Subject: WWII-L Digest - 18 Jan 1994 to 19 Jan 1994

From: Automatic digest processor <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 20 Jan 1994 00:00:14 -0500

There are 15 messages totalling 568 lines in this issue.

Topics of the day:

  1. Waffen SS in Indochina (2)
  2. [[email-masked]: Re: Waffen-SS]
  3. USAAF 19 JAN 44
  4. Patton's grave.
  5. Waffen-SS (2)
  6. ADMIN: Test
  7. re : Waffen SS
  8. Brandenburg unit(s)
  9. SS, Waffen SS & Wehrmacht
 10. MEDIA/WEAP:  U-1105, the Rubber U-Boat (2)
 11. Armed Japanese troops in French Indochina
 12. MEDIA:  Realism, or the Lack Thereof

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date:    Tue, 18 Jan 1994 22:57:17 -0600
From:    Jon Stevens <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Waffen SS in Indochina

Ken and others,

Regarding the former SS soldiers in Indochina, I recall a book
called  _Legion of the Damned_ that is the life story of one of these men.
I may be wrong about the title and will check on it.  (My brother has the book
at the present time.)  The writer claims that the former SS were recruited
through one of those mysterious networks that worked to get Germans out of
Europe at the end of the war.  He also says that this group grew to be fairly
large, maybe about 1000-2000 men.  The writer of the book was a German officer
 from this group who retired to an unnamed Asian country after the French
disbanded the unit.  One operation of the former SS men took them a few
days march into China where they caused quite a bit of havoc for the Red
Chinese.  Any info on why the French disbanded this unit.  It seemed from
the book that they were quite effective in fighting the Viet Minh.

Jon Stevens

------------------------------

Date:    Wed, 19 Jan 1994 00:23:48 CST
From:    Steve Alvin <[email-masked]>
Subject: [[email-masked]: Re: Waffen-SS]

    ================= Begin forwarded message =================

    From: [email-masked] (unknown)
    To: [email-masked]
    Subject: Re: Waffen-SS
    Date: Mon, 17 Jan 1994 11:43 +0100 (MET)

    In a recent study of the Army Historical Section ('Sectie Militaire
    Geschiedenis van de Landmacht staf/ the official institute for military
    history of the Dutch army) the myths around the German war crimes committed
    during their attack on the Netherlands (10-14 may 1940) are very much
    weakened. Untill recently dutch historians tried to explain the quick defeat
    of their country by emphasing the fact that the Germans used 'dirty tricks' or
    even crimes to overcome the Dutch resistance. The recent study about the
    events during may 1940 explains that most of the cases concerning
    suspicions of German warcrimes where in fact sometimes mere 'misunderstandings'.
    Besides, the Dutch troops themselves were not always 'fair' in their fighting
    methodes. For example, I think the incident you where refering to occured at
    the 'Grebbeberg' where the most fierce fighting during the campaign took place.
    A Dutch post appearently surrendered to a SS unit (SS standarte 'der Fuehrer')
    but as the Germans approached the shooting started again. The SSers were so
    angry that they shot down 2 Dutch soldiers (one of them who probably started
    the incident and was later awarded with the highest dutch badge). Even the
    terrible German air-attack on Rotterdam on the 14th of may is much debatted
    about the fact whether it should be considered as a warcrime.

    The conclusion should be that the German troops (SS and Whermacht) were not
    totaly free from committing warcrimes (they used for instance on several occas-
    sions dutch uniforms to mislead the Dutch defenders) but those were rare and
    they should not be considered as a structural or permanent part of their
    fightingmethode. The German invasion of the Netherlands, officially
    proclaimed neutral, in itselve should, however, strongly be condemned.

    Tobias van Gent KIM

This message was sent to me instead of the list, so I am
forwarding it.

--
Steve Alvin
[email-masked]

------------------------------

Date:    Wed, 19 Jan 1994 08:27:00 EST
From:    mc killop <[email-masked]>
Subject: USAAF 19 JAN 44

COMBAT CHRONOLOGY OF THE US ARMY AIR FORCES
WEDNESDAY, 19 JANUARY 1944
FTP SITES
  1. ftp.rutgers.edu in directory pub/wwii/usaf
  2. byrd.mu.wvnet.edu (129.71.32.152) in pub/history/military/airforce/
     wwii_chronology

AIRCRAFT MENTIONED IN THIS REPORT:
  A-20, Douglas Havoc
  A-36, North American Apache
  B-17, Boeing Flying Fortress
  B-24, Consolidated Liberator
  B-25, North American Mitchell
  B-26, Martin Marauder
  F-5, Lockheed Lightning
  P-38, Lockheed Lightning
  P-39, Bell Airacobra
  P-40, Curtiss
  P-47, Republic Thunderbolt
  P-51, North American Mustang

CHINA-BURMA-INDIA (CBI) THEATER OF OPERATIONS

  BURMA-INDIA (Tenth Air Force): 16 B-24's bomb the marshalling yard and Don
Maung railroad station at Bangkok, Thailand. In Burma, 4 P-40's hit the town
of Wakshang; 26 A-36's and P-51's hit targets along roads from Ngamaw Ga to
Maingkwan to Mashi Daru.

  CHINA (Fourteenth Air Force): 14 P-40's and 2 B-25's attack the barracks
area at Mon Cay, French Indochina.

MEDITERRANEAN THEATER OF OPERATIONS (MTO)

  STRATEGIC OPERATIONS (Fifteenth Air Force): In Italy, B-24's and B-17's hit
airfields at Perugia, Iesi, Centocelle, and Ciampino; P-38's fly close escort
for all the missons while P-47's fly top cover over Ciampino and Centocelle
and carry out a sweep over the Rome area.

  TACTICAL OPERATIONS (Twelfth Air Force): In Italy, B-25's bomb Rieti
Airfield; B-26's hit the airfield at Viterbo; A-20's attack the marshalling
yard at Colleferro; P-40's bomb and strafe 2 schooners at Makarska,
Yugoslavia; A-36's hit guns, trucks, and trains N of Rome and fly 70+ sorties
against rail, communications and troop positions in the US Fifth Army battle
area as the Garigliano bridgehead expands; P-40's also hit defended positions
in the battle area and near Scauri, Tremensuoli, and Alvito.
  Transfers in Italy: HQ 12th Bombardment Group (Medium) and 82d and 83d
Bombardment Squadrons (Medium) from Foggia to Gaudo Airfield with B-25's; HQ
27th Fighter-Bomber Group and 522d, 523d and 524th Fighter-Bomber Squadrons
from Paestum to Pomigliano with A-36's; HQ 31st Fighter Group and 309th
Fighter Squadron from Pomigliano to Castel Volturno with P-51's.

PACIFIC OCEAN AREA (POA, Seventh Air Force): 17 B-25's from Tarawa Atoll,
Gilbert Islands, hit Mille Atoll, Marshall Islands; flying at low altitude,
the B-25's score hits on gun positions, fuel dumps, and the airfield area in
general; AA fire claims 2 B-25's.

SOUTH PACIFIC AREA (SOPAC, Thirteenth Air Force): Attacks during the day are
limited to isolated strikes on shipping and other targets of opportunity by
aircraft on armed reconnaissance over Bougainville Island, New Ireland
Island, and Saint George Channel. During the night of 19/20 Jan, 11 B-24's,
in 2 waves, fly strikes against Rabaul and Vunakanau targets on New Britain
Island.

SOUTHWEST PACIFIC AREA (SWPA, Fifth Air Force): 57 B-24's bomb Boram, New
Guinea; 17 more bomb Amboina Island, Moluccas Islands, and Halong, Celebes
Islands; and 2 others score hits on freighter near Aitape, New Guinea. 65
B-25's, along with Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) airplanes, pound
positions in the Shaggy Ridge, New Guinea area. 2 P-39's bomb barges in the
Cape Raoult, New Britain Island area.
  25th Photographic Reconnaissance Squadron, 6th Photographic Reconnaissance
Group begins transfer from Brisbane, Australia to Lae, New Guinea with F-5's.

SOURCES:
AIR FORCE COMBAT UNITS OF WORLD WAR II, Office of Air Force History,
  Headquarters USAF, 1961, ISBN 0-912799-02-1
COMBAT SQUADRONS OF THE AIR FORCE, WORLD WAR II, Office of Air Force
  History, Headquarters USAF 1982
THE ARMY AIR FORCES IN WORLD WAR II: COMBAT CHRONOLOGY, 1941-1945 by the
  Office of Air Force History, Headquarters USAF, 1973
THE MIGHTY EIGHTH WAR DIARY by Roger A. Freeman, ISBN 1-85409-071-2

Jack McKillop
USAF (Airways and Air Communications Service)
1955-59

-------------------------------------------------------------------
|  Jack McKillop              |  Those who have long enjoyed such |
|  Bellcore                   |  privileges as we enjoy forget in |
|  Piscataway, NJ USA         |  time that men have died to win   |
|  [email-masked]  |  them.                     FDR    |
-------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date:    Wed, 19 Jan 1994 11:53:51 -0600
From:    WILLIAM HUBER - SCDR <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Patton's grave.

In Ron's message of 17 Jan 1994 at 1006 CST, he writes:

> The discussions about Gen. Pattons grave has brought up several questions.
>
> 1) What is the legal status of military cemeteries overseas, are the plain
> old cemeteries or are the considered soverign U.S. territory (such as an
> embassy)?

Hi Ron,

I have looked into this to some extent while I was in Italy but for
German cemeteries where I was doing research.  Some of your questions
I may be able to help with.

1)  In Italy, the land was owned by the Italian Govt. but granted to
the respective government for the intended purpose.

> 2) How is the land procurred?

In the German's case they were plots used by the graves registration
section of the German Army.  Some were located near large hospitals
or aid stations near battle areas.  There is a big German Cemetery at
Cassino 23,000 + soldiers buried there.  German soldiers were buried
where they fell in many cases but for simplicity of grave maintenance
they were moved to 13 large cemeteries (in Italy).

> 3) Who is responsible for it's upkeep and who guarantees its integrity?

In Italy, the German Government pays a German speaking Italian
national to maintain the cemetery and help visitors locate relatives
graves that are buried there.  This person make arrangements for
occasions when veterans groups have wreath laying ceremonies and when
new graves are discovered (which happens on occasion).  Graves of
soldiers or sometimes just remains are discovered on mountains or
woods and arrangements are made by the groundskeepers to have the
remains re-interred.

> 4) How is it that one is interned in a military cemeteries overseas?

Those that are buried in a German "Soldatenfriedhof" were killed
during the war or died shortly thereafter (hospitals, POW camps etc).
The only new graves are those that are discovered in the backwoods as
described above.

> 5) Is there a process in place to remove the remains and bring them back
> to the US if the servicemans family wishes?

Yes, I know for a fact that in the US, if the family wishes the
remains to be repatriated the US military will see to it.  I had an
uncle killed at Omaha beach and buried in a US military cemetery in
France.  He was returned to the states in 1946 or 47 and buried in the
family plot in his hometown at his mother's request.  I'm certain the
other countries have similar arrangements.

> 6) Do you have to be a serviceman to be interned in a military cemetery?

In the German cemeteries I visited there were German civilians buried
there too.  They were uniformed in many cases (boarder guards,
customs officials, railroad employees, construction workers {Org.
Todt}, truck drivers {NSKK}, police and Red Cross nurses etc.) but
family members or Italians were not to be buried in those cemeteries.
They were meant to be for persons serving a particular nation in
whatever capacity.  There are a lot of Ukrainian soldiers buried at
the German Cemetery at Costermano near Lake Garda because they were
engaged in anti-partisan activities in German uniform while in Italy
when they were killed.

I think what you are driving at though, is, could a man's wife be
buried with him in a military cemetery of this type as they are in US
cemeteries here in the States.  I don't think so.

No relatives are buried in war cemeteries unless it was two brothers
or father and son both serving and both killed in the same area.
These cemeteries are like time capsules of a specific time period and
everyone buried there had three things in common, what nation they
served, where and when they died.

Regards, Bill Huber / [email-masked]

------------------------------

Date:    Wed, 19 Jan 1994 09:12:18 EST
From:    "William B. Thacker" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Waffen-SS

Charles Reace writes:
>
> > Some other named Army divisions: . . .
>
> And don't forget my favorite, the Herman Goering Falschirmpanzer Division
> (parachute armor division -- I just love the image this evokes  B^)

I don't think the Hermann Goering Division was classed as a falschirm unit.
Rather, it's my understanding that it was one of the Luftwaffe field units.
Strictly ground-pounder.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Bill Thacker             AT&T Network Systems       attmail!att!cbemf!wbt
(614) 860-5294           Columbus, Ohio              [email-masked]
                      Humpty Dumpty was pushed!

------------------------------

Date:    Wed, 19 Jan 1994 15:50:39 EST
From:    Robert E George <[email-masked]>
Subject: ADMIN: Test

I have abruptly stopped receiving mail messages. Is this to do with
the extremely cold weather?

Or did the list simply fall silent Wednesday afternoon?

Regards,
Rob

------------------------------

Date:    Wed, 19 Jan 1994 15:04:28 -0600
From:    WILLIAM HUBER - SCDR <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: re : Waffen SS

In your message of 17 Jan 1994 at 1107 CST, you write:

> Right after the end of WW2 in Europe, the French began actively
> recruiting Waffen SS PWs for service in Indo-China. There was a
> direct offer that even the most culpable of SS would be quietly
> whisked away in return for them "volunteering" for service in
> what became a very nasty little war betwen the French and the
> Viet Mihn.
> A very large contingent of ex-SS subsequently fought in Foreign
> Legion units there.

A book came out about this titled _The Devil's Guard_ but it was a
fiction book as I recall.  I'm not familiar with any references that
might indicate that there were large numbers or entire units fighting
for the French in Indo-China.  It is not uncommon for combat troops
to miss the "high" of combat and join armies to continue their
careers when their country is defeated or at peace.

One of the fellows I worked with in Italy was a Korean War vet and in
his unit was a former Waffen SS man.  He recounted for Ed (my buddy
in Italy) as how the Waffen SS troops used to balance stick grenades
on their helmet after having pulled the porcelain ball.  I read about
them doing that in training to build nerve and discipline (I bet so!)
but Ed said this guy told him they did it in bars when people pissed
them off.  If you stand still it will go off and your helmet will
protect you.  They were not frag grenades and if in a big enough area
the concussion would not be too bad but I bet your ears would be
ringing for a while :^)

Anybody hear more about the SS in the French Foreign Legion?

Ciao,  Bill Huber / [email-masked]

------------------------------

Date:    Wed, 19 Jan 1994 16:25:41 EST
From:    Lowe Barrett MAJ <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Brandenburg unit(s)

>        Hi, all
>
>        I have always been very interested in "special" troops in any
>army and one of the most interesting has to be the Brandenburg unit. I
>have almost never seen anything about this unit like: It's size, origin,
>weapons, primary front (Eastern Front I think) and just about any detail
>that exists on them. Weren't they treated as spies by the Russians and
>shot uppon capture?
>
>
>Regards, Keep this list as alive as it is now :)
>
>Gudmundur Helgason
><[email-masked]>
>
Gudmundur,

I don't have my references with me, but a good place to start is the
History of the Grossdeutschland by Helmuth Spaeter (he was a Knight's Cross
winner in the GD on the Eastern front). The history and the pictorial
(bildband in German).

The Brandenberg units were originally long-range strategic reconnaissance
forces.  They were used to some degree in North Africa but mostly in Russia.
Spaeter's book gives an overview of their earlier operations.  The reason
the Brandenbergers are included in the History of the GD is that they were
eventually formed into a Panzer-grenadier Division near the end of the war.
The actual strength was probably that of a very strong Kampfgruppe (battle
group).

There is also a good chapter in James Lucas' book:  War on the Eastern Front
This book is about the perspectives of the German soldier on combat in Russia.

Hope this helps.

Bear

------------------------------

Date:    Wed, 19 Jan 1994 15:43:33 -0600
From:    WILLIAM HUBER - SCDR <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: SS, Waffen SS & Wehrmacht

In Richard's message of 18 Jan 1994 at 0803 CST, he writes:

> Quick question for my own edification. Did Wehrmacht troops take the same oath
> of allegiance to the Fuhrer (as an individual, and as the state) as the SS
> inductees (volunteers) did?  Would this also hold true for the non-German SS
> troops?
>                                 Richard Kaplan
>                                 Carnegie Library of Pittsburgh

Hi Richard,

The Army was required to swear an oath of allegiance to Hitler in
1934 after the death of President von Hindenburg, thus consolidating
Hitler's power over the German military and his metamorphosis from
Reichs Chancellor to Fuehrer.

The SS of 1934 had a deeper tie to Hitler and it was from those ranks
that his personal body guard (the Leibstandarte ,Adolf Hitler') was
assembled under "Sepp" Dietrich.

Once things started getting "sticky" at the front a *lot* of
formality was dropped in favor of expedience.  That's when the foreign
volunteers swelled the ranks of the SS as has been pointed out in
other fine posts.

BTW.  Only Army and Navy buckles had the "Gott mit uns" logo.  The SS
had their own slogan "Meine Ehre Heisst Treue" (My honor is loyalty).
The Luftwaffe had no slogan at all on their buckles.

Cheers, Bill Huber / [email-masked]

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 20 Jan 1994 00:20:30 GMT
From:    Gudmundur Helgason <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: MEDIA/WEAP:  U-1105, the Rubber U-Boat

>
> Ken,
>
>      My understanding is that U-Booten could survive dives of 1000',
> usually -- :-).
>
>      At great depths, the rubber might be highly effective in
> absorbing asdic pings.
>
> Lou Coatney, WIU
>

        The typical German U-boat would crush under the pressure
somewhere around 220m depth. The reported record is 280 meters which
might have been done by U.96 commander by Heinrich-Lehmann Willenbrock.
The Germans had much trouble keeping this rubber coating on the boats,
in one journey from France to Norway one boat lost over 60% of the
rubber. The only successful placement of Rubber on the U-boats was on
the Schnorkel head of the XXI's which reduced the allied radar signature
to about 30%.
        The XXI might have reached even as much as 1500' but this was
never tested to the max (as far as I know) and in one test he easily
reached 280-300 meters.

Gudmundur J. Helgason

E-mail to:    [email-masked]

------------------------------

Date:    Wed, 19 Jan 1994 09:36:12 -0500
From:    Warren Thompson <[email-masked]>
Subject: Armed Japanese troops in French Indochina

At the end of hostilities, before the French military returned in
force, the occupying British in Indochina used Japanese troops "to
keep order."

-- Warren Thompson
LEBANON VALLEY COLLEGE
Annville PA 17003

[NOTE: FYI, the thermometer read -12 this morning, the wind chill -31.]

------------------------------

Date:    Wed, 19 Jan 1994 08:36:09 EST
From:    Ken Koester <[email-masked]>
Subject: MEDIA:  Realism, or the Lack Thereof

Last night I happened to see the end of Olivier's film about Nelson, which
includes a good 15-20 minute treatment of Trafalgar.  "Good" is meant for
quality, as they had the ships firing at close range, produced prodigious
clouds of smoke, & had Nelson's last words accurately reproduced.  True,
they went in for far too many ships burning to the waterline, but heck,
it's about the only time I've seen 3-deckers in action, & it's also the
only fleet action from the age of sail on film that I remember seeing, so
I'm prepared to cut them some slack.

But the film *did* make me think about WWII films I've seen (yes, this note
*is* on topic after all (-: ) & realism or lack thereof.  I suppose what
annoys me the most are depictions of armored actions--the ranges are too
close, which I can accept as a practical limitation of the cinematic art,
but every time a tank is hit, it goes up in flames, and most of the time
everyone is using the wrong tanks to begin with--M-48s & 60s for Germans,
Russians, Brits, Americans, etc.  (Aside:  I watched part of Welles'
=Battle for the Naretva=, filmed in the former Yugoslavia; everyone there
was using T-34s, which is barely plausible if the Germans sent captured
vehicles back to the Balkans.)  Occasionally, films will show Shermans
or Tigers, & once or twice I think I've seen a Panther--once on Masterpiece
Theater I *think* I saw a Val for a second or two--but never a PkwII,
III, or IV of any variant.  Etc.

And of course, all other points of realism that I won't go into here that
filmakers seem to be oblivious to.  Questions then:  what WWII films do you
find realistic--at least in part, & what part exactly do you find
realistic?  What do you actually see when a tank gets hit with solid shot
but doesn't brew up?  From firepower demos I watched as a boy, I seem to
remember a certain amount of dust, maybe some bits of metal flying about,
& that's about it.  You can take it from there, I suspect (-:

------------------------------

Date:    Wed, 19 Jan 1994 09:10:17 EST
From:    Ken Koester <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Waffen SS in Indochina

>Regarding the former SS soldiers in Indochina, I recall a book
>called  _Legion of the Damned_ that is the life story of one of these men.
>. . . .  The writer claims that the former SS were recruited
>through one of those mysterious networks that worked to get Germans out of
>Europe at the end of the war.  He also says that this group grew to be fairly
>large, maybe about 1000-2000 men.
>. . . .  Any info on why the French disbanded this unit.  It seemed from
>the book that they were quite effective in fighting the Viet Minh.
>
>Jon Stevens

Memory tells me that the French had about 200,000 fighting in Indo-china
(or is that 200k casualties?  that's the problem with work--no reference
libs).  These SS men would amount to 1-2% of the total.  Not large, IMHO.
Fall goes into the question at some length, correlating the numbers of
Legionaires, average age of soldiers, Legion rules on recruitment, etc.
He concludes that any significant German participation would have been
by Hitler Jugend at best (-:  His analysis is either in =Street Without
Joy= or =Hell in a Very Small Place=, probably the former; both are
excellent works in their own right, of course.

As for the shadowy unit your book describes--no idea.  The French built
a number of counter-guerrilla commandos operating in Viet Minh territory
that got to be a fairly big problem for the Viets, but they weren't
able to recover very many, and their command structure seemed to be a
bit lukewarm on the whole idea to begin with.  Possibly one of these
two things is what the author is describing.

ken koester
[email-masked]

------------------------------

Date:    Wed, 19 Jan 1994 21:34:24 CST
From:    Steve Alvin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: MEDIA/WEAP:  U-1105, the Rubber U-Boat

The Germans weren't the only ones to use anechoic coatings on
submarines.  The Japanese applied it to some of there boats--
the I-19 in particular.  I wonder which navy thought up the
idea first?

Ooops--should be "their boats"

--
Steve Alvin
[email-masked]

------------------------------

Date:    Wed, 19 Jan 1994 21:35:37 CST
From:    Steve Alvin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Waffen-SS

Wasn't the Goering Division technically a Luftwaffe unit and
not an army unit?

--
Steve Alvin
[email-masked]

------------------------------

End of WWII-L Digest - 18 Jan 1994 to 19 Jan 1994
*************************************************