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.
Как вы фейки любите. Причем, старые, избитые, давно разоблаченные. Ну я вас понимаю, по другому свою историю не выставишь в выгодном свете, а надо. Вот факты, а по ссылке - разборка источников вашего фейка.
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
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
как же ты фейки любишь - любую блогерскую фигню за чистую монету примешь. мало того, еще и машешь как флажком.
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
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
Ну вот пошел по первому же автору. И как раз - разоблачение вашего фейка. Вы хоть сами понимаете, что постите? Или так, что бы покрасивее иностранными фамилиями потрясти?
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
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
ты избранные куски читаешь, что ли? Он как раз писал, что, несмотря на то, что у Бака были какие-то личные счеты, и он не всегда аккуратен с цифрами, американцы и не подозревают, каково приходилось немецким военнопленным в их лагерях.
сельсовет на выезде, чесслово 03.12.2016 21:17:36, Зюйд-Вест
сельсовет на выезде, чесслово 03.12.2016 21:17:36, Зюйд-Вест
Я знаю, все божья роса. Что вас не приведешь, вы перескажите своими словами, вам так понятнее. Вся статья - разгром вот той фальшивки, что триплалекс поместил тут. А вы там вычитывайте, вам полезно. А факт, что в Советских лагерях погибло 35 процентов пленных немцев, он никуда и никогда не денется. Божья роса, я знаю.
03.12.2016 21:26:55, Joint
читать всем полезно, вот видишь, и ты что-то внятное прочитал. остальное читай - там ответ, почему такие цифры
03.12.2016 21:38:08, 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
ну хоть просветится немного, и понесет сюда в следующий раз Амброза, а неБлюхера, и не милорда глупого с базара Пономаря с Цензора )
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
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
тебе, правдорубцу, из комментов по твоей ссылке:
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
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
Ну и зачем мне комментарий Евгения Фадеева под статьей?
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
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
действительно, комментарий слишком разумен, чтобы тебе для прочтения предлагать.
03.12.2016 21:23:50, Электра
Так же разумен как и пост Алекса. Набор слов, предложение за предложением. Фактов нет, одна голословщина, пересказ ОБС. Евгений Фадеев - ваш рулевой.
03.12.2016 21:29:14, 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
Ой, какой полезный материал. Сохрани ссылку, к дню победы опять набегут вещать, как мы над пленными немцами издевались.
03.12.2016 19:03:07, Электра
[-]
03.12.2016 20:57:10, Зюйд-Вест
Читайте также
Семейный досуг на Новый год: как выбрать игры, которые объединят всю семью
Проверенные настольные игры для всей семьи
Как обезопасить себя и ребенка от пищевых отравлений за праздничным столом: рекомендации врача
Что делать, если у ребенка появились первые симптомы отравления?