General Discussions
This is the place to discuss general issues related to the U-boat war or the war at sea in WWII.
Re: The story
Posted by:
Rainer Bruns
()
Date: November 13, 2001 11:10PM
<HTML>Hi Oliver,
Well, if you call it wisdom - I shall be flattered. One aims to please. :-)) I did not refer to "youngish age" but "ill considered youthfull expressions". And yes, I can read.
Back to Eck:
The argument of trying to sink the wreckage, but not harm the survivors in the process, is well known and has been commented on ad nauseam. The thought of trying to shoot the life raft out from underneath the survivor's bottom without harming the person, is totally ludicrous. I suppose, if successfully done, the survivor is now free to drown or be a tasty meal for the sharks.
Without doubt it was premeditated murder of non-combattants witrh the act cloaked under the umbrella of "operational neccessety". It harmed the honor of the German Uboat Waffe and he atoned for it by paying the highest price.
Your reference to like atrocities on a larger scale by Americans and other Allies is not germane to the Eck case, since one wrong does not justify another. Ofc, their actions are at least equally repulsive as the SS murders of POWs at the 'battle of the bulge'.
Ofc, such atrocities are rarely called to account by the side committing same. Considerations of fog of war and troop morale causes them to be swept under the rug.
Ofc, the loser in a conflict is rarely in the position to exert his rights - if he has any left.
That leaves us with the winner in the Lueneburg Heather, and the rest is history. For my part, those guys executed after the trial, had it coming. A couple of deaths of WW2, which I do not mourn. Yes, others deserved the same fate, but what else is new?
Rgds, RB</HTML>
Well, if you call it wisdom - I shall be flattered. One aims to please. :-)) I did not refer to "youngish age" but "ill considered youthfull expressions". And yes, I can read.
Back to Eck:
The argument of trying to sink the wreckage, but not harm the survivors in the process, is well known and has been commented on ad nauseam. The thought of trying to shoot the life raft out from underneath the survivor's bottom without harming the person, is totally ludicrous. I suppose, if successfully done, the survivor is now free to drown or be a tasty meal for the sharks.
Without doubt it was premeditated murder of non-combattants witrh the act cloaked under the umbrella of "operational neccessety". It harmed the honor of the German Uboat Waffe and he atoned for it by paying the highest price.
Your reference to like atrocities on a larger scale by Americans and other Allies is not germane to the Eck case, since one wrong does not justify another. Ofc, their actions are at least equally repulsive as the SS murders of POWs at the 'battle of the bulge'.
Ofc, such atrocities are rarely called to account by the side committing same. Considerations of fog of war and troop morale causes them to be swept under the rug.
Ofc, the loser in a conflict is rarely in the position to exert his rights - if he has any left.
That leaves us with the winner in the Lueneburg Heather, and the rest is history. For my part, those guys executed after the trial, had it coming. A couple of deaths of WW2, which I do not mourn. Yes, others deserved the same fate, but what else is new?
Rgds, RB</HTML>
