Most Representative Luftwaffe Pilot?

[Jim P.]

I suppose upon reflection Bar is not particularly 'representative' because he was a very successful pilot wherever he happened to be flying. Given that then someone like Klaus Faber might fit the bill - only had a few claims, flew from 39-45 and survived. On the other hand, the fact that he survived is not really representative either. The vast majority of LW pilots, for one reason or another, had very short careers. But in this the LW is not necessarily unique - its probably safe to say most of the losses for all combatants were of relatively inexperiened pilots, the survivors were generally the exception and became the aces. Another item that is probably worth mentioning is that in reviewing the LW losses, its always struck me as extraordinary how many of the 'experten' were lost due to accidents versus combat. What does the DunkBM consider representative?

[Ruy Horta]

I'll throw some oil on the fire.

First I find the original question pointless without a proper context.

Indeed just looking at Jagdflieger is part of the Luftwaffe's problem, certainly in its offensive phase it was the (dive) bomber who carried the offensive, or the reconnaissance or transport pilot who went unnoticed.

Second

Our "boys vs their boys" and the Nazi movement.

With hind sight or some "popular" contamination with Communists and Al Quaida (etc, "the tag"), it is easy to see a Nazi as something different to us decent people. He is part of that monstrous machine that burned books, gassed millions of Jews and slaughtered more millions in its war of aggression.

By using the word Nazi, we de-humanize or demonise the enemy, who apart from his possible political believes was a GERMAN. But saying/writing that you killed a German soldier, airman or civilian doesn't sounds as great as saying/writing that you killed a Nazi.

Why should a pilot with a Nazi upbringing be less of a human? One might say that one who believed and fought for the Nuremberg racial laws was evil, yet can you honestly claim that those fine southern boys in the US AAF didn't (at least in part) believe in their segregation laws? Yes, there is a BIG difference between the two in practice, but is there in theory?

Moelders the Gentleman of the Jagdwaffe, often praised for his unpolitical and religious stance, was if we read Kurt Braatz, a staunch believer in Hitler as the Fuehrer and savior of Germany. Does that mean that we must brand Moelders a Nazi fanatic?

Having finished the Moelders biography I had the chance of purchasing a relatively cheap copy of Theo Osterkamp's Durch Hohen und Tiefen jagt ein Herz, another example of a Gentleman in the Luftwaffe, yet he simply admits that he believed in Hitler as the answer for Germany. Again, does that make him a Nazi fanatic?

Were those young men (boys) from the 12th SS Panzerdivision "Hitlerjugend" who to all accounts fought a tough battle in Normandy which earned the respect of most of those who engaged them, simply Nazi fanatics and therefor lesser men?

Third

What Stigler did was perhaps a grand gesture, it was also stupid. I wonder if he ever thought about the consequences of letting an experienced bomber crew have another go at bombing?! Being a gentleman in war doesn't always mean that you are doing the right thing.

If Stigler wanted be a gentleman, he would have been better off if he selected a fellow fighter pilot from the other side of the hill to escort home.

Not judging the man, for I have not earned the right to do so, just the deed.

Last, in answer to the original query.

Want to hear my most representative Luftwaffe pilot: unnamed.

[Snautzer]

Originally Posted by Ruy Horta

I'll throw some oil on the fire.



What Stigler did was perhaps a grand gesture, it was also stupid. I wonder if he ever thought about the consequences of letting an experienced bomber crew have another go at bombing?! Being a gentleman in war doesn't always mean that you are doing the right thing.

I kinda agree but i cant help thinking that this would make it ok for an allied flyer to shoot the chutes.Indeed it should have been a priority. Not very heroic but it would make war time sence

[harrison987]

Well...

It is against the Rules of Armed Conflict to shoot at parachutes from planes. I know the US Pilots did it, and anyone who would do that is just as bad as the next person you want to call "evil".

Yeah..of course Stigler thought about it. He would have been SHOT ON THE SPOT IF ANYONE FOUND OUT!!! The "right decision" is ALWAYS the human decision. Hmmm...let's seee....shoot at a crippled B-17 that had 50% of it's crew dead, no one shooting at him, and running on 3 engines...or do the HUMAN thing. I would have made the same decision. if the RIGHT thing is too "kill everyone possible", then clearly a person with a viewpoint like that should never be in the military, and not someone I would want by my side.

The uprising of Nazism was due to an EXTREMELY charismatic leader, and in the beginning stages did not have the same, "immoral" values as we focus on now. Germany was falling apart, and the people needing something to believe in as people were starving and business were failing. To judge ALL Germans and pilots as all being "Nazi's" is an uneducated statement. Fear drove most of these people to stir in one direction.

John pointed out that there are far more atrocities done by other countries for longer periods of time. The British Empire had far more atrocities for a LONGER period of time than Germany ever did.

I remember a US vet telling a story about the Ardennes...

This captured US soldier (amongst others) was being marched down an icy road. A German officer kept having his Kubelwagon drive back and forth from the front of the line to the rear...honking at all US troops to move out of the way. I think he was just doing it to make them mad. After many passings, this one US troop decided, 'screw it", and did not move out of the way on one of the last many attempts. The German officer was so mad the US troop did not move, the Kubelwaagon pulled over, he went over to the US Troop, and put a gun to his head. The US troop being more angry than anything did not move an inch. As the German officer began to pull the trigger, a large "clack" from a machine gun could be heard. Looking left, he saw the MG that just cocked was atop a Panzer, and the gun was pointed at the OFFICER! It was an SS Tank. The SS officer pulled an MG on the German officer, yelling at him for having a gun to this US troops head. Don't remember what he said to him, something about how they are soldiers, not murderers.

True story.

So is that German SS officer dumb? Should he have let the other officer shoot the US troop? After-all, it was mentioned that Stiger was dumb for letting the B-17 go...what would happen if these US troops escape? CRAP!! Better kill them all now, then to have them escape and be soldiers fighting against us again!!

How do you look at the massacre in the Ardennes? Where 3 DOZENS of captured and defenceless US troops were gunned down by the SS?? Was that, "okay" because it better to kill the enemy than have them escape and fight another day?

Jesus...

No matter "what" peoples beliefs are, EVERYONE is human...that includes Hitler...and EVERYONE, no matter what they have done, is ALWAYS forgivable...

That is the main basis of Judiasm..."everything and everyone is forgivable" - that includes Hitler.

Stigler, along with MOST Germans all felt the same about the war and had the same beliefs about how WRONG Hitler was...wasn't there 50+ attempts on Hitler's life since 1942?

Mike

[Ruy Horta]

Apples and oranges.

That bomber can't be equated to either POWs or airmen in their chutes, it is as simple as that.

Would that SS Panzer have escorted a damaged enemy tank back to its own lines? No, it would probably have put in another canon round...

Again, I do not judge the man, for I have no right to do so, but I find the deed questionable, even if today we honor such a thing. What does it mean if the (remaining) crew flew other bombing missions killing countless German civilians?

perhaps I am simple, but I'd rather kill that crew than feel guilt about letting it go to fight another day...

That bomber if you like it or not was still an enemy combattant.

Have you ever heard of US fighter pilots escorting damaged enemy bombers back?

Again, there may be some room for this romantic stuff between fighter pilots, but bombers, no...I don't buy that.

[Nick Beale]

Originally Posted by harrison987

The British Empire had far more atrocities for a LONGER period of time than Germany ever did.
Mike

I am no defender of the British Empire (or any other empire) but please, get real. Yes the British Empire lasted longer than the Third Reich (as did every European Empire I can think of right now) but, are you seriously suggesting that there was a deliberate racial extermination policy with dedicated industrial killing facilities? Or that so many people were killed in so short a time? I don't think the Belgians managed that in the Congo, even.

[Franek Grabowski]

I thought that the thread should be forgotten, but as the general subject reappears in various forms, I believe it should be refreshed.
I concur with Chris S and I am terrified. I do not like PC but some thesis presented here are a so called 'nazi revisionist propaganda'. In short it is an old song, they were brave, they were chivalrous, they did not know, they were following orders, they had no mean of protest, etc. All of this could be debunked, given a little bit of good will and research. Mind you that Allied intelligence did a constant monitoring of morale of German society, this including analysis of letters send home by soldiers. This shows perfectly extent of knowledge about crimes, as well as decline of morale in 1943, when Germany started to loose the war. Informations are available either from period publications (like RAF Intel Bulletins) or from archives, I believe TNA should have a good file on it. They leave no shade of doubt, those interested knew perfectly well, what is going around, and the one must have been dumb, not to know that there is something fishy about it.
It is worth to note German behaviour in Poland. The war started here, so theoretically participating soldiers should not be influenced by combat stress and increasing brutality. Despite that, number of crimes committed by German soldiers (and it was mostly Wehrmacht's and Luftwaffe's war) is astonishing. Certainly there were individuals, who opposed it, and did not like it, but they were individuals indeed. En masse it was a machine of death and terror, and while I am not against research of particular men, and even sympathy towards them, I am deeply disgusted by removing their stories from the brute context. It is not only excusing of crimes, or lack of taste, but especially lack of common sense.
While talking individuals, I must stress one particular point. While reading about various criminals and degenerates, both nazi and communistic, it was a strucking thing to find out, they were often so nice and friendly fellas. Read about Mengele, how friendly he was towards children, so they freely called him uncle! I bet, if he survived to this day, you would be claiming he could not have been a nazi, and all of this is just a propaganda.
Finally, I find it deeply offensive the general approach here towards Allied soldiers. Certainly various countries had troubled history in their long term of existence, and certainly some decisions undertaken during the war should be discussed. It is obvious, that some Allied soldiers committed crimes or did other shameful things, sometimes because they were bad people, sometimes because of emotions. Nonetheless such behaviour was minor and never accepted by majority of servicemen.
One old good sample for this.
It happened in 1944 that in the heat of a briefing, one Allied general said something, that could have been an encouragement to strafe civilians. Airmen were so disgusted, that in a short time a statement was issued, that in no way this speech should be interpreted this way. Those interested may find a reproduction of original paper in Spit & Polish book.
I find it especially shameful, that such words happen on a site supposed to be a place for knowledgeable and educated people.

[ChrisS]

Like Franek I had hoped that this kind of topic had died out but I see almost (and I mean almost) neo-facist tendencies in some of the writing here.

REALITY CHECK

Lets be absolutely plain: the nazis (and their allies) were thoroughly evil, and because of them almost 60,000,000 people died. That's 60,000,000 people who wanted to live and enjoy life, who were just like you and me, and like your mother, your father, brother, sister and children. Many would still be alive today. Most of these 60,000,000 were non combatants. The nazis themslves were directly responsible for the deaths of over 6,000,000 innocent civilians in unjustified state-controlled racist genocide.
Of the 50,000,000 that died in the western wars the German armed forces directly resoponsible for their deaths either by action or inaction. Apart from directly causing death by military action the luftwaffe as part of the German armed forces by enthusiastically engaging in aggressive war enabled the axis to conquor the enemies of the nazi state and thus prolonged the war so that the genocide could continue unabated.

No amount of excellent looking aircraft, wonderful aircraft colour schemes, superb uniforms, admiration for military prowess makes up for the basic truth that these men were responsible for the deaths of 50,000,0000 people. If you disagree with this statement I humbly suggest that you make it a priority to visit either your own countries Holocaust museum, if you belong to an allied nation your local war memorial and take a look at the names on the stone, or visit as I have Oradour-Sur-Glane in France or maybe even Auschwitz or easiest go take out Schindlers List on DVD rental (if you can't cry at someplace in this most amazing film then........). The point Iam trying to make is don't let our interest hide th truth about the nazis and the Luftwaffe.

I guess we all here have an interest in the Luftwaffe, but please take a reality check

Chris

[krichter33]

There were over 18 million Germans who served in the Wehrmacht during the War. I guess we are supposed to believe that the majority of these men were war criminals and committed atrocities. My God! With so many murderers running around it is a wonder there were any innocent civilians left in Europe...

[Jim P.]

Give it rest. These gentlemen make very valid points, and I have to say I've mentally wrestled with this argument many times on my own. My own political beliefs tend to run to the side of being very liberal, and I've have spent way to much energy being very po'ed about over the last 8 years seeing my own country having to deal with the very disastrous policies pushed by very right wing, no nothing politicians and their media allies, and the 'with us or against us' bs that went with it. Notice how that's disappeared in a month.

In the end, on the one hand, I'm still fascinated by the Lw and other parts of the German armed forces in WWII, but never forget they were part of what was ultimately a very repressive, murderous regime. And I'm from the U.S. While we were certainly there, so to speak, guys like Franek, who's from Poland, and Chris, who I suspect is from England, have a very different perspective than me because their countries were occupied and/or a target of the bombs. I can say I understand, but in reality there is no way I can relate to what happened in either country.
On the otherhand, I believe that trying to erase the Nazi regime from history, which seems to be the case over the last 30-40 years, also erases the lessons that should be learned and remembered by us all. And to be honest, I think that history education, or lack thereof, is a big reason why my own country was headed down the road it was on the last 8+ years. Nobody wants to say the word, but if you look up the the definition of fascist, and see where this country was headed - if one is truly honest with themselves, then its as plain as day.
Where's that next beer -