Auschwitz and Birkenau

Marc

FH is my second home
Joined
Dec 28, 2003
Messages
11,094
Oh my..

If you havent already been, you have got to visit this place. Had a week in Poland and this was the highlight. You cant fully appreciate the horror and attrocities that happened at this place until you visit.

Even the birds know what happened here as you will not hear or see any birds in the place, but outside in the car park there are plenty.

Here is a question for you second world war buffs...

There is evidence that shows the allies knew about the place and what went on there. Why did they do nothing about it? The villages outside, where the germans lived were bombed, but only one bomb landed on Auscwitz and this was by mistake.
 

kirennia

Part of the furniture
Joined
Dec 26, 2003
Messages
3,857
They couldn't bomb the place as it was filled with innocent civilians. The only real option was to invade and liberate it on foot which they eventually did even if it was very late :(
 

Marc

FH is my second home
Joined
Dec 28, 2003
Messages
11,094
The allies bombed plenty of towns/villages that had innocents living there. What made auschwitz different?

Even if they didnt want to kill the innocents inside, why didnt they at least bomb the railroad that was carrying all the people into auschwitz?
 

Elkie

Can't get enough of FH
Joined
Nov 25, 2004
Messages
2,621
No, Intel was not 100% on what was going on in these camps, the allieds had no idea who the Germans were keeping there. There may have been evidence of what events went on there but I doubt very much the evidence did not suggest the scale of events. It wasn't until the alieds landed on foot that the true horror of what on in these places was revealed.

I have been and was a very moving experience, also recommend it to anyone.
 

liloe

It's my birthday today!
Joined
Jan 25, 2004
Messages
4,168
I was in a KZ near Munich and while it was impressive, I wouldn't call it a must-see experience. Then again it might be that as German, I'm used to getting indoctrinated that I'm a ruthless killer starting at the age of 3.
 

Marc

FH is my second home
Joined
Dec 28, 2003
Messages
11,094
No, Intel was not 100% on what was going on in these camps, the allieds had no idea who the Germans were keeping there. There may have been evidence of what events went on there but I doubt very much the evidence did not suggest the scale of events. It wasn't until the alieds landed on foot that the true horror of what on in these places was revealed.

I have been and was a very moving experience, also recommend it to anyone.


They did know. Churchil was told about it and was horrified and told the RAF to bomb it straightaway, but it never happened.
 

Chronictank

FH is my second home
Joined
Jan 21, 2004
Messages
10,133
They did know. Churchil was told about it and was horrified and told the RAF to bomb it straightaway, but it never happened.

he might have been pissed at the time so they took it as one of his rants :p
surely they couldnt bomb it if there were civilians being held there?
it's not as if bombing it would have made a significant difference, they would have just rebuilt it elsewhere and killed them using different methods
so would hold little military significane (there were only a few commanders and SS peoples according to their website)
 

Marc

FH is my second home
Joined
Dec 28, 2003
Messages
11,094
he might have been pissed at the time so they took it as one of his rants :p
surely they couldnt bomb it if there were civilians being held there?
it's not as if bombing it would have made a significant difference, they would have just rebuilt it elsewhere and killed them using different methods
so would hold little military significane (there were only a few commanders and SS peoples according to their website)

There will always be terrorists, ready to kill innocents. Should we not stop them when we have the chance. I understand what you are saying, I just cant see it myself.
 

Wonk

Can't get enough of FH
Joined
Dec 23, 2003
Messages
4,155
I've visited some KZ camps aswell and it was indeed interresting, although a bit brutal.
 

Chronictank

FH is my second home
Joined
Jan 21, 2004
Messages
10,133
There will always be terrorists, ready to kill innocents. Should we not stop them when we have the chance. I understand what you are saying, I just cant see it myself.

I completely agree with you,
but given the choice of spending rescources on stopping military assets and reloacting them to stop a death camp (atrocious as it is) the military decision would be to stop the assets, the human one would be to stop the killing

Just look at Israel today, they are effectively starving a country and pushing it into permanent economic ruin because of a minority,
The human responce would be enough is enough, the strategic is to leave things alone and try and resolve the issue through diplomacy and a bit of political leaning

It takes sick people to come up with shit like camps, but ultimately a look at the bigger picture is needed to win in the long run when your faced with allocating finite resources

You should visit the tour things near Chernobyl at some point, i have never been to a place so genuinly un-nerving in my life (and i have quite thick skin so to speak)
it sends a chill down your spine as if the place is frozen in time
 

soze

I am a FH squatter
Joined
Jan 22, 2004
Messages
12,508
They did not bomb as it would have been a war crime i think something about people in citys could have left but did not, people held in the camp were stuck there. I have seen a documentry about this but can't remember why they did nothing.
 

Marc

FH is my second home
Joined
Dec 28, 2003
Messages
11,094
I completely agree with you,
but given the choice of spending rescources on stopping military assets and reloacting them to stop a death camp (atrocious as it is) the military decision would be to stop the assets, the human one would be to stop the killing

Just look at Israel today, they are effectively starving a country and pushing it into permanent economic ruin because of a minority,
The human responce would be enough is enough, the strategic is to leave things alone and try and resolve the issue through diplomacy and a bit of political leaning

It takes sick people to come up with shit like camps, but ultimately a look at the bigger picture is needed to win in the long run when your faced with allocating finite resources

You should visit the tour things near Chernobyl at some point, i have never been to a place so genuinly un-nerving in my life (and i have quite thick skin so to speak)
it sends a chill down your spine as if the place is frozen in time

A lad I work with is involved with a charity for Chernobyl and he has shown me photos. I know what you mean about un nerving
 

Jeros

Part of the furniture
Joined
Dec 27, 2003
Messages
1,983
There will always be terrorists, ready to kill innocents. Should we not stop them when we have the chance. I understand what you are saying, I just cant see it myself.

Remember as hard as it is to imagine the world was in tatters, it was a WORLD war, resources where thin on the ground britain, hence we had recycling of pots and pans to build spits, i sure they would have liked to do something, but it was a fight for surivel
 

Dahakon

Fledgling Freddie
Joined
Nov 15, 2005
Messages
387
Yeah, I went there a few years ago, it was incredibly haunting. The bit that got me the most was room that was just full of shoes taken from the victims, I suppose that was the most human remains there, and the ones you could relate to most.

Here is a question for you second world war buffs...

There is evidence that shows the allies knew about the place and what went on there. Why did they do nothing about it? The villages outside, where the germans lived were bombed, but only one bomb landed on Auscwitz and this was by mistake.

They didn't realise the sheer extent of the killing, and thought bombing the camps would kill a lot more innocent people that not killing them. Also they only knew about the camps because they broke the enigma codes, and didn't want the Nazi's to realise this.
 

Platin

Fledgling Freddie
Joined
May 12, 2004
Messages
450
They couldn't bomb the place as it was filled with innocent civilians. The only real option was to invade and liberate it on foot which they eventually did even if it was very late :(

I think the option was to destroy the roads/railroads leading to the camp (like they did on the tracks from the factories). The allies didn't know what was going on in those camps though, even if they knew they existed.

Btw hey kirennia mate :)!
 

old.Tohtori

FH is my second home
Joined
Jan 23, 2004
Messages
45,210
Well, there's a couple of reasons, but here's some:

A: They had WAY more important things to worry about then some civilians.
B: They had some nice places like that themselves.(allied were as bad as the germans).
C: They couldn't get a succesful bomb run.

And then there's the whole "don't kill civilians" pr bullcrp, but, doubt that would've stopped them.
 

Marc

FH is my second home
Joined
Dec 28, 2003
Messages
11,094
Well, there's a couple of reasons, but here's some:

A: They had WAY more important things to worry about then some civilians.
B: They had some nice places like that themselves.(allied were as bad as the germans).
C: They couldn't get a succesful bomb run.

And then there's the whole "don't kill civilians" pr bullcrp, but, doubt that would've stopped them.


A. Possibly
B. Dont be so silly. We didnt set out to exterminate millions of people. What a stupid statement Toh.
C. Allied bombers regularly flew over Auscwitz and the rail track leading to Auschwitz, on their way to other targets
 

old.Tohtori

FH is my second home
Joined
Jan 23, 2004
Messages
45,210
A. Possibly
B. Dont be so silly. We didnt set out to exterminate millions of people. What a stupid statement Toh.
C. Allied bombers regularly flew over Auscwitz and the rail track leading to Auschwitz, on their way to other targets

A: Exactly. Can't really know, but i bet it was a minor target, if even that.
B: Didn't say so, and yes, germans did some extreme things compared, but allied weren't all these "heroes" of the world either. They had their dark side. (Oh and, germans didn't "set out to kill millions" either, it's just the thing people remember)
C: Refer to A really, but on bomb runs, you don't just "drop one on the way". Even if you were carrying 10 bombs to drop, and you saw old Adolf running nakid on the field, you couldn't confirm a "ok" to drop bombs before the target was gone. so, bomb runs were, A-B-A and that's it.
 

soze

I am a FH squatter
Joined
Jan 22, 2004
Messages
12,508
Seemingly the official reason is they could not smart bomb with enough skll to avoid killing the prisioners so they did nothing. Some peole claim the brits could have as we had accurate bombing and a small fighter bomber couls have made it there. But the Brits claim the chance of sucess was too low to risk.

I think this would be a hard call to make now we could smart bomb the barracks and the chemical rooms and leave the prisoners. But back then the chance of getting the bomb in the right place would be too hard a call for someone to make imo
 

Lethul

FH is my second home
Joined
Jan 25, 2004
Messages
8,433
A: Exactly. Can't really know, but i bet it was a minor target, if even that.
B: Didn't say so, and yes, germans did some extreme things compared, but allied weren't all these "heroes" of the world either. They had their dark side. (Oh and, germans didn't "set out to kill millions" either, it's just the thing people remember)
C: Refer to A really, but on bomb runs, you don't just "drop one on the way". Even if you were carrying 10 bombs to drop, and you saw old Adolf running nakid on the field, you couldn't confirm a "ok" to drop bombs before the target was gone. so, bomb runs were, A-B-A and that's it.

C: i think his point was they could easily have made a bombrun on the camp if they wanted, not that they could have dropped an occasional bomb every time they pass ........................

B: i wanna know what these extreme things the allies did that you think is comparable with auswitch ?
 

old.Tohtori

FH is my second home
Joined
Jan 23, 2004
Messages
45,210
C: i think his point was they could easily have made a bombrun on the camp if they wanted, not that they could have dropped an occasional bomb every time they pass ........................

B: i wanna know what these extreme things the allies did that you think is comparable with auswitch ?

C: Yes hensh the "refer to A" in my post. Not a target. Anything could have been bombed, not the point really.

B: Yes yes, you want proof or wiki links and all that. Well i haven't dug it up, it's just common logic and sense.

First, i didn't say extreme things, i refered to the germans doing extreme things. Second, i'm not saying they had exact same style camps(wouldn't know if they did, as allied won), but certainly prisoner camps, or "alleged nazi" camps. Similar to quantanamo these days. And if you think they treat people with silk gloves and with warm fuzzy teddybears in those places, or that the allied forces never resorted to unethical acts, i'm not gonna change your mind with some "documentation" from the internet.
 

old.Tohtori

FH is my second home
Joined
Jan 23, 2004
Messages
45,210
Noticed that yes, saying "(allied were as bad as the germans)" was too extreme, when i meant "allied weren't that "good" either" as such.

But hopefully the posts that followed, explained it.
 

Marc

FH is my second home
Joined
Dec 28, 2003
Messages
11,094
You originally said

"Allied were as bad as the germans"

The only thing we did that comes any where near as close, was the dropping of the nucleur bomb. But that was for war reasons, to end the war, unlike the holocaust
 

old.Tohtori

FH is my second home
Joined
Jan 23, 2004
Messages
45,210
You originally said

"Allied were as bad as the germans"

The only thing we did that comes any where near as close, was the dropping of the nucleur bomb. But that was for war reasons, to end the war, unlike the holocaust

Yes yes, and explained it just there.

The nukes we're even worse in my opinion, no question, no "reason" changes it. Holocaust killed people to "purify" or some such, the nukes were to "end the war", same difference. Killing of civilians for own needs. But this isn't really about that.

Aaand also, i think that the treatment of a civilian in camps and the treatment of soldiers in camps, same difference in "human rights violation" or some such. So a prison camp or a civilian holding camp or "possible nazi collaborator"-camp, they treated people most likely in the same manner, and a human is a human.
 

old.Tohtori

FH is my second home
Joined
Jan 23, 2004
Messages
45,210
However, saying we were as bad as the Axis? Waaaaay over the line Toh.

Exactly. It wasn't meant as such, but sometimes in the heat of posting, you tend to forget the ten second before "post" rule.

My bad on that account, yes, admitted.
 

Fafnir

Resident Freddy
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
3,024
Well Stalin and his boy's where just as bad as Mr. H if not worse. And if the allies had bombed the camps, the germans would only have used the slavelabour to rebuild them.

The only way to stop them was to win the war. But Stalins Gulags kept on running.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom