1. Please take 30 seconds to register your free account to remove most ads, post topics, make friends, earn reward points at our store, and more!  

Soldiers who fought Hitler hide their medals

Discussion in 'Off Topic [BG]' started by P. Aaron, Jan 1, 2012.

  1. P. Aaron

    P. Aaron Supporting Member

  2. nortonrider


    Nov 20, 2007
    "They didn't understand why we did what we did. A lot of Irish people wanted Germany to win the war - they were dead up against the British."

    and......... it looks like if Germany would have won the war, they would have gotten a lot worse than what they did.
    I'm actually surprised to find that Ireland wanted Hitler to win.
  3. Ireland had not long gained independance and there is always an anti-british segment of the Irish population. The IRA (or claimed IRA) terrorists (or freedom fighters as some Amercians saw them) have still had some activity in the past couple of years, granted, still calmer than what was happening in the 80s and 90s. They would have seen Germany as a country which could have bullied Britain back.

    Basically, they were punished for fighting because Ireland wanted to stay out of it (I also suspect it was unofficially to punish people for siding with the British over the Irish).
  4. Dr. Cheese

    Dr. Cheese Gold Supporting Member

    Mar 3, 2004
    Metro St. Louis
    I'm no expert on this subject, but if the British did not offer these Irish soldiers citizenship after the war, they are the true villians in this story. Anybody who has a knowledge of Irish history should not be surprised that the Irish sided with the Germans. Heck, many in the West sided with Hitler at one time or another in the lead up to WWII. Had it not been for both Germans and other Europeans who tolerated Hitler because he was anti-communist, he never would have gained power.
  5. nortonrider


    Nov 20, 2007
    well, Obviously there's my problem, I didn't spend my time studying Irish history.
  6. AnchorHoy


    Dec 29, 2008
    New Jersey
    Yep. Two famous Americans that come readily to mind in this context are Henry Ford and Charles Lindbergh, although to be fair a distinction needs to be drawn between supporting Hitler personally and "supporting" the Nazi government of the time

    It is pretty clear from his own writings and public statements that Ford was an unabashed anti-Semite and supporter of Hitler personally

    With Lindbergh, it wasn't quite that simple IMHO. Due to his high status in the aviation world he had been given unprecedented access in the late 1930's to the latest developments in German aviation, even to the point of guided tours of certain research and production facilities within Germany as a personal guest of Göring himself. It needs to be said right up front that he had also cleared his visit with the Roosevelt administration beforehand and freely offered to be debriefed in detail when he returned

    At the time of Lindbergh's visit in 1936, Germany had already repudiated the Versailles Treaty and was openly rearming. The level of technological and production expertise he saw first-hand was apparently one major factor in Lindbergh's subsequent support for the America First movement, which inevitably led to his troubles with the Roosevelt administration. Accepting a medal from the Nazi government two years later, in 1938, certainly did not help him in this regard, especially since the mood in the USA had definitely turned away from isolationism and towards supporting the British and French against an increasingly aggressive Germany and Italy. Hard-head that he was, Lindbergh never backed off from his isolationist position until the Pearl Harbor attack in 1941, at which point he offered his services to the US government - with predictable results.....

    Well after the start of direct American participation in the war, Roosevelt eventually consented to allowing Lindbergh to provide "technical assistance" to front-line units but (unlike many of his peers) he was not given a commission in the military and he was also flat-out barred from the European Theater, spending all of his time as an "advisor" in the Pacific Theater where his expertise played a significant role in the mission to kill Admiral Yamamoto
  7. Phalex

    Phalex Semper Gumby Supporting Member

    Oct 3, 2006
    G.R. MI
    The enemy of my enemy........
  8. From the article:

    ...but the British are the villains....riiiiiight.
  9. rr5025


    Nov 12, 2008
  10. Dr. Cheese

    Dr. Cheese Gold Supporting Member

    Mar 3, 2004
    Metro St. Louis
    I said if rhe UK did not offer the Irish soldiers citizenship, they are the true villians in the story, and as I said before, I am not an expert on this story, so maybe the British did offer these veterans an oportunity to be UK citizens. Simply allowing them to be resident workers is inadequate, IMHO.

    After the Vietnam War, America allowed thousands of South Vietnamese to come here and become citizens. The same is true for the Hmong soldiers from Laos who fought for America during the Vietnam War.

    My main point is that if a government takes soldiers to fight in a war their own country does not support, then that country has a moral obligation to those soldiers.
  11. Mystic Michael

    Mystic Michael Hip No Ties

    Apr 1, 2004
    New York, NY
    And IF that is the way it actually went down, it frankly wouldn't surprise me. Nor would it be the first time that the British government did something so villainous.

    As much as of an Anglophile as I can be, I'd be the first to admit: sometimes they can be downright bastards. :mad:

  12. I'm not trying to annoy you, but you seem to have gone from one unsubstantiated statement about citizenship (which is not quite right when talking about the British at that time anyway), to another about resident worker status, which doesn't really apply to the Irish. I don't know why more of them did not relocate, but there was certainly nothing legal stopping them from doing so - perhaps they had other reasons for staying: they would have had National Insurance, pension and employment rights if they had relocated, and permanently settled status if they had been there for more than a year.

    Wikipedia (Iknow, I know, but the reference seemed solid enough):

    And quite right to. But tell me, after WWII, in which many African Americans fought and died, was there any difference in the civil rights for the survivors compared to their white peers? And this was their own country. Does this make the USA a "villain"?

    What happened to these men and their families was shameful, especially after the full horror of what they were fighting against became known. At the very least they deserve honourable recognition in their own country, and I would say some serious compensation as well.
  13. Dr. Cheese

    Dr. Cheese Gold Supporting Member

    Mar 3, 2004
    Metro St. Louis
    If you are looking for a gotcha moment, fine. I have twice admitted that I don't have deep knowledge of this story. I simply said that the British owed the Irish soldiers for their service, and the proper repayment was citizenship, IMO. That seems to have been an option, so the British were not the villians.

    As for the treatment of African American soldiers during WWII, are you simply looking for a s##tstorm? You know full well that anything I say critical about the treatment of African American soldiers will simply be an excuse for those who love to attack me to come out of the wood work.
  14. I was just narking the pitch a little bit. I'll stop now.
  15. sandmangeck


    Jul 2, 2007
    I think the USA is has been percieved as a villain for quite sometime now with the treatment of it's own people. And I'm not even going to kick the hornets nest of the treatment of people outside.

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.