Would it have been more honorable for the Officers in the Wehrmacht to resign or stay in under the leadership of the "Fuhrer"?

MAJ Bryan Zeski — Sun, 13 Dec 2015 21:31:36 -0500

**CAVEAT - This is not intended, in any way, to equate any current administration or candidate to the Nazi party or Adolf Hitler. It is simply a question about whether it is honorable to serve under a bad leader or whether it is more honorable to leave the service.

Keep in mind that Hitler was elected by the people. **** CORRECTION - Hitler was NOT elected by the people. He was legally appointed.

What should the Officers and Soldiers in the Wehrmacht have done?

Response by Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS made Dec 13 at 2015 9:53 PM

Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS — Sun, 13 Dec 2015 21:53:17 -0500

One must first realize it is a bad leader, and how bad before they can make that decision.

By all accounts, Hitler was a Charismatic Leader. I hesitate to use the word, but it is accurate. He accomplished "Great" things. He also did Terrible, Monstrous, and Horrible things which shall forever be remembered, but we get into very Subjective territory here.

As an opposing question we can look at our own Union Officers who resigned their commissions and fought for the Confederacy, and their view of the opposing side.

Response by SGM Mikel Dawson made Dec 13 at 2015 11:28 PM

SGM Mikel Dawson — Sun, 13 Dec 2015 23:28:12 -0500

I don't think we with the advantages of hindsight and history can really answer this question. We don't know the real circumstances, thoughts, upbringing of all the soldiers, officers. We can read history, but I don't believe it gives an accurate picture into the thought process to make a judgement call.

Response by SCPO Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 14 at 2015 1:24 AM

SCPO Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 14 Dec 2015 01:24:01 -0500

What it is is (a Slick Willy reference) an asinine discussion question which I fervently hope garners you no more than the minimum 15 points for asking it. Your first attempt at this was almost, I say almost, as bad. This "trumps" the absurd!!!

Response by PO1 William "Chip" Nagel made Dec 14 at 2015 4:28 AM

PO1 William "Chip" Nagel — Mon, 14 Dec 2015 04:28:37 -0500

The Nuremberg Trials at the end of the War pretty much answered that question. "I was just Obeying Orders" if that Order is Illegal under the Conventions of War, It is a War Crime for you to obey it and you are a War Criminal although I'm sure that Opting Out was not an Option for Most with the Exception of the Von Trapp Family (Made Famous in the Sound of Music) who escaped the country.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 14 at 2015 6:52 AM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 14 Dec 2015 06:52:28 -0500

Not sure what honor has to do with an individual serving their county and leaving because they don't like the leader.

Response by Capt Walter Miller made Dec 14 at 2015 8:22 AM

Capt Walter Miller — Mon, 14 Dec 2015 08:22:52 -0500

Beck left under protest and Von Runstedt also left I believe.

Walt

Response by Capt Walter Miller made Dec 14 at 2015 8:34 AM

Capt Walter Miller — Mon, 14 Dec 2015 08:34:03 -0500

There was a third alternative: Blowing Hitler into a million pieces. Hitler survived numerous assassination attempts including a bomb at beer hall before the war because he left after making brief remarks and the bomb exploded a few minutes after he left. As I recall, this was a lone wolf socialist guy and before Hitler was Chancellor.

The 7/20/44 attempt is pretty well known. General Beck was involved in that plot.

Two other attempts:

The big heads enticed Hitler to fly out to a tent city in Russia; this was 1943. Two officers were going to just walk up and shoot him. The biggest big head called it off.

A bomb was placed on Hitler’s plane in a bottle of fake wine. The chemical fuse froze as the plane climbed to altitude and did not detonate. Col. Von Tresckow had to retrieve it, a scene vividly portrayed in the movie “Valkyrie”.

This came up on another thread: Hitler was never elected to any office.

Walt

Response by LCDR Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 14 at 2015 11:10 AM

LCDR Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 14 Dec 2015 11:10:25 -0500

To answer that question, you have to ask another...Is one's oath more important than one's personal principle? To my mind, one shouldn't take oaths lightly that may conflict with their personal sense of right or wrong.

At some point, you have to decide if an oath you once took is no longer "valid", or if you're willin to break an oath to uphold principle. If you swear to defend your nation's people...then actions taken against the people, even by the ruling parties, become the litmus test. If you take an oath to support a leader....then at some point, you have to either break your oath, or accept that that leader's will is your own. If you swear to uphold laws that are "re-interpreted", you have a similar problem.

In the case of the Nazi regime, I think the officers of the Wehrmact who decided to take action against their own leadership were true heroes of both patriotism and humanity. They didn't take the "easy" road and turn on their people...they continued to fight the Allies to defend their national territory as loyal soldiers...and took the risks to overpower and replace their corrupt, evil government. It would've been a very different, and unfortunately possibly much longer end to WWII if they had succeeded I believe.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 14 at 2015 11:39 AM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 14 Dec 2015 11:39:22 -0500

My grandfather was in the Wehrmacht, and while he is no longer around to speak for himself, I think I have a good idea of how things were from him.
At the onset of the war, Alfred was a Leutnant. He had been in the Wehrmacht for a few years at that point, just like his father and virtually everyone in his family as far back as they could remember. To them, the invasion of Poland was to recapture Danzig and Posen, areas removed from Germany at the conclusion of WWI. The subsequent invasion of France after they and Britain declared war on Germany in support of Poland was a moment of great pride in Germany, although the invasion of Denmark and the Netherlands did generate some disquiet. By the time it became apparent that things were not just a matter of lost territory and honor, but something else, it was no longer really an option to resign. Officers or Soldiers with apprehensions were sent to the front, and nature took it's course. As the tide of war turned on Germany, the men of the Wehrmacht were in a very real struggle to defend their country from imminent destruction - and even if that were not motivation enough, the SS was there to ensure your "loyalty".
The time to resign was in the early days when Hitler was marching into the Rhineland and Checkoslavakia and Anshlussing Austria. By the time the war got going in earnest, it wasn't really an option.

Alfred made it though the war somehow, despite serving the entire war on the Eastern Front except 1944-45 in France. Eight of his nine brothers and all six sisters were not so fortunate.

Response by PO1 Glenn Boucher made Dec 14 at 2015 3:28 PM

PO1 Glenn Boucher — Mon, 14 Dec 2015 15:28:06 -0500

I think you have to take into account the time period and what those who refused service faced.
Its not a simple question because there are so many layers to serving under a leader who has no honor.
In WWII Germany I am thinking that if you refused to serve then you would probably find yourself on the very short end of the stick and quite possibly in a concentration camp or just simple executed.
Just from reading and watching some documentaries on Hitler and his hold on power that there was no trust amongst his officers with each other so a coup would never work because you could never know who was trustworthy.
And you have to balance out the evil of doing Hitler's bidding or face a shortened life. You had 2 extremely bad choices.

Response by Capt Richard I P. made Dec 14 at 2015 9:50 PM

Capt Richard I P. — Mon, 14 Dec 2015 21:50:42 -0500

Resign. Or get all Valkyrie on it.

Response by 1LT Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 15 at 2015 12:29 AM

1LT Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 15 Dec 2015 00:29:43 -0500

Some officers tried to use force, but failed to free German soldiers from their oath of loyalty to Hitler (cf Op Valkyrie).

How could Nazi Germany (including the Wehrmacht) have done those atrocities? Well, we could get some answers with both Arendt's banality of evil theory and Milgram's experiment.

Response by Cpl Jeff N. made Dec 15 at 2015 7:32 AM

Cpl Jeff N. — Tue, 15 Dec 2015 07:32:26 -0500

That is an easy question to ask 75+ years later sitting in front of a computer with no concern to take into account for your wife and kids, parents etc. Trying to judge peoples actions after the fact is always tempting. The German Wehrmacht was, for the most part, the German professional military. The SS/Waffen SS and other more politically motivated elements were far for allegiant to the cause of the Nazi Party.

The Germanic people had been fighting wars for centuries in that region and many were following in a long line of tradition. You could say the treaty at Versailles might have angered many post WWI and many felt that it was too harsh and some payback was needed etc. Hitler capitalized on the feeling of the day.

The wage for trying to walk away was a one way ticket to the eastern or western front or perhaps a firing squad after they let you know your family would pay a severe price too.

Let's turn the question on you Major. If you had to put your wife and kids in real physical danger for a position you took against the government would you do it? No one would ever want to be there but in Germany, circa 1940, many were.

Response by Capt Walter Miller made Dec 15 at 2015 7:35 AM

Capt Walter Miller — Tue, 15 Dec 2015 07:35:50 -0500

Hitler was never elected to -any- office. The Nazi Party held at one point about 30% of the seats in the Riechtag. Hitler didn't hold a seat. Hitler was -offered- the Chancellorship. He was not elected to it.

Response by SGT Alan Simmons made Dec 15 at 2015 11:20 AM

SGT Alan Simmons — Tue, 15 Dec 2015 11:20:50 -0500

We have the advantage or disadvantage of answering this type of question in hindsight. It is always easy to play the role of armchair quarterback especially when the game is over. With that said, and using an American parallel - the Filipino-American War of 1898 - 1902, it is how I will approach this question.

Many American officers during that time were fresh out of the Spanish-American War, of which the Filipino-American War sprang out of. While at first, there was very little objection to what was happening during the early stages of the war, once the U.S. began using the same tactics of Spanish General Weiyler "the Butcher" (who was loathed by Americans thanks to Pulitzer and Herst), many in the officer and enlisted ranks soon grew to resent the heavy handed tactics being used. It is one of the reasons of the mass-migration of higher ranking officers and senior enlisted after the war had ended and Taft was appointed provisional governor of the Philippines. Those officers and senior enlisted could not leave the service before then because of the restraints placed on mustering out of the service at this time. It was not until 1900 that Americans began to oppose the tactics being used in the Philippines and began to demand some sort of change. Before this point, those veterans who did tell the stories of what was really going on were normally ridiculed or were claimed to be mentally ill. There was great pressure for the military to follow orders and keep their mouths shut.

For those soldiers and officers who served as Hitler came to power, he was a dynamic speaker who, in the eyes of many, restored a sense of pride in being German. By the time they realized what Hitler's ultimate goal was, it was too late to resign or leave the service. Additionally, Hitler had managed to whip up public sentiment to the extent if you did leave the service, you were seen as a disgrace or something less than honorable. And if you were too outspoken in your objections to Hitler, you could find yourself sent to the Eastern front (where some claim that over 85% of all German casualties of war effort served), your family threatened or harmed, or even detained for "safety reasons."

Response by SPC David S. made Sep 7 at 2018 2:35 PM

SPC David S. — Fri, 07 Sep 2018 14:35:19 -0400

This is not to hard - stay in up to being ordered to carry out an unlawful order or commit a war crime. However there a a few example where big brass did indeed resign - the Blomberg–Fritsch affair is just one example. As well there is the more extreme example where the Wehrmacht actually fought SS troops in the Battle for Castle Itter. As well a number of coups to oust the mad man.
Wehrmacht military prisoners held in its military prisons

Response by SPC Mike Davis made Sep 8 at 2018 8:13 AM

SPC Mike Davis — Sat, 08 Sep 2018 08:13:03 -0400

Sadly, most will say resign (and they would be correct.) However, today's military is a P.C. military. Most officers and NCOS who are worth the title "leader." Are well aware good men will die who should not have died. If true qualified leadership was demand in the service today. Shame on you if you are just such a leader and you maked "resign." You are condemning others for not doing the right thing. When you will not do the right thing either. Shameful....indeed!