PDA

View Full Version : 'Evil Naval Tatics'



SubSerpent
05-07-2005, 06:14 AM
Does anyone know if the Germans during world war II ever used human shields onboard their surface ships in an act of desperation? Something like putting a hundred innocent civilians(jews, British, American, Russian) in the hold onboard?

This would have actually been an effective tatic when you think about it. Of course it's a very cruel one but war isn't pretty and it would have possibley caused politcal damage to the allied nations. For instance the hostility among the allied nations about who had the right to sink a German ship carrying innocent people from their particular nation. The debate could go on for a long time allowing the German ship(s) to wreak havok and if the German ship was sunk allied nation(A) would have gotten upset with allied nation(B) if allied nation(B) was the one that sank the German ship carrying innocent life from allied nation(A). Obviously, the Germans would have had to let the allies know that there was innocent life onboard the ship(s). It may not have stopped the allies from sinking it, but it sure would have started up some heated debates between the allied nations, thus giving Germany a bit more time to pull a flank manuver on the allies.

bgblkdg
05-07-2005, 06:41 AM
I think the "human shield" tactic would have had precious little, if any, impact on the Allies.

It's hard for me to believe the Allies could fire bomb German cities, killing perhaps tens of thousands of civilians, and not sink a ship containing a hundred or more "human shields" whom may or may not be what they are portrayed as.

Regards,

Joe S.

Kpt_Zig
05-07-2005, 07:13 AM
Not forgetting how they knowingly bombed a U-Boot that had allied lifeboats in tow, and more allied civillians on deck, red-cross draped over the lot.

Maj_Solo
05-07-2005, 07:29 AM
Originally posted by SubSerpent:
Does anyone know if the Germans during world war II ever used human shields onboard their surface ships in an act of desperation? Something like putting a hundred innocent civilians(jews, British, American, Russian) in the hold onboard?

This would have actually been an effective tatic when you think about it. Of course it's a very cruel one but war isn't pretty and it would have possibley caused politcal damage to the allied nations. For instance the hostility among the allied nations about who had the right to sink a German ship carrying innocent people from their particular nation. The debate could go on for a long time allowing the German ship(s) to wreak havok and if the German ship was sunk allied nation(A) would have gotten upset with allied nation(B) if allied nation(B) was the one that sank the German ship carrying innocent life from allied nation(A). Obviously, the Germans would have had to let the allies know that there was innocent life onboard the ship(s). It may not have stopped the allies from sinking it, but it sure would have started up some heated debates between the allied nations, thus giving Germany a bit more time to pull a flank manuver on the allies.

You must have been smoking (friendly smile) ....

RULE number 1: It's us or them
RULE number 2: It's us or them
RULE number 3: It's us or them
.....
.....
.....
.....

Bergman
05-07-2005, 07:46 AM
It would certainly backfire on them because the Allies would show less mercy on the Germans (think of the prisoners of war, civilian population etc). AND which German sailor wanted to be a crewmember of a vessel who does this, they are likely to be shot if they are captured. Remember that Germany had already lost the war and they had to think about how to survive after the war.

archer49d
05-07-2005, 07:52 AM
1) As hard as the allies tried they couldn't ever compete with Germany in term of being "inhuman".
2) Yes, they bombed allied lifeboats full of Italians who were probably going back to kill more allied soldiers when they got back to a German controlled port. I'd pull the trigger on that one any day.

U-49
05-07-2005, 08:44 AM
Originally posted by archer49d:
1) As hard as the allies tried they couldn't ever compete with Germany in term of being "inhuman". I shall restrain myself and not answer to this in-depth, for fear of turning this into another political debate (which has no place here) and ultimately useless flame war. That said, you should distinguish between German and Nazi. There is a monumental difference between the two. Not all Germans were Nazis or Nazi sympathizers. Do not paint everyone with the same broad brush.

V-MAN1981
05-07-2005, 08:51 AM
Originally posted by Kpt_Zig:
Not forgetting how they knowingly bombed a U-Boot that had allied lifeboats in tow, and more allied civillians on deck, red-cross draped over the lot.

**** those trigger happy yanks.

ARM505
05-07-2005, 09:58 AM
Plus you would somehow have to let the enemy know you were carrying human shields, somewhat impractical when he is busy shelling you...he's unlikely to believe you anyway!

Popey109
05-07-2005, 10:31 AM
Not too worry! I have no doubt by the time YOUR third WW rolls around our left wing media will so demoralize us that even the use of camouflage will be politically incorrect!... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif good luck...

Budokan
05-07-2005, 10:52 AM
Human shields don't work today, they certainly wouldn't have worked in an era when the Allies were at the Axis Powers' methaphorical throat.

In another words, employing human shields (disgusting as it is) is just another way to thin out the global herd...

SubSerpent
05-07-2005, 12:09 PM
I'm not so sure what the allies would have done back then. The world had a different view about things than the world has today. But let's change the scenario a bit shall we? What if those 100 innocents were childern under the age of 10? Would this have made the decision to sink the ship(s) carrying them a bit more difficult? Imagine that you are the president of the US or the Prime Minister of England and you have video proof showing the Nazi's detaining young British/American childern and placing them into the cargo holds onboard warships. What would you do? Would you sink the warships regardless of the 100 young innocent childern onboard the German warship(s), or would you break down and surrender to the enemy? And just to spice things up a bit...Your child is on one of those ships, Mr. President or Mr. Prime Minister! What do you do?

c_mattio
05-07-2005, 04:55 PM
What possible circumstance would arise where the allies would be aware of 100 children on board. It would be an utter waste of time as a tactic cos no-one would know. There really weren't cargo holds on warships, cargo holds tended to be found on cargo ships. The storage on warships was for food and shells, there was barely any room for anything else, so that would never have been done.

Budokan
05-07-2005, 07:20 PM
The Allies would have gone ahead and sunk the ship, even if there were 100 children aboard and they knew about it. And I can't speak for other world leaders, but I'm willing to bet this guy we got in the White House over here would give the order to sink a ship or bring down an enemy airliner if his own twin daughters were aboard....

For some people, no matter what the circumstance, no matter what their race or their ideology, killing isn't all that big a deal.

Hyper_Fish
05-07-2005, 07:36 PM
Not sure if it's relevant, but I know that when the Japanese were retreating in the pacific, they loaded up cargo ships with allied POW's to take back to Japan as cheap labour. Some of these ships were bombed and sunk by allied forces, not knowing that there was little of value on board but their captured comrades locked in the cargo holds. I'm not sure if the Japs actually made it known that they were on board though...

Frederf221
05-08-2005, 03:21 AM
Most of the bad stuff happened and was tollerated in those days is because people (the general public) just plain didn't know.

As more and more people started becoming informed of every event in the world, this sort of thing became hard to swallow.

Treetop64
05-08-2005, 03:45 AM
Originally posted by Hyper_Fish:
Not sure if it's relevant, but I know that when the Japanese were retreating in the pacific, they loaded up cargo ships with allied POW's to take back to Japan as cheap labour. Some of these ships were bombed and sunk by allied forces, not knowing that there was little of value on board but their captured comrades locked in the cargo holds. I'm not sure if the Japs actually made it known that they were on board though...

Well, I'm sure the "Japs", as you put it, didn't take the time to send the Americans friendly greeting cards to let them know what they had on board. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Also, many of the transports were sunk by American submarines, which were on independent, free roaming "sink-what-you-see" missions - primarily merchants and transports. It is not likely that they knew exactly what was on board a particular ship as they loosed a torpedo onto it.

Frankly, one does not have the time to debate on the ethics and morals of sinking a ship when you have orders, and you are in a war situation.

Baldricks_Mate
05-08-2005, 05:49 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gifThere was/are rules of engagement. The Nazi's were engaged in unrestricted naval warfare. As I understand the rules of engagement at the time, the Allied comander(s) would be obliged to attack. A early-ish U boat tactic was if cornered, to park your sub under the crew of a sunk ship to avoid depth charging. It work for a short while until the escorts charged in and depth charged anyway - while the crews were in the water. The results were not nice. Official references are not easy to come by but an easily acessed "unofficial" commentary is in the novel "The Cruel Sea" when the Flower Class corvette "Compass Rose" strikes this scenario.
In short it don't matter a damm...don't negotiate with terrorists.

Jex_TG
05-09-2005, 09:33 AM
German U-boat captains were reported to help the crew of ships they'd sunk, sometimes giving them food and a compass so they could get home.

American U-boat captains preferred to deckgun survivors - well according to microprose's silent service anyway http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Trackman53
05-09-2005, 10:32 AM
Originally posted by Jex_TG:
German U-boat captains were reported to help the crew of ships they'd sunk, sometimes giving them food and a compass so they could get home.

American U-boat captains preferred to deckgun survivors - well according to microprose's silent service anyway http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

See this web site for an example of this by German U-Boat skippers:
http://www.u-35.com

the_kommadant
05-09-2005, 12:56 PM
Originally posted by Baldricks_Mate:
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gifThere was/are rules of engagement. The Nazi's were engaged in unrestricted naval warfare. As I understand the rules of engagement at the time, the Allied comander(s) would be obliged to attack. A early-ish U boat tactic was if cornered, to park your sub under the crew of a sunk ship to avoid depth charging. It work for a short while until the escorts charged in and depth charged anyway - while the crews were in the water. The results were not nice. Official references are not easy to come by but an easily acessed "unofficial" commentary is in the novel "The Cruel Sea" when the Flower Class corvette "Compass Rose" strikes this scenario.
In short it don't matter a damm...don't negotiate with terrorists.

The Americans engaged in unrestricted warfare against Japan also. A lot of American submarine captains machine gunned the survivors in lifeboats too. The major Nazi attrocity was a raider captain put crews into life boats in the middle of the ocean and let them drift. I am sure that some U-boat captains probably killed survivors, but the majority did not. The American put that he machine gunned survivors the patrol reports.

Trink_Afri-Cola
05-09-2005, 07:24 PM
Originally posted by archer49d:
1) As hard as the allies tried they couldn't ever compete with Germany in term of being "inhuman".
2) Yes, they bombed allied lifeboats full of Italians who were probably going back to kill more allied soldiers when they got back to a German controlled port. I'd pull the trigger on that one any day.

Actually, I think the German Soldiers including the Nazi soldiers were quite civilized in combat, unlike their counterparts in the the US, english, and soviet militaries. Totally vicious and disgusting, especially the soviets.

Bergman
05-09-2005, 08:43 PM
Malmedy, Rotterdam, Coventry, Warshaw I, Warshaw 2, Warshaw 3, Guernica, Leningrad, Waffen SS, Einsatzgruppen etc. Not neccessary to say more.

bertgang
05-10-2005, 04:16 AM
Best to forget national historical faults: every country has some.

Human shields are a young invention, they could work only if everybody knows that someone is using them, and nearby TV reporters are ready to witness their mass murder; without that, in WWII they should have been totally ineffective, specially at sea.

Guardicus
05-10-2005, 08:36 AM
Yeah, ok, Nazis were civiled in combat, nice trolling. I suppose murdering unarmed American POW's during the battle of the bulge counts as civilized?

There is alot of revisionist history on these forums. Interesting. I also sense alot of anti-American sentiment. That's fine, but be fair and equitable in your criticism.

Spend more time refining your knowledge of history and less time in front of the pc trolling forums.

Nothing irks us more than an ungrateful, ignorant Euro with an axe to grind....

durex2000
05-10-2005, 09:11 AM
Dont listen to Afri-Cola. He is just a insane neo fascist, posting fascistic stuff (this is not the first post). Simply ignore those guys.
durex

CRSutton
05-10-2005, 11:06 AM
Of all the services the German Navy was probably the least tainted by fanatical nazism. It was a tight knit professional service with very close ties to the old Germany. Many officers were ardent anti Nazis (Canaris). Likewise Naval combat is a little less personal than ground combat-where the close proximity of the enemy and the daily exposure to death and mayhem tends to hardend even the most moral of soldiers. Tactics such as the human shield are more of a SS or Gestapo sort of thing. I doubt that it ever happened on Naval ships.