General Discussions
This is the place to discuss general issues related to the U-boat war or the war at sea in WWII.
RE: Hospital ships
Posted by:
kurt
()
Date: March 13, 2001 01:48AM
<HTML>Thanks for the compliment!
Both those instances you mention were unfortunate, but in both cases the ships were not marked as true hospital ships. Without starting a debate on the Gustloff, Gustloff could have reasonably considered to be carrying soldiers (and in fact was, if memory serves correctly), in addition to its civilian load. The attack on it was unauthorized and contrary to the Soviet sub commanders orders (he was out of position), though not contrary to Soviet policy and actions. It was also well within the bounds of what people did to eachother on both sides on the Eastern Front. Not that it makes it right, but it makes it more understandable as a historical incident. Part of the flavor of my last post is that as historians, we have to look at incidents within the particular dynamics and actions of each front, which were very different from eachother.
The U-boats in the Laconia incident were, well, warships. They were not marked as hospital ships (painted white, fully lit, unarmed). They should not have been, in my opinion, attacked, but it is very hard for an in in a battlefield to \'stop the shooting\'. The allied commanders figured the \'local ceasefire\' request of the U-boat to be a ruse or some other trick. The attacking aircraft, I\'m sorry to say, was a USAAF B-24. </HTML>
Both those instances you mention were unfortunate, but in both cases the ships were not marked as true hospital ships. Without starting a debate on the Gustloff, Gustloff could have reasonably considered to be carrying soldiers (and in fact was, if memory serves correctly), in addition to its civilian load. The attack on it was unauthorized and contrary to the Soviet sub commanders orders (he was out of position), though not contrary to Soviet policy and actions. It was also well within the bounds of what people did to eachother on both sides on the Eastern Front. Not that it makes it right, but it makes it more understandable as a historical incident. Part of the flavor of my last post is that as historians, we have to look at incidents within the particular dynamics and actions of each front, which were very different from eachother.
The U-boats in the Laconia incident were, well, warships. They were not marked as hospital ships (painted white, fully lit, unarmed). They should not have been, in my opinion, attacked, but it is very hard for an in in a battlefield to \'stop the shooting\'. The allied commanders figured the \'local ceasefire\' request of the U-boat to be a ruse or some other trick. The attacking aircraft, I\'m sorry to say, was a USAAF B-24. </HTML>