Senior Member
Global Moderator
Senior Member
Interesting discussion!
Their own, yes - and I'm sure Allied atrocities (whether real, exaggerated or fabricated) would have been very much publicised and punished by a winning Axis regime, whether in Europe or Asia.Originally posted by bubbaj0nes:
If the Axis had won, what would history being saying about them? Would the atrocities be hidden, and disguised?
Having said that, I find it interesting that some WW2 Allied atrocities are openly admitted by veterans - yet do not seem to be recorded by history as known atrocities or unpunished war crimes.
A few TV documentaries about various WW2 battles I've watched recently have featured veterans' accounts of killing prisoners on the battlefield. One particular contrast stood out:
In one film, a US soldier, who had lived to tell the tale of the Malmedy massacre (he was shot in the legs and played dead), finished by saying something like: "I've often wondered why they did it. I guess they were in a hurry and didn't have time to take prisoners...". After what happened to him and his not-so-fortunate friends, I was surprised by the way he tried to empathise with the mindset of the German perpetrators (that's how it seemed to me anyway).
Two separate documentaries I saw shortly afterward (one of which I remember was 'Hell in the Pacific') featured Allied soldiers who stated that they had killed numerous enemy troops who had surrendered on the battlefield, in the Pacific and in Normandy. The reason they gave echoed that which the Malmedy survivor suggested: "We didn't have time to take prisoners."
Senior Member
I've not heard that before. My impression of the American Civil War is that the south was indeed fighting principally to retain slavery. At least, that's what I was taught at school here in the UK (in the late 1980s).Originally posted by RockinRobbins:
Interestingly, sometimes, as in the American Civil War, the history is rewritten by the losers! During the 1870s through the civil rights movements of the sixties, the southern losers succeeded in rewriting a war which was begun over slavery, fought to repudiate that right and whose victory ended slavery forever in the US, as a simple war about states' rights vs. federal rights. The "noble" southerners have recast their shameful guilt as defending the real principles of the founders of the US. Most people accept that fallacy as fact today.
Senior Member
Going back to the original subject of this thread...
Originally posted by antiStalin:
I bought SH3 three years ago. However, I only played the tutorial sections of it and never involved in any missions. It was because I did not find any convincing reasons to have joys in killing the Allies.Originally posted by antiStalin:
Yesterday, I participated in the Tokoyo express mission of SH4. I incorporated some webmates' advice and hence luckily evaded four destroyers hunting, though still sustained considerable damages. In the process, I sank two destroyers. I felt immense pleasure when viewing them being eliminated. Great! I had made a little contribution for history.
SH3 and SH4 do not focus on moral decisions, killing humans, nor changing history. The emphasis is on submarine/ASW tactics and technology.
I'm confused by this attitude to 'right and wrong'. You have a moral issue with "killing Allies" in the SH3 game, yet you imply that you morally approve of killing Japanese sailors in SH4. If killing Japanese sailors is a motivating factor for choosing SH4 over SH3, you're playing the game for the wrong reasons. Those feelings belong in the past!
If WW2 veterans (some, not all, admittedly) can learn to forgive and even befriend their former enemies, then who are we to perpetuate feelings of moral approval for killing Allied or Axis opponents - regardless of which sides we're fighting for and against?
Please try to remember that sinking those fictitious Japanese destroyers did not make any contribution to REAL history whatsoever! Equally, sinking Allied ships in SH3 does not have a negative effect on anything, anywhere!! (I'm sure know you know that - I'm just saying you need to keep that objectivity when playing the game!)
Senior Member
Senior Member
Herr Porche always did want to make thinks backwards. I have two of his legacies, or as they are sometimes called, Hitler's Revenge.Originally posted by Celeon999:
Hmmm i haven't read that they claim this anywhere.
BTW :
Photos of the two Tiger prototypes during secret trials in a forest in Poland.
Notice the untypical body (suggested by Porsche and got rejected later) and the position of the turret.
It went through quite some drastic changes before series production began.
Vlaba
Senior Member
Banned
Senior Member
possibly a dangerous precedent...
