Campfire Chat - General DiscussionsThis is a forum for posting discussion topics, questions, current events, and anything else you'd like to chat about. Please post serious Civil War History threads in appropriate History Forums.
I flipped through a book that my brother owns which were essentially pictures. Vaccaro, Tony: Entering Germany: Photographs 1944-1949, Taschen Verlag, 2001.
Interesting pictures. I was disturbed by one thing however.....the different periods in the book are marked and the period of the Allied conquest of Germany is referred to as 'Liberation'
I flipped through a book that my brother owns which were essentially pictures. Vaccaro, Tony: Entering Germany: Photographs 1944-1949, Taschen Verlag, 2001.
Interesting pictures. I was disturbed by one thing however.....the different periods in the book are marked and the period of the Allied conquest of Germany is referred to as 'Liberation'
Any thoughts?
cw1865,
Why "disturbed?" Certainly there were those in Germany who felt they were being liberated, were they not?
Or are you thinking it should not be considered a "liberation" because the German people and government of the time were our sworn enemies?
Sincerely,
Unionblue
__________________ "The American people and the Government at Washington may refuse to recognize it for a time but the inexorable logic of events will force it upon them in the end; that the war now being waged in this land is a war for and against slavery." Frederick Douglass
"Loyalty to our ancestors does not include loyalty to their mistakes." George Santayana
Why "disturbed?" Certainly there were those in Germany who felt they were being liberated, were they not?
I am sure there were those who felt the Allied arrival was a liberation. I am disturbed by it because I feel it is 'revisionist' (Overall, Vacaro's book would DEFINITELY NOT QUALIFY AS WWII REVISIONISM) because a liberation implies that a majority of the people are pining for the event to occur. I feel that it exculpates the German people from their support for the regime. I feel the evidence of this is overwhelming. The Germans supported Hitler's vision of a Grossdeutschland and as the war progressed against them, it was their goal to prevent Allied occupation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by unionblue
Or are you thinking it should not be considered a "liberation" because the German people and government of the time were our sworn enemies?
Yes, absolutely, now can I turn the tables on you? With that logic can Operation Barbarossa be seen as a Fascist attempt to 'liberate' Russians from Bolshevism? (I don't think so, although the Nazis tried to sell that concept from time to time)
I must stand firm that I feel the best terms to describe the event would have 'Fall', 'Downfall' or 'Conquest'
Plus we have to remember that the Red Army really isn't liberating anything except themselves.
Seeing the more detailed response above, I agree totally with your view on the matter.
I too, am of the opinion the majority of the German people either supported, nor at least, opposed Hitler and his government. When things were going their way, no vast numbers rose up in complaint at the running of the war.
I see where you are coming from and I agree.
Sincerely,
Unionblue
__________________ "The American people and the Government at Washington may refuse to recognize it for a time but the inexorable logic of events will force it upon them in the end; that the war now being waged in this land is a war for and against slavery." Frederick Douglass
"Loyalty to our ancestors does not include loyalty to their mistakes." George Santayana
I too, am of the opinion the majority of the German people either supported, nor at least, opposed Hitler and his government. When things were going their way, no vast numbers rose up in complaint at the running of the war.
I reckon we all know why they used the term "liberaton" and it don't have nothing to do with the German people. Its about myth making and revisionist history for sure and he probably couldn't have gotten his book published less'n he did.
Large numbers of Ukrainians and Russians did see Operation Barbarossa as liberation from Bolshevism. Indeed, one of Hitler's great mistakes (among many) was in oppressing the Slavs he so "liberated." They were, at first, apparently happy to fight against the Stalinists on his behalf. However, given the attitude of the German people and especialy of Hitler himself toward these Slav untermensch, it was not long before they were taking up arms in partisan bands against the invading, not liberating, Germans.
I will agree that altough the Allies liberated France, the Low Countries, etc., the move across the Rhine was definitely an "invasion." But "liberation" sounds like such a nicer term.
__________________ "There must be more historians of the Civil War than there were generals figthing in it... Of the two groups, the historians are the more belligerent." David Donald, Lincoln Reconsidered (1961)
Timewalker stole my thunder about how the Ukrainians, Belarus, and some Russian believed the German's were liberating them form Uncle Stalin's grasp. If the Germans would have treat them with kindness the war in the east for them would have been much different. The war itself would have had a completely different tone to it.
I do agree with CW1865 that U.S. forces crossing of the Rhine into Germany was not of Liberation but one of Conquest...
__________________
"States Rights are about States Wrongs" - Jesse Jackson
In the lexicon of the times, American forces and their allies were Liberating Europe (and Asia) from under the heel of Axis totalitarian dictators.
Conquering Germany (and Japan) was the process of Liberating Europe (and Asia) i.e. to invade and conquer Germany was Liberating Europe.
Large numbers of Ukrainians and Russians did see Operation Barbarossa as liberation from Bolshevism. Indeed, one of Hitler's great mistakes (among many) was in oppressing the Slavs he so "liberated." They were, at first, apparently happy to fight against the Stalinists on his behalf. However, given the attitude of the German people and especialy of Hitler himself toward these Slav untermensch, it was not long before they were taking up arms in partisan bands against the invading, not liberating, Germans.
I will agree that altough the Allies liberated France, the Low Countries, etc., the move across the Rhine was definitely an "invasion." But "liberation" sounds like such a nicer term.
That's why I put 'Russians' instead of the Soviet Union. There were Russians fighting for Germany....there were Germans fighting for the Allies too.
Between Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union, Poland, Baltic States, Ukraine & Belarus really have to pick their poison I suppose.
I lived in a little town up in the mountains in South America for a while when I was a kid.
Up the street was a cheesemaker who'd moved there after the war to escape the red army. I could believe he'd have viewed the Ami's as a liberating force.
Across the street from us lived a different man, a former SS major who no doubt had a different opinion.
He was a little scary in real life.
Anyway, I suppose there were both types, but by 45 everyone knew the jig was up and if you had to pick, don't even let's pretend it would take a second: 3rd Army or Red Army.
CivilWarTalk.com -
A free and friendly Civil War community. 
Liberation 
Linear Mode
