IGNORE THE LAW: German Interpretation of International Law in World War II Part IV (Conclusion)

[@franciszeklatinik889]

At last, the final part of this series is out, well thanks a lot for posting this.

[@nikhil1536]

Hello Hand Grenade Division, I just wanted to take a moment to express my heartfelt congratulations on the fantastic KZbin videos you've been producing. Your content is both informative and engaging, and I've learned so much from your channel. I'm particularly interested in the Eastern Front of World War II, and I was wondering if you have any plans to create any more videos exploring it. Your approach to storytelling and analysis would make for an incredible addition to the discussion on this topic. Keep up the excellent work, and I can't wait to see what you have in store in the future!

[@DaveSCameron]

I second this comment. 👍

[@JHohenhauser]

Another very insightful video on the conduct of Germany's armed forces. I cannot say this enough: Great work, keep it up!

[@derekstynes9631]

Good Work as Usual Thanks for All Your Efforts .

[@Andy85uk]

38:02 I take it this incident formed the basis for what was portrayed in Masters of the Air

[@HandGrenadeDivision]

It took me some time to figure this out as I haven't seen past episode 2, but yes. A watchmojo video (of all things) confirms that the inclusion of a 100th BG pilot in the depiction of the Rüsselsheim massacre was an invention of the film-makers, but that the film-makers had the actual event firmly in mind when choosing to portray it. kzbin.info/www/bejne/iWGliHxontOspKc @watchmojo.com

[@colson3050]

Another amazing video! I knew of some of these events but Ide never seen some of the pictures especially of the erns etc.

[@brentandvuk]

Excellent video, thank you

[@johanlaidoner122]

Great video, will you do any video like this on german treatment of civlians?

[@HandGrenadeDivision]

Thank you for the kind words. I probably won't do anything on civilians as it is outside my areas of interest and expertise but I agree it is an interesting field of study.

[@JohnDoe-yr4wc]

Excellent as usual!

[@FeldgrauDivison]

Hey! Big fan of your channel, very big inspo for me. I was looking at your earlier uniform-focused videos and was wondering, what tool do you use to draw the depictions of the uniforms in those videos?

[@HandGrenadeDivision]

Would you believe Microsoft Paint? No one ever does when I tell them.

[@FeldgrauDivison]

@@HandGrenadeDivision I believe thst, haha! Thank you so much 👍

[@SmittyMRE]

Recognize the brave POW from such productions as "Thousand Yard Stare" and "A Child of War", but where's the flask!?

[@HandGrenadeDivision]

The divisional MO wanted to double-check it since it was last seen in Leo Major but the star refused to submit to a health and safety inspection. We were just happy to have the man on set, what can I say?

[@domino2560]

It's interesting when things are noted and when not, like for example the questionable aspect of especially excluding previous legal presidents or the American usage of German POWs as laborers under the euphemism of Disarmed Enemy Forces.

[@HandGrenadeDivision]

No real rhyme or reason to "exclusions", other than trying to keep it to a reasonable length. Wasn't concerned much with what the Allies did as the series deals with German interpretation. It's a worthy topic of study, but didn't consider it germane here. I did have a whole "chapter" on the Canadian reprisal action at Friesoythe where the entire town was burned down as retribution for a popular commanding officer being killed. I deleted it as not really on topic, and way too long to include. I may do something on it separately at some point. Thanks for taking the time to comment.

[@mitchrils]

Has your channel been shadow banned? Not been seeing these videos in my subscribed section :/

[@HandGrenadeDivision]

Not that I'm aware of. If you want to be informed of every video on a specific channel you also need to click on the bell icon and indicate you want to be informed of every video, otherwise, it is up to the algorithm as to what you're informed of. I expect my content is sufficiently unique, as well as infrequent, that it is difficult for the algorithm to recommend it based on what else people are watching.

[@tostie3110]

I agree I'm not being notified. The bonus of that is that I get to watch 4 videos in 1 go, as this one actually showed up. It might be due to the fact that these in depth videos take longer to release and KZbin might see that as a sign of disinterest, as I can't watch in depth wwII content that often

[@AGaming775]

Please post the Kriegsmarine ranks 1935-1945 in the next video

[@johnweerasinghe4139]

Overall, it seems like the Nazi Generals had moral remorse on the Western front against fellow Nordic races not defined as " Untermenchen." There is no such moral compunction on the Eastern Front mainly because the Soviets were defined as an inferior race.. there are other reasons. Hitler wanted to make Russia Germany's " India," i.e., a place to colonize and exploit raw materials , oil, and grain. Therefore, the policy of extermination was implemented from the beginning in Russia. While the narrative of this focus on the Western Front appears to be a subtle exoneration of the Wermacht, books like Wolfram Wette's The Wermacht clearly implicate the average German and the Wermacht were very willing participants of Hitlers extermination policy in Russia. Manstein was wanted by the Soviets for war crimes Very good video, though, with good illustrations of sources despite the usual Western bias Why does this topic bug me? Because Western accounts deviously try to position themselves on the moral high ground by throwing the Nazis under the bus? This is false. The Nazis were a product of European racism. All of Europe, the US and UK were all responsible for these criminal acts. The US had the Eugenics movement, and Jim Crow Britain committed plenty of acts that violated international law. Churchill alone was responsible for the deaths of millions of Bengalis in India. This broad racism was a product of colonialism that definitely didn't value the lives of the natives they killed in the conquest of colonies. What bugs me the most is as soon as the USSR became a competitor that threatened the wests interests in regaining their Colonies and as soon as the US got the Atom bomb to negate the strength of the Red Army , all these crocodile tears over Nazi atrocities in the east were forgotten and every effort was made to minimize and ignore these heinous crimes committed against the Slavic people in the east. And worse, all these Nazis were rehabilitated and employed by the West This was truly the " unkindest cut" against a former ally. Deplorable!

[@HandGrenadeDivision]

Thanks for the kind words, I think you've summarized much of the history well. My only objection to what you've wrote, and a mild one, is to the use of the word colonialism. Not that it is inaccurate, but because the word has become so politically charged. It was the way of the world throughout recorded history. It is easy in the west to think that suddenly passé things like colonization, conquest and human slavery don't exist but all these things continue to go on whether or not observers in the liberal democracies approve. That doesn't make them right, but if they are wrong for the first world countries, they should be wrong for everyone. And if those observers are not willing for their countries to do something about it wherever it is practiced today, those same observers should probably forgive their own ancestors for having practiced it themselves, once upon a time.

[@johnweerasinghe4139]

@HandGrenadeDivision You make an incorrect assumption comparing the period of colonialism and the phenomenon of slavery and exploitation that preceded it. Colonialism is unique The broad envirnment was the Enlightenment , scientific progress, industrial revolution and the need to find raw materials and markets. The liberal movements were a source of criticism and restraint. Racism before colonialism lacked the pseudo scientific racist basis to justify slavery and exploitation. There was upward social mobility of slaves captured by Romans or Muslims. But in Europe during colonialism, the colored races were doomed because they were defined as genetically inferior. Conversely, European races could subjugate non whites because they were genetically "superior" Europeans forgot that they learned of the Greeks through the vast studies done by the Arabs of Greek writings. Remember, the Greeks moved toward India, not Europe, and had interaction with India and the Persians. The Europeans didn't give the Arabs credit ( an Arab Persian Haythum was the first to use the scientific method to disprove Aristotle's explanation of sight ) and instead made Greek learning their own. An act of plagiarism.Europe claimed a direct lineage. False. If the direct lineage was true, the Renaissance would have happened in 200 BC, NOT the 14th Century. The next potent ingredient that powered European racism was the British discovery of the Indian Upanishads in the 19th century! How could a non white culture that was " inferior " produce the Upanishads that, according to Wittengstein, were " more profund and copius than the Bible .. " Europe was exposed to the word " Aryan" So Europeans commit another act of plagiarism. Enter Arthur Gobineau and Houston Stewart Chamberlin amongst others. Any accomplishment by any civilization in any part of the world is because they had European blood claimed Gobineau! I speak a derivative of Sankrit. Sinhalese. ( සිංහල). The meaning Europe gave to The word " Aryan" has nothing to do with this word spoken in South Asia. Houston Chamberlain promoted the Nordic Races as the ideal " superior race." And associated them with " aryan" in an attempt to link them to the ancient culture that was Persian and Indian that authored the Upanishads and Avesta. No ancient cultures promoted slavery and colonialism based on an " ideal race. " But Europeans saw a " benefit " in making this link to motivate their countries no doubt insecure they played no decisive development in ancient history i.e. astronomy , medicine , Gunpowder, maritime compass, Arabic nunemerals etc. Add to this mixture was the Eugenics movement started by a cousin of Charles Darwin. Francis Galton and their concept of sterilization and reduction of the population of non white races, the misrepresentation of Darwin combined with the unlikely phenomena of one man raised in an environment of European racism becoming an absolute Dictator of one of the technologically advanced countries and you had the Holocaut. The Cold War focused on 6 million Polish Jews. I understand that historical fact, but I am also aware that the bigger target was the extermination of 190 million Soviets so the Nazis could have their equivalent of British India to secure economic autarky. No ....sorry ... there is no equivalence of slavery and conquest in the past and what evolved in Eurooe. European racism was perverted, diabolical, false and victims had no hope for redemption except in a gas chamber or if you happen to be part of the British (and French) Empire death by starvation. The West continues to blame Hitler for racism instead of owning up to producing a culture that raised him and contributed to the destruction of their empires. Nothing has changed in Europe. Look at how they treat the Russians ? Hitler's descendants are still a little annoyed they still depend on Russia for prosperity.

[@Ailasher]

Another fact, not so fun: the "Commissars Order" is the most well-known, but it did not have as much effect on the ferocity of the fighting on the Eastern Front as the "Erlass über die Ausübung der Kriegsgerichtsbarkeit im Gebiet „Barbarossa“ und über besondere Maßnahmen der Truppe" (Yep, maybe because of the length of its name). This document effectively justified any war crimes committed by Wehrmacht personnel, as long as they were, quote, "not a violation of a commander's order and were evidence of a lack of discipline". Now, here's a direct quote from that document: 1. Crimes of hostile civilians shall, until further notice, be removed from the jurisdiction of military and military field courts. 2. Guerrillas must be mercilessly destroyed by troops in battle or in pursuit. 3. All other attacks by hostile civilians against the armed forces, their members and service personnel must also be repressed by the troops on the spot, using the most extreme measures to destroy the attacker. 4. Where the time for such measures will be missed or where they were not immediately possible, the suspected elements must be brought immediately to the officer. The latter shall decide whether they are to be shot. (This is where fans of the "Clean Wehrmacht" or "It Was SS" myth should scream furiously). Localities in which the armed forces have been insidiously or treacherously attacked should be immediately subjected to mass violent measures by order of an officer not below the rank of battalion commander, if circumstances do not quickly identify the specific perpetrators. (Same). 1. Prosecution for acts committed by military and service personnel against hostile civilians is not mandatory, even when those acts simultaneously constitute a military felony or misdemeanor. 2. In discussing such actions, it must be borne in mind at every stage of the process that the defeat of Germany in 1918, the period of suffering of the German people that followed, and the struggle against National Socialism, which required countless bloody sacrifices, were the result of Bolshevik influence, something no German has forgotten. (That's brilliant!) 3. The judicial commander must therefore carefully consider whether disciplinary or judicial proceedings are necessary in such cases. The judicial superior shall order a judicial review only if it is required for reasons of military discipline and troop security. This applies to serious misconduct involving sexual immorality, criminal tendencies or misconduct likely to lead to the decay of the troops. Sentences for wanton destruction of facilities and supplies or other spoils to the detriment of one's own troops are generally not lenient. 4. It is suggested that the credibility of hostile civilian testimony be viewed extremely critically at sentencing.

[@alexanderspear9464]

Simply a response to the brutality and inhumanity the Bolsheviks inflicted on those they captured.

[@Ailasher]

@@alexanderspear9464 Yep. Every pretty woman is a Bolshevik and an hostile civilian.

[@obiwaankenobi4460]

​@@alexanderspear9464 The order was written before the invasion of the USSR. They didn't even observe the way the Soviets treated prisoners of war before writing their own orders. They went into the union with a plan to annihilate.

[@carthy29]

Great Britain during ww2 invaded and occupied soverign and democratic Iceland and Iran to ensure its security, so the allies also bent and ignored international law as it suited them, also USA occupied greenland etc etc

[@HandGrenadeDivision]

In many ways, Roosevelt had the USA in the war months before it was official - particularly with regards to the north Atlantic. When he shipped 10-ton tanks to Canada in 1940 so that the newly created Canadian Armoured Corps would have vehicles to train on, they were marked as metal scrap so as to maintain a veneer of neutrality.

[@mixererunio1757]

Your comment is great example of whataboutism.

[@HandGrenadeDivision]

@mixererunio1757 though in the case of Britain and the US, no one interned the residents of Iceland or Greenland, used them for labour, etc. So if it is really meant as "what about" it probably fails. It was a case of getting there before the Germans as far as the Allies were concerned, I think the Germans could only dream about extending their reach that far. The Spitsbergen operations are particularly interesting - I suspect Mr. Felton may have done something on this.

[@David-ct1rd]

The US Navy was hunting German subs at lest in 1940. Which is a fairly well known fact in Naval history circles.

[@rick3461]

Thank you! And no offense to my Yankee brothers, but your radio procedure is whacky in general. "A-firm" "lima Charly" "how copy". The Canadian radio procedure is just "affirmative" "loud and clear" and "acknowledge(d)". Nothing fancy Doesn't take any more time. When Americans took over the Kandahar AO in 2010 ish, I didn't understand a damn thing on the net. Lol Anywho. Great video!

[@KevinSmith-yh6tl]

I'd much rather wait for your quality content, and actually learn about history, than be Inundated with vids by a partisan hack. I think some out there will know who I speak of. He has a strangely devoted following of Fanbois also.

[@HandGrenadeDivision]

I appreciate it, Kevin. I have a couple of ideas of whom you could be referencing but I will not be so ungentlemanly as to try and guess. I'd like to be able to say the gaps between my releases is deliberate, but in all honesty its a lot of work to get it to the level I like, and I still find myself embarrassed by things like poor audio quality (not helped by my rough voice), typos in the on-screen graphics, and unfortunate errors of fact that creep in and are my fault alone. I think I worked out that every minute of finished video takes between 30 and 60 minutes of production time, including writing, re-writing, editing, researching, obtaining images, documenting references, recording sound, and then editing it all together. Was it Ben Burtt who said films aren't finished, they escape? I know exactly what he means. So I tend to be a little more sympathetic towards others in this space, even the ones who are just "phoning it in." I try not to spend a lot of time comparing response to this channel to others, mostly I remind myself to stay grateful that I've been able to inform, entertain, and most of all interact with some pleasant and well-informed viewers. I sometimes wonder if I'm a little *too* visible in the comments sections, but I know how much I enjoy being a viewer on other channels and having the creators there take the time to respond, so it is hard to stop. Thanks again for taking the time to leave a note.

[@KevinSmith-yh6tl]

@@HandGrenadeDivision The content of your reply to me, is why I enjoy your channel so much. Thanks again for all the great history you bring to us. Also, there is nothing at all wrong with the tone of your voice. 👍

[@Curse44]

First! :)

[@DaveSCameron]

1st what?

[@Curse44]

@@DaveSCameron First nerd to comment ^^

[@David-ct1rd]

There is a good book a German War crimes. a study the germans' investigation on crimes they committed. The book is " Wehrmacht War Crimes Bureau, 1939-1945"

[@alexanderspear9464]

What about the 600,000 civilians murdered by allied air and fire bombing?

[@HandGrenadeDivision]

I'm afraid that question makes no logical sense in the way it has been phrased. Aerial bombardment of civilian areas was not, as far as I am aware, illegal under international law, though as I discovered in the research for this series of videos, that law was spotty and incomplete, very much a work in progress. Either way, though, I can't confess to being all that interested in "what-about-ism." I would suggest, however, that all the major combatants seemed not to have any issues of targeting civilian populations given how frequently they did it, and how early on in the war it started.

[@johanlaidoner122]

@@HandGrenadeDivision they all participated in bombing but some more than others, the germans had no round the clock bombing like the british and their bombings were very sparse and usually for tactical not strategic purposes.

[@Ks73468]

The US still remains the only nation to use nuclear weapons on civilians. International law only matters if you loose a war.

[@HandGrenadeDivision]

Which international law in 1945 prevented the use of nuclear weapons on civilians, out of curiosity?

[@Ks73468]

@@HandGrenadeDivision the 1925 Geneva Protocol prohibited the use of chemical and biological weapons in war. Of course at that time nuclear weapons weren’t even in existence but generally one could ascribe this as prohibiting the use of weapons of mass destruction. Although 36 League of Nations members ratified the protocol including most of the Western European powers, the US did not. Just like the US championed the development of the League of Nations but never subsequently joined it. So it would be difficult practically speaking to enforce this protocol in relation to the US atomic bombings when 1. Nuclear weapons did not exist at the time of the ratification of this protocol and 2. The US never ratified the protocol or joined the League of Nations which would be the only real international body to enforce it. The exact wording was “the use in war of asphyxiating, poisonous or other gases, and of all analogous liquids, materials or devices.” I would argue that radioactive materials would constitute “all analogous liquids, materials or devices”. The United States signed this protocol in 1925 but because of reservations by the US military it was not ratified by the Senate.