Известно, что весной 1945 года немцы были озабочены одним - попасть в плен не к русским, а к американцам и англичанам. Никогда особенно не интересовался этим вопросом, данная статья была ну... почти откровением...
Скажем прямо - похоже, немцы много не выигрывали, сдаваясь в плен не нам.
[ссылка-1]
Конференция "Общество""Общество"
Раздел: История
Американские лагеря смерти
03.12.2016 18:08:56, AleXXX28 комментариев
Вы не авторизованы. Для отправки сообщения необходимо авторизоваться.
Percentage of POWs that Died:
Russian POWs held by Germans: 57.5%
German POWs held by Russians: 35.8%
American POWs held by Japanese: 33.0%
German POWs held by Eastern Europeans: 32.9%
British POWs held by Japanese: 24.8%
British POWs held by Germans: 3.5%
German POWs held by French: 2.58%
German POWs held by Americans: 0.15%
German POWs held by British: 0.03% 03.12.2016 20:32:16, Joint
источники читай
Günter Bischof and Stephen E. Ambrose.The United States and the German PoWs
Stephen E. Ambrose. Eisenhower and the Germans
Brian Loring Villa. The Diplomatic and Political Context of the PoW Camps Tragedy
Albert E. Cowdrey. A Question of Numbers 03.12.2016 20:51:17, Зюйд-Вест
Our second conclusion was that when scholars do the necessary research, they will find Mr. Bacque's work to be worse than worthless. It is seriously -- nay, spectacularly -- flawed in its most fundamental aspects. Mr. Bacque misuses documents; he misreads documents; he ignores contrary evidence; his statistical methodology is hopelessly compromised; he makes no attempt to see the evidence he has gathered in its relationship to the broader situation; he makes no attempt to look at comparative contexts; he puts words into the mouth of his principal source; he ignores a readily available and absolutely critical source that decisively deals with his central accusation; and, as a consequence of these and other shortcomings, he reaches conclusions and makes charges that are demonstrably absurd. 03.12.2016 21:01:20, Joint
сельсовет на выезде, чесслово 03.12.2016 21:17:36, Зюйд-Вест
поражаюсь вашему самообладанию в таких вот несуразных беседах ни о чём. меня так всё это бесит, что я даже не читаю чужеродные реплики), ибо заранее знаю, что там нечего прочесть)
03.12.2016 22:23:14, Авралл
Амброз, кстати, задавал вопрос, а не чудовище ли Эйзенхауэр (Was Eisenhower a monster), и трогательно так ответил - не по собственной инициативе))
и несмотря на то, что работал для эйзенхауэровского центра (и на его деньги), не смог замолчать неприятную правду 03.12.2016 23:14:14, Зюйд-Вест
Brief points (most based on ref. 1, more references at the end):
Eisenhower decided in 1943 that the prisoners would be termed "DEF" (Disarmed Enemy Forces) not "POW" - on purpose so that the Geneva Convention would not apply
The camps were set up in April 1945 and were active at least until September 1945, possibly until 1946.
Held according to the official numbers between 1 and 1.9 million people. (why is the count so imprecise? could this be intentional?)
The camps were open fields enclosed by the barbed wire, there was no shelter and the prisoners lived in the holes dug by hand. "Some of the enclosures resembled Andersonville Prison in 1864."
International Red Cross was not admitted to the prisoners until spring 1946 (why?)
Food supplies by the Red Cross were rejected and local population was not allowed to feed the prisoners (why?)
Americans claim that only 3-6000 prisoners died in those conditions (really?)
There is no indication that the prisoners were properly registered. (Again - why the official count of prisoners so imprecise? And if the prisoners weren't registered how would we know what was the actual count?)
Daily calorie intake in the English and American occupation zones for the civilians was between 1000 and 1500 calories (see 2 and 3) (why would it be more for the prisoners? I would assume that prisoners received less and therefore must have been starving, even 1500 cal is starvation diet on the run of half a year or so)
The images of the "Rheinwiesenlager" camps are widely available 03.12.2016 21:17:26, Электра
Я могу другой комментарий привести.
John Geare, ROTC Paper: Annihilation, the Final Principle of War
Written Mar 5
Such "evidence" as has been introduced (especially in Other Losses) is based on interpretation of historical records, a few interviews and statements by people presumed to be credible.
But if, in fact, the claimed atrocities and massive loss of life (numbering near a million souls) owed to American abuse is true, then we need some corpus delicti, here. The problem, is, there isn't any; at least nothing on the scale that James Bacque has proposed. Nor is there much in circulation in this day and age. We find plenty of Jewish holocaust survivors with personal testimony, and thousands of detainee graves were discovered after the cessation of hostilities.
But no equivalent evidence has yet been introduced to support the idea that the allies (not counting the Russians, mind you) committed mass killings. Surely, by now, survivors of such an extermination effort, or their family members, would have come forth.
Likewise, anything on the scale proposed by Bacque would have emerged from whistle-blowers within government or the military, itself. Instead, there is almost nothing. Put another way, if Bacque had not written his book, what would we rely upon even for a theory -let alone a body of evidence- of some mass scale atrocities? And what took so long?
Bacque may be sincere in his writing, but what he has proposed is woefully lacking in independent support. Thus the idea of some hidden agenda is no more plausible then the conspiracy theories about the WTC attack.
Bottom line: nadda. 03.12.2016 21:22:46, Joint
"Набор слов, предложение за предложением. Фактов нет, одна голословщина, пересказ ОБС." - как ты откровенно о себе рассказал, в очередной раз)
03.12.2016 22:24:20, Авралл
[-]
03.12.2016 20:57:10, Зюйд-Вест
Читайте также
7 причин не носить брекеты: когда они противопоказаны и почему
Кому нельзя носить брекеты?
