It could really go on and on.On another site I reall someone calling out Tamiya when they came out with the 1/350 Tone because of the atrocities committed on board.I said as many have said,the ship didn't commit the atrocities,the sailors did.I just thought it was a really cool warship design,that's it.

My grand father fought the Axis forces in Africa and then up through Italy, and for reasons that have gone to the grave with him he respected the Germans and hated the Italians. I can fully understand the reasons for your stance and respect it, but I do not think it is as easy a subject to categorise. Atrocities were carried out by all sides regardless of race or creed during war, both sides are guilty of killing those who surrendered, maybe not for the same reasons but it happened. The British started the idea of concentration camps in South Africa, and while not run along the same lines or for the same reasons they were still responsible for the deaths of thousands of woman and children. I agree with you about the death camps and those responsible for what happened in them, but not that many Germans had anything to do with them or I suspect knew what was going on there. Good and evil is all a matter of perspective in time of war.

In the UK at the moment there are two groups who have questionable opinions on Muslims and anyone not considered British, which I am sure if certain things came to pass would be responsible for some atrocities. However hating them achieves nothing but alienation which drives people to do stupid things. What we need to do is converse with them and find a compromise which doesn’t result in the unthinkable, and at the same time doesn’t drive them underground where their beliefs become more twisted.

With all that said should I not build the Allied vehicles that took part in The Gulf because we were fighting for a lie? Or the US forces that took part in Vietnam because they were fighting a political war against the native population? Or indeed WW2 German vehicles because of the political ethos that was in charge at that time and the atrocities carried out in its name. Being British I know from history some of the things we got up to in time of war, after all we didn’t have an Empire on which the sun never set by playing by the rules.

I will say it is good to see how members are acting in this thread as I know how heated it could be.

Actually I keep politics out of the hobby. I build what I like based on looks, pictures, ideas etc. So if my idea calls for a Pak-40 in a ruined building, that's what I build. Next to that sits a M42 Duster in a "Khe Shan" Scenario (only 40 more footmans loops till painting). There are some subjects I do not touch like (Waffen)SS but neither would I touch NKWD or so. But regular (and irregular) forces are fair game choosen on looks and likes.

While I accept other peoples opinions about WWII I may not share them(3). Maybe due to the fact that I know quite a few german veterans(1) and make a difference between a german(2) and a member of the NSDAP or (Waffen)SS. The regular army where no saints but no Nazi hordes either. Politics back then where complex with nationalism and all (Polish question/Danzig Problem i,e) and so where peoples motives. Besides, that all is two generations in the past(4). Something that needs to be discussed and understood in history lessons but has no place in everyday life.




(1) Being german and having done my 15month in the 1980s made sure of that

(2) German army was relatively apolitical. Until late 1944 serving soldiers could not be party members and party members drafted had the membership suspended

(3) Voltaire was willing to lay down his right for your right to voice your opinion. Modern Liberals are willing to lay down your life for your right to voice their opinion (Some sources attribute this to Pournelle) No matter who said it, I prefer Voltaire

(4) My father is born 1938, I am born 1968 and the children sired by my generation are quickly aproaching puberty

Most of the subjects we build are linked in some way to acts of brutality, violence cruelty and inhuman acts, so I think its best to keep this in the back of our minds but not let it get in the way of our enjoyment of the hobby. I find enjoyment in re-creating the appearance of the machines of war in miniature, not glorify the killing of human beings of any race, creed of gender.

Kind of new here, but I have been intrigued by the way the conversation has been kept so far and for this you should all be commended.
As for my very own point of view, I build 100% military stuff, mostly modern (cold war onwards), with so far not a specific focus (examples: tanks, fighters, submarines). The reasons:
1) for as long as I can remember I have always been fascinated by things "olivedrab", with the root being in (as many have already well said) them being super-cool. Over the years I have spent hours researching on them and their incredible achievements (take a small example like the SR-71 and its unbeaten records) and eventually all of it came to shape my very own life and got me an engineering degree and a job in aerospace company, with the side effect of now making me even more appealed by the degree of human ingenuity that went into conceiving and building them.
2) I like the possibility this hobby offers to replicate life in scale. I think it of "Lego for adults". And even if one does not build, it is still fun to collect.

As for your point I believe that "evil lies in the eye of the beholder". As other have said quite well already, most of our outlooks and views are (rightly, in my opinion, or, better, inevitably) somehow always seen through lenses which are shaped by where we are from, in terms of cultural and gegraphical backgrounds. What I do NOT mean is that "everything is relative", because there are indeed plain and pure evil (the holocaust being one, if not THE, of them) but no side is innocent (give it a try at seeing life through the eyes of a survivor of Hiroshima, a simple bystander selling fish that day).
The bottom line of what I am saying is: it is very difficult to rationalize when your glasses already have a tint through which you are looking through. The beauty is that you have all rights to do so and if not building a specific craft helps your peace of mind, you should be respected for your decision. But as this thread as proven, to each, his (or her) own.

Anyhow, the biggest beauty is sharing even this thoughts in a world-wide community with no hatred. This is good rationalization.

MBR, thank you for your views. I wasn't aware that party members weren't allowed to be soldiers. What was the reason for that? Were party members considered too valuable to be sacrificed on the battlefield or something? For the most part, I think I'm beginning to agree with many of the thoughts and feelings shared with me here. It's curious...I never thought of building models of Nazi (or IJN or Soviet or anything else) as ways to glorify their ideologies, but something just didn't feel right about it. Maybe it's the same reason why some of you stated you will not build SS or NKVD models. There's a pang of terror, pain, and even anger when I see a swastika, despite my overwhelmingly positive views of Germany and the German people. I know well that plain footsoldiers are not always in agreement with their government, nor should they be at fault for the actions of their superiors, but it's just an uneasy topic for me to be around. I've been to Holocaust museums and exhibits in Detroit, Cleveland, DC, and Yad V'Shem in Israel, and I've been to Dachau, and I know full well what happened to my people and others because of those who corrupted and idolized the swastika. I think I'll be able to build an Axis kit after this discussion...maybe it'll somehow be even more meaningful. After all, the world cannot afford to forget the consequences.

And I seriously cannot thank you all enough for your civility, honesty, and willingness to share with us all...I absolutely love this network!

The "Reichswehr" (the german army 1919-1935) tried to stay out of the politics by a number of methods. One of those was that soldiers where not allowed to vote. The personal was a mix between officers and nco from the imperial army (mostly conservative) and recruits from the rural parts or germany (again mostly conservative). This resulted in a core army that was relatively far removed from most political movements including the NSDAP. If in doubt the Reichswehr allied with national-conservative forces (Freicorps) against left wing forces (Socialists and Communists(1)) and send forces against a certain postcard painter and his revolutionaries in Munich, 1923

This idea carried over into the Wehrmacht. Soldiers had to be Soldiers and keep away from politics. So the rules where

+ If you are serving you are not allowed to become a member in a political party
+ If you are drafted and you are already a party member, your membership was suspended for the duration of your draft

This changed post 20 Juli 1944 (Officers assasination attempt against Hitler) when the army was brought "in line" with the party (Hitlergruß instead of salute etc)

My guess is that the "unpolitical" Wehrmacht was part of an unspoken agreement between army and party to calm the armys fear of being absorbed/integrated with the SA (as Röhm would have liked). With many members, even more the lower NCO (created from the Reichswehr enlisted) being close to the Zentrum (Conservative) this also helped to keep moral up in the early war years since the soldiers where "fighting to regain german territory" (Poland campaign) and "protect germany from the arch enemy" (French campaign).

=========================================

When it comes to certain symbols german modellers are split. Some say "the Swastika is part of history and belongs on a model if the original had it" (I.e ships on the turret deck, ID flags used by ground troops) and others say "no way, do NOT show it" My guess is the latter are the majority, even more so since it is a "legal grey zone"(2). No german model shop carries flags etc. with the symbol, german kits have symbols "blotted out". I won't use the symbol even if it was legal / different.

Granted, as a "tank modeller" I have little problem with that since tanks did not use it anyway and a "marker flag" can easily be "bunched up" to the point the symbol does not have to be displayed. Ship and plane modellers face a harder choice

============================

As for the Bundeswehr this should shed some light on the post WWII army:

My grandmother is born April 23nd . When her 60s Birthday came up in 1988 I was a PFC in the Bundeswehr and was asked to take some days of to help set up the party. So I wrote a "request for holiday"(3) stating "18th April to 22nd" and under reason I correctly stated "preparation and execution of a birthday". Put the request on the S3 (my boss) desk at 9:30. Around 9:45 I was standing in fromt of the S3, the batallion commander and (he was there for another reason) the BRIGADE commander, the latter lecturing me that "Hitlers Birthday" was NOT something a soldier will celebrate, NOT a valid reason for hollidays and I should be happy that the could not use more actions against me. It took a phone call to grandma to convince them that I really wanted to help prepare a totally acceptable holliday and not celebrate the Austrian Painter.


(1) The german Socialists (SPD) before WWII was closer to communism, the change to a general party happened post WWII until 1959 (Godesberg Program)

(2) Modern germany forbids the display of Nazi symbols unless they are for "educational purpose depicting historical events". The debate is still up wether scale models fulfill the very high set of requirements

(3) Bundeswehr soldiers are legaly "normal employees" so we have the regular german 25 days of PTO/year and a 40h workweek (overtime must be compensated for!)

This network is one of the best communities out there hands down, just wish that I had joined in earlier

This has been a great conversation to watch and participate in and I wanted to thank you for bringing it up

For what it's worth I hate looking at the swastika and feel the same things that you do, but that is specifically why I will build a model that bears one. It's better to be aware of these feelings and to understand why you feel them than it is to not engage them. It'll make you a stronger person for it.

Simple answer: I don't

When I look at a Tiger or a 109 I don't see a "cool" weapon of war, I see an instrument that was used to expand and protect one of the most brutal and hideous regimes in human history. I see the slave labourers who built them under horrific conditions and few of who survived.

Likewise, building allied models is my own personal little tribute to the hundreds of thousands who died to defeat that regime. If I build a german tank, its a knocked-out one. They lost the war, they deserved to lose the war and I am eternally grateful they lost the war.

All IMO of course. Other opinions may vary

i can understand your plight Robby, a lot of my friends can't understand why i model ww2 kits but i do it as a way of connecting to my two grandfathers who fought in the war (one fought with the desert rats and the other entered the war on the beaches of normandy) my stash consists of allied and axis kits American, British, Russian, German, Japanese and a few Italian and French. for me i model as a hobby to create something in minature to look at with a sense of accomplishment and think i did that. i try not to let the politics or religious aspects affect my decision on what to build yes the Nazi regime was evil but the Russians were responsible for their fair share of atrocities too, as were the japanese the same could be said for the atrocities commited by american troops during vietnam or further back against the native americans does this stop modelers doing diorama's of vietnam or other historical wars the simple answer is no. we all model as a hobby not to make a political statement in favor for or against another nation. in my job i work with a host of different people of various nationalities and effnicities hell some of my good friends are muslim should i be bitter towards them due to 9/11 or 7/7? the answer is no again because those atrosities were commited by brainwashed fanatics, just like the german people under Hitler's rule the SS themselves being ardent fanatics. and the japanese Kamikase' again being forerunners to todays modern day suicide bombers. yes the atrocities of the past must never be forgotten, or in some cases never be forgiven but if we forget the past we as a species would be doomed to repeat it, this i fear is the problem for many countries in the world who constantly hold onto the bitterness and hate of crimes commited in the past as a rallying call to commit further acts of violence instead of letting go of the past and trying to better understand their fellow man, his beliefs and customs. look at technology today some of the world's best cars are made by Italy, Germany, and Japan. should we refuse to buy them because of the crimes commited by these countries in the past? our laptops and tv's are made by giants such as Toshiba, Sony, and Samsung. would we forego buying them because of the atrocities committed by the japanese during ww2? the same goes for model kits, i don't look at a kit as machine used by an evil regime i see it as a kit of really cool machine that if it didn't exist we wouldn't have the modern fighting vehicles we have today. this is just my opinion i agree that a simple solution would be to not model vehicles in the markings off the SS and if you modelled aircaft do what modern day airshows do remove the swastika and place the modern luftwaffe symbol on the tale just cause it's a ww2 era model doesn't mean it can't be modelled as an aircraft flying at a modern airshow. what ever you decide Robby it's upto you mate happy modelling. Ant

MBR, thank you for your explanations, and also for your anecdotes...I can only imagine the look on your face when they accused you of that! And that's really cool that you get those vacation benefits with the Bundeswehr!

Ant, I see your points very clearly, but just to play Devil's Advocate, I actually know quite a few people who still refuse to buy BMW's, VW's, Hondas, Toyotas, Sony appliances, or anything else made in or by Germans and Japanese. Whenever I talk with them and they bring up their views on this issue, it does upset me a bit that they still believe that all Germans want a Second Third-Reich and the Japanese are just waiting for their chance to storm China again. Maybe my views would be different if I personally witnessed men with swastika armbands rounding up my friends and family members...you really can't blame these survivors if they don't want to forgive, although I believe the majority have already done so.

i totally agree Robby i've read many accounts of US Marines who to this day will never forgive the Japanese for the brutalities they committed. and your right there are still people out there who believe in the Nazi idealogy but i think they'd have a different view if they actually visited Auscwitz or Dachau, walked the camps from end to end and seen the crematoriums. Ant.

I'm not so optimist about that. I think they wouldn't change their opinions.
In fact lots of them says Holocaust was actually a fake. They're too fool to admit and to change their minds

They’re just things. That’s all. German tanks and guns and planes are just things. I yield to no-one in my loathing for Nazis (and still more for neo-Nazis) but there is no such thing as a Nazi tank, only tanks that the Nazis used. Building German armour doesn’t make you a Nazi; refusing to build it, by the same token, doesn’t make you a defender of freedom. Both make you a modeller. The success or otherwise of current attempts to suppress neo-Nazis will not be affected one tiny little bit by our choices of models. History will be affected even less than that.

Mind you, I’m sure there must be people out there who do build exclusively German WWII stuff because they like what the Nazis did. Modelling is a broad church. But I’ve never met one. My club chairman does practically nothing but WWII German and I’m pretty sure he’s not a Nazi.

Personally I don’t build models to “honour” anyone. I have real difficulty seeing how my slapping together a model and then keeping it in a shoe-box (eventually to be a display shelf) amounts to honouring someone, especially someone who’s dead and can’t possibly know what I’m doing. Because of this, I feel very comfortable making armour of all sorts of unpleasant persuasions - Soviet as well as Nazi. I know that no-one affected by the real thing will be affected by what I’m doing. The one small reservation I have is that seeing a swastika - or possibly a red star, or who knows what - could bring back nasty memories for some people. But then, the only times my models are on display to the general public are at shows. Hopefully visitors to shows are at least slightly aware of what they’re likely to see and know to keep away if they have an aversion to some of it.

Nail, head, hit for me there Pigsty. I hear the 'honouring' argument a lot, especially people that use it as a reason to model axis ('Im honouring history' or imply it is in some way educational) which always sounds like some sort of excuse to cover something to me

If you want to model panzers becuase they look 'cool' then thats reason enough surely? you don't need to dress it up in something higher minded. I think most people model their chosen subjects because they do, and they don't think about it too much

Personally I do not model Panzers, and I don't think I ever will. Not because I'm British, and not because they 'are nazi' but because they are just so darned common. I have got heartily sick of looking at yet another Panther or yet another tiger (especially a blo**dy white-washed one!) For me their overfamiliarity makes them ineffibly boring, so I build British and French just because it is interesting and you don't see it absolutely everywhere


One more point though, people often say that 'not all Germans were Nazis' and talk about how soldiers were probably fighting against their will. It is worth remembering that the war criminals tried at Nuremberg were, for the most part, tried for crimes that had nothing at all to do with the holocaust, or for the millions of deaths in the war of extermination in Eastern Europe and Russia. Genocide was not a crime on the internation statue books then (it was added after the experience of WWII)

They were tried for initiating illegal wars of agression against other sovereign states. Seperate from the holocaust (and not in any way diminishing the deaths of 6 million in the camps and ghettos) their hunger for conquest lead to the deaths of millions and the destruction of Europe. The German army Passionate pro nazis and non-nazis alike, was not unenthusiatic in prosecuting these wars. It is not so easy to seperate culpability as people would like, and wermacht units committed war crimes as well as SS units

Are you kidding? USSR was not planning to attack Germany, Stalin had a deal with Hitler.

On 4th March 1939 Poland started to plan a war against Germany and this plan was approved on 22th March. Germany had no tactical plans before April 1939, read memoires of Manstein.
And at the same time French prime minister signs a treaty with England on 22th March and signing a pact between England and Poland on 6th April made the world war inevitable.

Poland had no plans to invade Germany. That was a fiction concocted by Himmler as a pretext for the invasion of Poland. I am somewhat surprised that people still actually believe it as I thought it was paper thin at the time, let alone 70 years later with everything else we now know. It might be in Manstein's memoir, but he's not exactly unbiased is he?

Are you saying that it was Britain, France and Poland that started WWII by signing a mutual defence pact? If you are then doesn't that kind of ignore the fact Germany had spent 10 years re-arming, that Hitler and the Germany armed forces had annexed the Sudetenland, Austria and Luxemburg, that they were already planning the invasion of France and Poland and that they had already agreed a non-aggression pact with Russia to divide Poland up between them?

The pact between Britain France and Poland was a response to the rearmament of Germany, her support for Franco's fascists and her pact with Italy and the obvious fact that German was preparing for war. Seeing these preparations Britain France and Germany hoped that signing the pact would deter Germany from further illegal aggressive expansionist actions (it didn't because Hitler had already called their bluff with Czechoslovakia)

The Allies signed a pact that said that in the event of Germany invading one of them the others would declare war on Germany. Therefore, if Germany had not invaded Poland or France WWII would not have happened

To blame France Britain and Poland for causing WWII by signing this treaty is complete revisionism of history. If the allies are to blame it is in not enforcing the demilitarisation of Germany (especially the Luftwaffe and Panzerwaffe forbiden by Versaille) sooner and preventing the rearming of the German state

Walking the grounds of the camps isn't all that spectacular unless you already know what happened there. I.e unless you know it the gas chambers don't look much like an execution device and crematoria are not special in themselfs, only in their use. Only in combination with historical picture, information on the size of the "Endlösung" and upon understanding the system will the effect set in

Sadly those claiming the Holocaust (Holocaust-Leugner, HL) a fake like Leuchter are far too often aided by those who know better. Simply because those who know do not know enough or have been educated in the "Cold War". This results in

+ A flat refusal to discuss/argue with HL at all
+ Stating the HL numbers are fakes and not trying to explain them
+ Forgetting a few million victims because they where the "Cold War enemy"

The HL use a very mean trick to play with your mind. They claim

According to this census numbers, taken in year 193x (always BEFORE the Nazis came to power there) there where only y Million Jews in all of Europe. Of those quite a few escaped and quite a few survived. So how could the Nazis kill z million jews (With z >> y)? And even IF one challenges their data they can proof beyond doubt that it is real and correct (within the limits of a census but that is far lower that the difference)

The trick is actually simple but one needs to know it:

Pre-Nazi census had "Jewish1) as a religion". One had to actively claim "I am a Christian/Jew/Moslem/Whatever" to be counted for that group. To use me as an example I would show up as "Roman Catholic" untl 2000 and "Religion:none" after that.

Nazi Census post 1935 (Nurenberg laws) used "Jewish as a race". And race is something you inherit. That in turn led to concepts like Half- and Quarter Jews. Again with me as an example: I am a "Roman Catholic" (Both parents are) and a "Half-Protestant" (My grandparents, mothers side are). For the KZs and Ghettos everyone IIRC "Half Jew" and above was in danger. And once "in the system" the papers no longer made the difference. Add the fact that Europe at the start of the 20th century had a relatively large number of converts that went to "Christian" or "none" (and would register as such in the last normal census) and those where still "Jew" in the Nazi census and you get your number.

Forgetting the Sowjet PoW that where commonly send into the same System (More to work camps, less to gas chambers but to be killed as well(2)). Same for other minority groups like Gypsies. Those add to the numbers and the HLs are not above generalizing the numbers

(1) Is that the correct term for being a practicing jew?

(2) The "Fremdarbeiter" where part of a different system. Those where forced to work in german factories, payed less than german workers and restricted in movement. But they where housed/clothed/fed and payed to a level that was "enough to live, longterm"

Poland/UdSSR invasions:

+ There is ONE russian book that claims Stalin was preparing for attack in 1941 and Hitler pre-empted that. The (russian) author is basing that claim on the easy sucesses the germans had "because the Red Army was deployed for attack not defence". The book has been countered by quite a few authors (Russian and others)

+ Poland had actually attacked germany post WWII (Between 1919 and 1921, Silesia) but that was a thing of the past and the League of Nations had intervened and made guarantees.

+ There was a lot of nationalism in Poland and the fact that a number of "administered territories"like Danzig, Regions of East Prussia and Silesia where about to come up for a Referendum wether they would like to go back to Germany or remain under polish control (not posession) added fuel to that. But Aggitation by right wing parties is not the same as "the government plans"

Ironically Hitler could have gotten back quite a bit of territory if he had NOT occupied Tschechoslowakia and NOT left the League of Nations. Had he behaved and cooperated chanced would have been good to re-aquire Danzig (very pro german, only administered territory), some parts of Silesia and maybe even a former colony or two (Samoa had asked to "be given back to german control, before 1933, Todays Namibia was another candidate)

But that would have needed waiting until mid/end 1940s and Germany would have "done the Greek" somewhere around early 1940s without the loot from the national coffers (That is why the Royal Navy rescued the norwegian state treasure - keep it from the germans who could have used it to buy maschinery in say Switzerland)


Edit: The idea of Stalin entering a pact with Poland is without substance. The guy was known to hold grudges and (From Wiki)

After their Russian Civil War victory, the Bolsheviks moved to establish a sphere of influence in Central Europe, starting with what became the Polish–Soviet War. As commander of the southern front, Stalin was determined to take the Polish-held city of Lviv. This conflicted with general strategy set by Lenin and Trotsky, which focused upon the capture of Warsaw further north.

Trotsky's forces engaged with those of Polish commander Władysław Sikorski at the Battle of Warsaw, but Stalin refused to redirect his troops from Lviv to help. Consequently, the battles for both Lviv and Warsaw were lost, for which Stalin was blamed. Stalin returned to Moscow in August 1920, where he defended himself and resigned his military commission. At the Ninth Party Conference on 22 September, Trotsky openly criticized Stalin's behavior.

SIMPLY PUT: "Less we forget." You could do a burnt out vehicle or one that was captured by Allied Forces. This will serve as a reminder that the Desperate Alliance triumphed over evil. Yes, these were darks years. However, as history is constantly being re-written, I feel it our responsibility to keep the memory of what did happen alive. On a side note, the Wermacht was not under direct Nazi rule. They were just soldiers following orders. Several officers in the Wermacht officers tried to assasinate Hitler. You can not judge the masses by the actions of one man. That would be like blaming the US military for its involvement in the Iraq wars. Furthermore, it leads to stereotyping. I belief that is what Hitler excelled at, discremination.

I am not talking about Poland invading Germany, but Poland was preparing for a war before Germany had a plan to attack!

Why not blaming England and France? Didn't they give Chechoslovakia to Hitler?
We can only speculate what would happen if there wouldn't have been a treaty between Poland and Britain, but definitely if Britain knew that Germany is going to make a war against Poland then signing a treaty automatically means to be involved in a war. A war that turns into world war.

BTW, non agression pact between USSR (not Russia, please) was AFTER the pact between Poland, France and England and not before that. And for Stalin that was a defence act, to move the theoretical border of conflict with Hitler from western USSR land to Poland since it was clear that sooner or later Hitler will go towards the East.

And about revisionism - saying that Stalin was going to occupate Poland and Germany is pure revisionism. See what MBR wrote - he is 100% correct.

I dont want to disappoint you but there was an article in German magasine Speiegel based on Allied intelligence reports from POW camps saying that not only SS were commencing violence, rape and murder of civilians but "just soldiers" too. A man becomese an animal during the war (it is true not only to WWII)

See article here (only in German, sorry)
http://www.spiegel.de/spiegel/print/d-77855742.html

I am from Singapore and Chinese.

I adore Tamiya model kits, enjoy sushi and buy Japanese electronics and love their kawaii girls but I do not condone the massacre of Chinese in Nanking, South-East Asia and Singapore by the Japanese imperialists. I will not boycott Japanese produce but I will join in a peaceful protest against Japan for denying atrocities committed by the Japanese Army in Nanking.

I have seen pictures/movies of troops murdering innocent civilians- old folks, woman and babies murdered by blood-crazed soldiers- Japanese, Nazis and others, so to me it is important for any nation to possess weapons for defensive purposes (including King Tiger which would have defended the citizens of Berlin during the siege of Germany). I am sure there were brave and righteous German soldiers like Colonel Claus von Stauffenberg who defended "Sacred Germany" and its people from the Nazi party.

The KT is a weapon, like the M1A1, Merkava, Leopard tank... it's primary purpose is to disable/kill the enemy , but it is up to the person operating it- to kill the enemy with 1 clean shot or a slow torturous death with many small stab wounds into the gunny sack.

Just my 2 cents worth.

The article describes individual and small group actions that happened. As you rightly stated "man becomes an animal during the war".

Difference between most of the german regular armed soldiers(1) and the SS was that typically attrocities by the regulare where initiated on the squad level or by individuals

One transcribt line is "I shot a french - Up close - Yes - Did he try to capture you? - No, I wanted his bycicle(2)) and often "one time"

while the SS did this based on orders issued by the political leadership, repeatedly and volunterely (Until very late in the war SS and WaffenSS where all volunteer forces)

The former has (and will) happen in all wars throughout history. Sometimes it is punished (When done in friendly territory or under a stern commander) sometimes it is not. But this is always a disciplin/training/control problem and soldiers caught will at least be lectured even in the (for the victim) worst case.

The latter is encouraged, ordered and wanted. It is praised by the leadership and shown as good work. And that is the really ugly thing, that is what needs to be shown as the key problem IMHO

(1) The army did order some attrocities i.e Italie during an anti-partisan operation, the shooting of escaped officers from Stalag III etc.

(2) From the text this sounds like 1944/45 but no time given