Post-surrender mop-up - WWII

[beans4]

I've been following a discussion on another board, where it was asserted that the current combat operations tempo in Iraq is comparable to that of post-surrender Germany and Japan, as well as post-cease fire Korea. This poster also blames the media for promoting the view that the Iraq situation is abnormal and hasn't happened to the US before.

 

I don't doubt that there were some problems in Germany and Japan immediately following surrender, but I'd guess they were resolved in a matter of weeks or months, not years. So I'm asking for the board's opinion on this - does the guy have a valid point, or is he offering a rather imaginative view of history?

[Yama]

I've been following a discussion on another board, where it was asserted that the current combat operations tempo in Iraq is comparable to that of post-surrender Germany and Japan, as well as post-cease fire Korea. This poster also blames the media for promoting the view that the Iraq situation is abnormal and hasn't happened to the US before.

 

I don't doubt that there were some problems in Germany and Japan immediately following surrender, but I'd guess they were resolved in a matter of weeks or months, not years. So I'm asking for the board's opinion on this - does the guy have a valid point, or is he offering a rather imaginative view of history?

 

Everything I've read implies that Werwolf and other similar groups were small & disorganized and didn't really amount much damage. There were some murders etc. and reprisals by Allied troops, but not any kind of major resistance, at least not in the Western occupation zone. Don't know anything about post-occupation Japan

 

If one wants to find a proper comparison, situation at liberated (or "liberated") USSR territories was much more serious, as German occupation combined with Soviet withdrawal had created fertile ground for various nationalistic groups to emerge. These conflicts lingered on well into 1950's, some of the Baltic "Forest Brothers" apparently avoided capture until the '80s...

[beans4]

Thanks, that's the sort of thing I was looking for. IIRC things were hot in the Philipines following the Spanish-American War also.

[Hittite Under The Bridge]

From "The U.S. Army in the Occupation of Germany"

 

http://www.history.army.mil/books/wwii/Occ...ex.htm#contents

 

 

"Except for black marketeering, some thefts of food and firewood, and petty violations of military government ordinances, the German civilian crime rate was low, sometimes almost disconcertingly low for the Army agencies charged with ferreting out and suppressing resistance. In October, after five months of occupation, Seventh Army G-2 believed Germany to be a "simmering cauldron of unrest and discontent" and claimed to have detected a "mounting audaciousness in the German population"; but as concrete evidence G-2 could only cite some illicit traffic in interzonal mail (then still prohibited), a "strongly worded" Werwolf threat to one military government officer in the Western Military District, and a protest against denazification from the Evangelical Church of Wuerttemberg.

 

Patrols occasionally found decapitation wires stretched across roads, ineptly it would seem, since no deaths or injuries resulted from them. Military government public safety officers from scattered locations reported various anti-occupation leaflets and posters, some threats against German girls who associated with US soldiers, and isolated attacks on soldiers. Although not a single case was confirmed, possibly the most talked about crimes against the occupation were the alleged castrations of US soldiers by German civilians. When the commanding officer of Detachment E3B2, in Erbach, Hesse, was asked to investigate one such rumor, he reported that not only had there been no castration but that there had not been a single attack on US military personnel in over four months of occupation.

 

The most pressing concern of public safety officers was often with getting the German police out of their traditional nineteenth century Prussian drill sergeant uniforms and into American styles, usually modeled on the uniforms of the New York City police. Wherever troops were stationed, especially in towns and smaller cities, prostitutes and camp followers were a moral problem, placed added strain on food supplies, housing, and medical facilities (frequently also on jails), and raised mixed feelings of disgust and jealousy among the other civilians. In quarrels with other civilians and with the police, the prostitutes did not hesitate to call on their soldier friends."

Edited May 29, 2008 by Hittite Under The Bridge

[beans4]

Excellent! Thank you.

[Marcello]

I've been following a discussion on another board, where it was asserted that the current combat operations tempo in Iraq is comparable to that of post-surrender Germany and Japan, as well as post-cease fire Korea. This poster also blames the media for promoting the view that the Iraq situation is abnormal and hasn't happened to the US before.

 

I don't doubt that there were some problems in Germany and Japan immediately following surrender, but I'd guess they were resolved in a matter of weeks or months, not years. So I'm asking for the board's opinion on this - does the guy have a valid point, or is he offering a rather imaginative view of history?

 

I would say a "Oceania has always been at war with Eurasia" view of history. Since Iraq was supposed to be a WWII style liberation when the locals turned out to be a bit more restless than expected some people quickly went throught the history books scraping to find some nazi equivalent of that. So some ludicrous articles comparing the nazi werewolves to the iraqis guerrillas came to being. All of this is nonsense of course, for example the much touted assassination of the mayor of Aachen, one of the few nazi "resistance" actions that the desperate pundits could quote, happened before the german capitulation. In general very little of such activities happened in american/western occupied areas and most of them before the capitulation anyway. If one is willing to compare a few wires left hanging, some leaflets and such to what was going on in Iraq for much of 2007 clearly the level of detachment from reality is reaching Orwellian levels.

[Junior FO]

...

Edited September 20, 2024 by Junior FO

[Hittite Under The Bridge]

The Western Allies had the good fortune that a 3rd party provoked a much more visceral reaction from the occupied population and keeping the 3rd party out was the first priority.

 

That and the choice was between resisting and eating. Eating, such as it was that first year of occupation, won out.

[Marek Tucan]

Few incidents here, and even there it is hard to discern how many of these "Werewolf incidents" were just cover for some rape and pillage by various "vigilantes" (or, as often called here, brave fighters of May 10th).

Werewolves got much more place in literature and films (of course, in Commie-era films often overage werewolves conspiring with evul CIC or BND ) than in reality.

[rmgill]

I would say a "Oceania has always been at war with Eurasia" view of history. Since Iraq was supposed to be a WWII style liberation when the locals turned out to be a bit more restless than expected some people quickly went throught the history books scraping to find some nazi equivalent of that. So some ludicrous articles comparing the nazi werewolves to the iraqis guerrillas came to being. All of this is nonsense of course, for example the much touted assassination of the mayor of Aachen, one of the few nazi "resistance" actions that the desperate pundits could quote, happened before the german capitulation. In general very little of such activities happened in american/western occupied areas and most of them before the capitulation anyway. If one is willing to compare a few wires left hanging, some leaflets and such to what was going on in Iraq for much of 2007 clearly the level of detachment from reality is reaching Orwellian levels.

 

Of course the Germans AND the Japanese had been bombed nearly back to the stone age by 3 years of solid day and night strategic raids. They were

thoroughly exhausted and utterly tired of the war. Iraq had a few days of real heavy combat, mostly in lasting what, a few hours as US/British forces swept through the organized Iraqi Resistance and then things settled down over a few weeks into the occupation and rebuilding. In Germany there were hundreds of thousands of German troops walking home after release/surrender who were just happy to get back home and get out of the utter misery they suffered after the last few years, months or weeks of their combat with Allied forces.

 

Interesting that you invoke Orwell. He was FOR kicking the crap out of the Germans and Japanese and knew that when you were fighting totalitarian forces that the peace forces on the Allied side were in fact aiding the enemy. I expect he'd have the exact same perspective today where it concerns the current conflict.

[Hittite Under The Bridge]

Don't forget that one of the first things the Allies did when entering a German town was disarm it. FWIH, it's a common thing for Joe Iraqi to keep an AK in his bedroom.

[Marcello]

Of course the Germans AND the Japanese had been bombed nearly back to the stone age by 3 years of solid day and night strategic raids. They were

thoroughly exhausted and utterly tired of the war. Iraq had a few days of real heavy combat, mostly in lasting what, a few hours as US/British forces swept through the organized Iraqi Resistance and then things settled down over a few weeks into the occupation and rebuilding. In Germany there were hundreds of thousands of German troops walking home after release/surrender who were just happy to get back home and get out of the utter misery they suffered after the last few years, months or weeks of their combat with Allied forces.

 

Interesting that you invoke Orwell. He was FOR kicking the crap out of the Germans and Japanese and knew that when you were fighting totalitarian forces that the peace forces on the Allied side were in fact aiding the enemy. I expect he'd have the exact same perspective today where it concerns the current conflict.

 

I brought up simply Orwell because the story that a significant Nazi guerilla campaign was waged in Germany in the aftermath of WW2 was touted around by pundits and government officials to justify a current policy. Yet no such thing actually took place and this is easily verifiable by checking easily accessible historical records. The degree of falsification of history involved here was such that I was nearly expecting soviet style doctored photos showing nazi werewolves ambushing Sherman tanks with Panzerfaust in 1947 Berlin.

Alteration the past to fit the present was a major "1984" theme there were some further reflections on it in others works IIRC (some essay/ editorial on the spanish civil war, although I don't have it at hand now). So the comparison was obvious.

Edited May 29, 2008 by Marcello

[Hans Engstrom]

Of course the Germans AND the Japanese had been bombed nearly back to the stone age by 3 years of solid day and night strategic raids. They were

thoroughly exhausted and utterly tired of the war. Iraq had a few days of real heavy combat, mostly in lasting what, a few hours as US/British forces swept through the organized Iraqi Resistance and then things settled down over a few weeks into the occupation and rebuilding. In Germany there were hundreds of thousands of German troops walking home after release/surrender who were just happy to get back home and get out of the utter misery they suffered after the last few years, months or weeks of their combat with Allied forces.

 

Yes, I'm sure that's the main difference...

Interesting that you invoke Orwell. He was FOR kicking the crap out of the Germans and Japanese and knew that when you were fighting totalitarian forces that the peace forces on the Allied side were in fact aiding the enemy. I expect he'd have the exact same perspective today where it concerns the current conflict.

He might, however, have been able to discern who the enemy was, instead of attacking the wrong nation. Anyhoo, we've been over this before.

 

As regards occupying another country, here are some useful tips:

"First and probably most important, an occupation has an objective. In the abstract it may be only to assume executive, legislative, and judicial authority in a defeated nation; but as any actual war is likely to be fought for some more significant purpose than merely to win, so an occupation is likely to be entered into for some reason other than merely to govern. Establishing a valid objective, as the U.S. experience in Germany demonstrated, may not be easy. The combat commander deals with an existing situation, the occupation planner with one that does not yet exist. The combat commander is concerned with an immediate military problem, the occupation planner, working in the political and psychological milieu of the war, with political, economic, social, and military problems of the future."

 

"The military administration of occupied territory, like a combat operation, also requires unity of command. The necessity for clear lines of authority and a single commander on the battlefield is obvious. In an occupation, however, the need is apparently not so obvious. "

 

"Of course, an occupation also differs from a combat operation in various respects and in one in particular: the outcome of a battle will usually-that of an occupation, perhaps, seldom-be clear. In a strict sense, maintenance of law and order sufficient to prevent interference with combat missions during hostilities and unrest or to prevent resistance later on are enough to qualify an occupation as a success, but the judgment of history will demand more. And the Army in Germany accomplished more-more than even the detachment commander believed who summed up the first year, "We gave them enough military government to last a hundred years." 12 Not every Nazi received the full deserts due him in American and some German opinion, but many did. Not all the Germans were converted to democracy, but they were given the opportunity for democracy without any snares or tricks. The tenor of some policy statements was harsh to the point of being vindictive, but the practice was as humane as a defeated enemy had a right to expect after a long and destructive war. Although many soldiers looted and played the black market, the Army protected and restored the country's art treasures and monuments and imported three-quarters of a billion dollars worth of relief supplies. The DPs were returned to their homes, the concentration camp inmates were cared for, and the numerous services without which a modern society cannot function were put back into operation and kept running. Certainly after 1946 there could be no doubt that civil affairs-military government had proven its value both in and out of combat or that the Army had demonstrated its competence to manage a major occupation in the national interest and the interest of a conquered people."

quotes from "THE U.S. ARMY IN THE OCCUPATION OF GERMANY 1944-1946" by Earl F. Ziemke

[JOE BRENNAN]

I've been following a discussion on another board, where it was asserted that the current combat operations tempo in Iraq is comparable to that of post-surrender Germany and Japan, as well as post-cease fire Korea. This poster also blames the media for promoting the view that the Iraq situation is abnormal and hasn't happened to the US before.

Blaming the media is fun, and they can be blamed for poor Iraq coverage IMO (not necessarily just the mix of 'sad' and 'happy' news, either). But, the poster is making a ridiculous comparison, Iraq to Japan or Germany, (and Korea post 1953? ceasefire is even more completely different, the US led UN/ROK forces were left holding basically pre-Korean War South Korea, nobody was being 'occupied'). I think the basic fallacy of the comparison comes from the idea, sometimes popular among opponents of the Iraq war as being against a nationalist force trying to force out an occupier. That's not mainly what it is, and moreover it has morphed through few different stages. The original Sunni insurgents were fighting not so much the US presence as US formula of majority rule in Iraq, meaning they had to be ruled by the more numerous Shiites rather than dominating them as they had under Saddam. More recently a lot of the 'war' is among Shiite factions, Al Sadr's faction v the govt etc., again against the US policy of supporting that govt. To be fair, politically oriented supporters of the war tend not to speak of it in those terms either, because they want to deflect another different antiwar slogan: 'in the middle of somebody else's civil war' (which though is somewhat accurate). Then there are foreign players pursuing own agendas in Iraq, Al Q and Iran.

 

The most obvious difference between that and Japan is not exhaustion and bombing, but the fact that bringing down the militarist govt in Japan didn't uncover any basic deep fissure in Japanese society, a highly homogeneous society compared to Iraq, so even was Germany; nor where there foreign players with the same determination to cause trouble and access to do so. If there had been resistance to US occupation (there was virtually zero in Japan, v little in Germany) it *would* have been a pure nationalist uprising, but again that's not what the Iraq war has mainly been.

 

They are mainly non-comparable situations.

 

Joe

Edited May 30, 2008 by JOE BRENNAN

[Ken Estes]

There were many insurgencies in 2003 Iraq, in many cases from disparate groups, some of which had been organized under the national resistance Ghafiqi Project that envisioned an insurgency and provided for bomb building experts. Some opposed US occupation, some simply vented frustration at the continuing misery of a population left shattered and poor. The threat to U.S. forces and their operations remaining after the initial collapse of the regime consisted of isolated pockets of disorganized resistance, a large criminal element, which heavily infested Baghdad because of their release from prisons on the eve of the war, and emerging subversives or insurrectionist movements. Both planned resistance and the inability of US and other forces to secure and guard arms depots throughout Iraq made arming the population a simple matter. Mountains of ordnance continued to be discovered well past 2006. Agendas existed variously for Shi'ia, Sunni and Kurdish resistance or insurrection, all self serving and none in coordination. In less than a year, both Sunnis and Shi'ia threatened US positions and communications in the April04 risings.

 

Nothing of the sort existed in either Germany or Japan in 1945. Weapons hardly could be found in civilian hands, because of the military or totalitarian regimes they had experinced. In both countries, the native police and civil service remained at their posts and functioning. The populations remained disciplined and obedient to new masters, who did not announce themselves as liberators. The Nazi leadership died or disappeared, leaving a motley crew of lessers to stand trial at Nurnberg. In Japan, the crucial preservation of the person and sanctity of the emperor guaranteed the passive conduct of the Japanese population. Any violence against US forces in either place usually amounted to individual actions and many could be chalked up to reactions to misbehavior of occupation troops. Little discussed until now have been the abuses of German civilians post V-E day, and US provosts complained of up to c.500 rapes per week by US soldiers at one point. Doubtlessly revenge was taken at moments. In the case of Japan, the emerging literature points to collusion between occupier and the Japanese authorities to provide sexual services through authorized brothels and other policies, generally leaving the population unmolested.

[Brasidas]

I would say a "Oceania has always been at war with Eurasia" view of history. Since Iraq was supposed to be a WWII style liberation when the locals turned out to be a bit more restless than expected some people quickly went throught the history books scraping to find some nazi equivalent of that. So some ludicrous articles comparing the nazi werewolves to the iraqis guerrillas came to being. All of this is nonsense of course, for example the much touted assassination of the mayor of Aachen, one of the few nazi "resistance" actions that the desperate pundits could quote, happened before the german capitulation. In general very little of such activities happened in american/western occupied areas and most of them before the capitulation anyway. If one is willing to compare a few wires left hanging, some leaflets and such to what was going on in Iraq for much of 2007 clearly the level of detachment from reality is reaching Orwellian levels.

 

Never read one of those articles where Werewolves and Iraqi guerillas were compared, and I've read quite widely on OIF. Where did you dig to find them?

[Hittite Under The Bridge]

Never read one of those articles where Werewolves and Iraqi guerillas were compared, and I've read quite widely on OIF. Where did you dig to find them?

 

Google is your friend.

 

Condoleeza Rice and Donald Rumsfeld were the first to float the comparison to the Werwolf in separate speeches to a VFW Convention in San Antonio on 8/25/03.

 

According to this article, Maurice Rose, despite eyewitness accounts, was "allegedly a victim" of the Werwolf.

http://www.talkingproud.us/International090103.html

 

Thomas Sowell, 12/15/05:

http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/sowell121305.asp

 

The American Thinker, 6/28/07

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2007/0...errorism_1.html

Edited May 30, 2008 by Hittite Under The Bridge

[Hittite Under The Bridge]

Excellent! Thank you.

 

You're welcome. I also found a work by the RAND Corporation entitled "America's Role in Nation Building: From Germany to Iraq". On page 21 it states:

 

"U.S. officials anticipated and planned to deal with significant residual German resistance following the surrender of its armed forces. Yet no resistance of any consequence emerged then or at any time thereafter, much as in Haiti during Operation UPHOLD DEMOCRACY (see Chapter Five). The large number of U.S. and allied military forces in West Germany and the establishment of a strong constabulary force preempted most resistance. Indeed, the constabulary force was specifically created to respond to incidents of civil unrest, conduct mounted and dismounted police patrols, interdict smuggling operations, and aid in intelligence gathering. This contrasts starkly with nation-building efforts in Bosnia which were marred by organized crime and civil unrest."

[Kenneth P. Katz]

Major differences between Japan/Germany 1945 and Iraq 2003.

 

1. Iraq had intense internal divisions between ethnic, religious and tribal groups that did not exist in Germany/Japan.

2. Germany/Japan were broken countries that had been pulverised with brute force. There was no fighting spirit left. Starvation, widespread firebombing of cities and two mushroom clouds are big demotivators and a sure sign that one has lost is a most complete manner. Iraq was very lightly affected by the invasion.

3. There were no outside countries to support insurgencies in Germany and Japan, comparable to Syria and Iran.

4. The Germans and Japanese had no doubt that resistance would have been brutally crushed, with none of the prissy PC nonsense that constrained American/Coalition operations in Iraq.

[Ken Estes]

...

Condoleeza Rice and Donald Rumsfeld were the first to float the comparison to the Werwolf in separate speeches to a VFW Convention in San Antonio on 8/25/03.

 

....

I did not recall Rummie chiming in, but he could hardly be restrained in any event. When Condi made this howler [what a pun!], I assumed at the time that one of her staffers had read part of a book about the Werewolves, enough to get what they wanted, but likely failed to read the entire work and learn that neither they nor the National Redoubt ever came into play. It was, to turn the phrase, child's play.

[Ken Estes]

Major differences between Japan/Germany 1945 and Iraq 2003.

....

To me, Ken, it would be the planning method, viz:

 

Planning for the MilGovt of GE and JA: Apr-May 1942

Planning for the occupation of Iraq: say what??

[Kenneth P. Katz]

I believe that I have read that the Soviets faced some resistance after they began their occupation, which they handled in such a manner that the rest lost any enthusiasm for further resistance.

 

You're welcome. I also found a work by the RAND Corporation entitled "America's Role in Nation Building: From Germany to Iraq". On page 21 it states:

 

"U.S. officials anticipated and planned to deal with significant residual German resistance following the surrender of its armed forces. Yet no resistance of any consequence emerged then or at any time thereafter, much as in Haiti during Operation UPHOLD DEMOCRACY (see Chapter Five). The large number of U.S. and allied military forces in West Germany and the establishment of a strong constabulary force preempted most resistance. Indeed, the constabulary force was specifically created to respond to incidents of civil unrest, conduct mounted and dismounted police patrols, interdict smuggling operations, and aid in intelligence gathering. This contrasts starkly with nation-building efforts in Bosnia which were marred by organized crime and civil unrest."

[seahawk]

Simpel difference.

 

1945 : occupation forces were prepared for occupation, live got better quickyl for the population

2003 : no working plans, not police force, live got worse

 

Apart from that I think there is a cultural difference between Iraqis and Germans/Japanese.

[Yama]

Simpel difference.

 

1945 : occupation forces were prepared for occupation, live got better quickyl for the population

 

Uh, that's not what I've read. There was a famine in Germany after the war (indeed, all of Europe). Whilst Allied indeed had a plan for post-war Germany, that plan was Morgenthau plan.

[Junior FO]

...

Edited September 20, 2024 by Junior FO