about an appology by the Germans to the 6 million Jewish people that were killed in ovens and camps and some of the most barbaric ways imaginable? How dare they ask for an appology. How arrogant can you be?

Señior's Covenant · Post by **Señior's Covenant** » Fri Oct 29, 2004 7:37 pm

Real Deal Headline

GERMANY DEMANDS APOLOGY FOR THWARTED ATTEMPT AT GENOCIDE OF THE JEWS

Family Guy flashback...

[Brian and Stewie are on a German tour bus]
German Tour Guide: You vill find more on Germany's contributions to ze arts in ze pamphlets ve have provided.
Brian Griffin : Yeah, about your pamphlet... uh, I'm not seeing anything about German history between 1939 and 1945. There's just a big gap.
Tour guide: Everyone vas on vacation! On your left is Munich's first city hall, erected in 15...
Brian Griffin : Wait, what are you talking about? Germany invaded Poland in 1939 and...
Tour Guide: We were invited! Punch vas served. Check vit Poland.
Brian Griffin : You can't just ignore those years. Thomas Mann fled to America because of Nazism's stranglehold on Germany.
Tour guide: Nope, nope. He left to manage a Dairy Queen.
Brian Griffin : A Dairy Queen? That's preposterous.
Tour guide: I vill hear no more insinuations about the German people! Nothing bad happened! Sie werden sich hinsetzen! Sie werden ruhig sein! Sie werden nicht beleidigen Deutschland!
[throws his hand up in a Hitler salute]
Brian Griffin : ...uh, is that a beer hall?
Tour guide: Oh yes, Munich is renowned for its historic beer halls.

bobaprime85 · Post by **bobaprime85** » Fri Oct 29, 2004 9:30 pm

Pretender Bumblebee wrote: How arrogant can you be?

Arrogant enough to ask for an apology from England over the bombing raids, apparently.

What a load of crap.

Optimus Prime Rib · Post by **Optimus Prime Rib** » Sat Oct 30, 2004 3:21 am

ok seriously, someone voted yes on accident right?

Post by **Denyer** » Sat Oct 30, 2004 4:30 am

Peter Storrar, from the RAF’s 610 Squadron Association, said: “They started it

Oh, well, that's alright then. Kill as many non-combatants as you like. Because our opponents act like barbarians, it's absolutely okay if we sink to that level.

The thread title is misleading -- all Liz is being asked to do is murmur something along the lines of it being regrettable that civilians were targeted in the process of ridding Germany of fascist nutjobs who had taken control.

She's the nominal figurehead of a country and the head of a church. If she can't say it's regrettable that thousands of ordinary people were carpet-bombed (whoever they are, wherever they are) I seriously worry...

Post by **Kaylee** » Sat Oct 30, 2004 10:35 am

I don't see why we shouldn't.

Of course, only on the proviso that every other nation appologises for every bad thing they've ever done, regardless of context. Perhaps under that disclaimer German politicians might want to rethink this plan.

Though I would question the point of such a thing- none of the politicians of the time, nor any of the RAF commanders or high decision makers are still alive. The only people who are still alive are the survivors, mostly normal servicemen, and their families. They were following orders, just like normal German soldiers were [nut jobs in the SS and so on excepted].

So what precisely would we be appologising for? None of our living citisens were responsible for it AFAIK. Should the sins of the fathers be used to judge the children?

Leatherneck · Post by **Leatherneck** » Sat Oct 30, 2004 1:31 pm

War is against a country. Especially in that period. Not against this section of a country or this portion of a nation-- an entire nation. Sucks that civilians are killed, but it's war.

Post by **Denyer** » Sat Oct 30, 2004 2:56 pm

Leatherneck wrote:Sucks that civilians are killed, but it's war.

We aren't talking incidental deaths. I think everyone accepts that explosives aren't a fine science and that when you're blowing up munitions factories the chances are you're going to kill a few bystanders. It's still regrettable, but you're attacking a war machine.

Dresden included the systematic firebombing of civilian targets by British and American air forces. Hell, even Churchill made efforts to publically question it:

It seems to me that the moment has come when the question of bombing of German cities simply for the sake of increasing the terror, though under other pretexts, should be reviewed ... The destruction of Dresden remains a serious query against the conduct of Allied bombing.

Leatherneck wrote:War is against a country. Especially in that period. Not against this section of a country or this portion of a nation-- an entire nation.

That's the excuse you're feeding yourself, anyway. Deliberate and indiscriminate targeting of civilians is Evil Bastard territory, whoever's doing it.

Karl Lynch wrote:Perhaps under that disclaimer German politicians might want to rethink this plan.

I don't see why—are you suggesting the country's leaders are unwilling to condemn the behaviour of past citizens?

Karl Lynch wrote:So what precisely would we be apologising for?

Much the same thing Germany apologises for in its ongoing commitment to stamping out references to systematic killing and genocide in anything other than condemnatory terms. It's recognising past actions and keeping them in mind so that they're less likely to ever be repeated.

Like I say, the 'apology' is more "indiscriminate slaughter is wrong whoever is doing it."

If you're reading ma'am, feel free to borrow wording...

Leatherneck · Post by **Leatherneck** » Sat Oct 30, 2004 3:39 pm

I guess I'm an evil bastard then.

Bombing civilians destroys the draft pool, less people to go build tanks/etc., makes more for the gov't to worry about, and kills morale.

It's not a bad strategy.

Post by **spiderfrommars** » Sat Oct 30, 2004 4:07 pm

Denyer wrote:all Liz is being asked to do is murmur something along the lines of it being regrettable that civilians were targeted in the process of ridding Germany of fascist nutjobs who had taken control

Actually...

spiderfrommars wrote:
A major German newspaper piled pressure on the monarch, just days before a state visit, with pictures of the bombing of Dresden and the headline “Will the Queen finally say sorry?”

They want an apology. Yes, she's figurehead of our country, and it would be an apt time to look back in regret at the conduct of those involved in past wars. But an outright apology seems ludicrous. And when put in context against Hitler's ethnic cleansing, singling out Liz in this sort of manner is overly harsh.

Post by **Kaylee** » Sat Oct 30, 2004 4:12 pm

Denyer wrote: I don't see why—are you suggesting the country's leaders are unwilling to condemn the behaviour of past citizens?

I'm not referring to condemning it, my problem is with the idea of appologising for it. They didn't do it, so I don't see how or why they should appologise for it.

It's probably a poor analogy but if someone killed my great uncle 60'ish years ago, I wouldn't go round to that person's descendant's house and demand they say sorry for it. Though naturally we would both expect to agree that the killing was wrong.

Denyer wrote:
Much the same thing Germany apologises for in its ongoing commitment to stamping out references to systematic killing and genocide in anything other than condemnatory terms. It's recognising past actions and keeping them in mind so that they're less likely to ever be repeated.

Like I say, the 'apology' is more "indiscriminate slaughter is wrong whoever is doing it."

If you're reading ma'am, feel free to borrow wording...

The sentiment of agreement over the barbaric nature of what happened and what still goes on in war to this day can't be argued with, I quite agree.

My problem is I don't understand what possible relevancy modern leaders saying "sorry" can have on it- they did not do it, so why are they appologising?

Primarily in my mind it's a question of blame- to appologise for something I think involves taking responsibility for it, but it is decidely not the fault of the current German of British governments what happened in our past.

That doesn't mean to say we can't accept that things were bad and learn from it, but I honestly don't see what saying sorry has to do with anything.

If I were feeling particularly cynical I'd say it had more to do with trying to cause petty irritation to a nation which has multiple times shown it's reluctance to integrate further with Europe rather than actually trying to make a point about the horrors of war.

EDIT-

As an illustrative point, Gerhard Schroeder at the anniversary of the D-Day landings said something with infinitely more meaning than an appology imho.

"The D-Day landings were not a victory against Germany. They were a victory for Germany."

I think that's so beautiful, and possessed of something with greater intrinsic value than an appology for something he didn't do.

Post by **Denyer** » Sat Oct 30, 2004 4:49 pm

spiderfrommars wrote:They want an apology. Yes, she's figurehead of our country, and it would be an apt time to look back in regret at the conduct of those involved in past wars. But an outright apology seems ludicrous.

It's remiss to apologise for something even the wartime Prime Minister of Britain deplored? Some of his other writings on the Allied development of chemical and biological weapons make interesting reading, by the way. Whilst never ruling anything out, he was determined to hold back their use wherever possible. He was committed to victory, but not at any cost.

Leaving aside the fact I don't trust AOL to be able to translate American news without sensationalising, let alone German, "it's awful that this could ever have been deemed necessary, and we mourn with you for everyone who bought the farm during this period" is an apology.

spiderfrommars wrote:when put in context against Hitler's ethnic cleansing, singling out Liz in this sort of manner is overly harsh.

Why is this being put into a specific context? It's just another way of saying "they started it" -- and it never alters what happened in a circumstance; either ordering and carrying out the strafing of family homes is inutterably vile or it isn't.

Karl Lynch wrote:My problem is I don't understand what possible relevancy modern leaders saying "sorry" can have on it-

No, I don't grasp that very firmly either, but if someone saying "sorry my ancestors torched the f*ck out of your ancestors' wives and kids as they were sleeping" makes anyone feel happier, I've no problem with that statement being made.

It's like any relationship. Even if gestures don't necessarily make sense to us, they can still be important.

Karl Lynch wrote:The D-Day landings were not a victory against Germany. They were a victory for Germany."

I think that's so beautiful

Indeed. Similarly, the blanket bombing of Dresden was a defeat of principles for the Allied forces. Whatever the eventual outcome, we lost -- and that's the really pernicious thing about war, and where the phrase "there are no winners in it" takes root.

Post by **Kaylee** » Sat Oct 30, 2004 4:51 pm

Denyer wrote:
No, I don't grasp that very firmly either, but if someone saying "sorry my ancestors torched the f*ck out of your ancestors' wives and kids as they were sleeping" makes anyone feel happier, I've no problem with that statement being made.

That's fair enough.

Denyer wrote: Indeed. Similarly, the blanket bombing of Dresden was a defeat of principles for the Allied forces. Whatever the eventual outcome, we lost -- and that's the really pernicious thing about war, and where the phrase "there are no winners in it" takes root.

Quite so.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Sat Oct 30, 2004 7:01 pm

Leatherneck wrote:I guess I'm an evil bastard then.

Bombing civilians destroys the draft pool, less people to go build tanks/etc., makes more for the gov't to worry about, and kills morale.

It's not a bad strategy.

Unless it backfires and bolsters morale and determination instead. Nothing like uniting disparate peoples under the same banner to bolster morale. I can think of one glaring example of this in recent times. A pity it doesn't seem to have panned out as hoped.

Leatherneck · Post by **Leatherneck** » Sat Oct 30, 2004 8:33 pm

Morale still only goes so far. Morale does not build equipment, nor does it replace dead soldiers.

Post by **spiderfrommars** » Sun Oct 31, 2004 12:26 am

Denyer wrote:
It's remiss to apologise for something even the wartime Prime Minister of Britain deplored?

An 'apology' from Churchill (our commander in chief) would have been more apt than one from someone who was a girl in her teens getting blitzed way back then.

Denyer wrote:
"it's awful that this could ever have been deemed necessary, and we mourn with you for everyone who bought the farm during this period" is an apology.

That would be a very fair thing for her to say. But no, I wouldn't see that as an apology. And I've already said, "it would be an apt time to look back in regret at the conduct of those involved in past wars" which sounds like the same thing to me.

Denyer wrote:
Why is this being put into a specific context? It's just another way of saying "they started it" -- and it never alters what happened in a circumstance; either ordering and carrying out the strafing of family homes is inutterably vile or it isn't.

The 'they started it' thing quoted by the serviceman was stupid. I didn't say it.

I'm no fan of hers, I'm just saying the Queen has nothing to be sorry for. And neither do any Germans of today either for that matter.

Post by **snarl** » Mon Nov 01, 2004 1:28 pm

THE BRAVEST NAZI

Brave Nazi officer Adolph Hitler (Mel Gibson) is distraught when his beautiful young wife, Eva Braun (Cameron Diaz) is killed by an unprovoked English bombing raid. He pledges to get even on the cruel English pig dogs, but when he can’t convince his peace-loving superiors to sanction a war, he takes matters into his own hands, and recruits troops for his own invasion of England.

Aboard their small coracle, he raises morale with the following speech: “The colonial scourge of the dreaded English has oppressed and repressed free people for centuries… But now the tide is turning. We, the people of Germany, shall unite the free peoples of this world, and teach the English a lesson, for the hate and prejudice they have inflicted upon this fragile, beautiful sphere… They can bomb our cities, but they can NEVER BOMB OUR HEARTS!”

The movie climaxes with a pulse-pounding fist-fight between brave Adolph, and the cruel English ruler, Winston Churchill (Winston Churchill), atop the Houses Of Parliament. When Adolph gets the upper hand, the sobbing, pitiful Churchill begs for his life. Adolph spares him, but as he turns his back, Churchill cowardly stubs his cigar out on Adolph’s head, killing him instantly… But his legend lives on!

TransFans.co.uk

Germans Demand Apology for War

Should the Queen say sorry?