Lessons for Iraq from General Washington, Major Andre and Der Fuhrer Adolf Hitler

first published on ChronWatch ^ | 21 September 2003 | John Armor (Congressman Billybob)

[Congressman Billybob]

This will also be published on John's campaign website, and on Billybob's website.

Those who haven't already are cordially invited to visit the campaign website. Click here.

[TheDon]

BUMP

[bvw]

Bravo and Yowsa!

[WOSG]

Thanks for a great read; yes, we need folks like you running the country! :-) You ought to get this published more widely too.

A few Questions/comments:
A big deal is made of the casualties "since May 1, when major military operations were declared over" ... Can you speak of the overall casualty rate in 1945-1946 due to sabotage etc. and how it compares?

Second, you indicate that maybe we should be treating the fedayeen-type attackers as POWs, or are they just to be lined up and shot? The thing that is unclear to me is whether CENTCOM is (stupidly) releasing people "detained"; I guess not, since brave soliders were just killed guarding a prison. So, how they they treating these militants?

IMHO, what Iraq really needs is to see some of these terrorists caught, tried publicly, then jailed or executed. Treat them as the criminals that they are.

[Gritty]

Excellent work.

It's work the Media should have done long ago. It may be laziness or incompetence, but more likely they just don't want to make any parallels and thereby sabotage the phony arguments of those they support for President.

[Congressman Billybob]

Thank you for your comments. As for "running the country," please click over to my campaign website, sign up, and do what you can.

Regarding casualties during the occupation of Germany, I tracked down, bought and read Dr. Ziemke's book because I was certain it would provide that information. In his welter of statistics, however, he NEVER discussed casualties. I have, however, read the detailed history of VII Corps (General Patton's group that was disbanded in October, 1945). That did discuss casualties, incident by incident.

From the admittedly partial VII Corps information, I know that American casualties in the occupation of Germany were similar to, but less than, what we are currently experiencing in Iraq. So that's what I said in the article.

There is an interim position between jailing the attackers and shooting them on the spot. The interim is giving them a "military" trial under the law of war, and executing them if found guilty of being "illegal combatants." That has been done in the United States (Quirin case) and in Germany. I suggest that it should be done in Iraq as well.

John / Billybob

[Starrgaizr]

This is worthy of a mega-ping.

[RobFromGa]

I concur that this deserves a MEGAPING John.

Congressman BillyBob- this is excellent work. If there is a way to somehow show this in graph form that we are two years ahead of German rebuilding, it could be even more powerful. Great research!

[JustPiper]

Wish I could vote for you ;( But you are in my homeschooling modern history class!

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

Early on, the official policy of America was to "do nothing concerning the reconstruction" of Germany's economy and society. This was to be left only to the Germans themselves, regardless of their lack of money, equipment, homes, factories or shops. It took two years for the United States to recognize that its own self interest demanded a functional Germany back on its feet as a bulwark against the Soviet buildup in Eastern Europe. And the American policy was changed to helping the Germans reconstruct their nation, effectively and quickly.

Early on, the policy of FDR--that the Soviet Union should dominate Europe (see The New Dealers' War by Flemming)--was followed. It was only after the 1946 election put the fear of electoral defeat into HST (see Treason by Coulter) that any effort was made at containment of the Soviet Union. Before that, American troops were shipping refugees from Stalin back into Soviet hands.

[olliemb]

Great read. Thanks. Any mention in your readings of the Werewolves--read somewhere that the post war saboteurs were organized and named werewolves. Is this correct?

[Congressman Billybob]

The highest compliment that anyone has ever paid me, here on FreeRepublic, is what you just said. I am honored that you have made some of my writings a part of your "homeschool modern history class."

Please let me extend that process. When I get sworn in as a real Congressman, you and your whole class (plus a resonable number of others) are invited to a first-class tour of Washington which I will set up. And it doesn't matter one whit whether you are in my District or a thousand miles away.

(I still remember with favor a visit that one of my professors lined up in Washington for his class, with and in the Chambers of a Justice of the Supreme Court. Sometimes being there and seeing things face to face is a very special experience that stays with you for a lifetime.)

Cordially,

John / Billybob

[steveegg]

Outstanding.

[Congressman Billybob]

The Werwolves as the Germans called them, were organized by Himmler just before the collapse of Germany. They were not very organized and had very limited effects. Dr. Ziemke makes only passing mention of them. The history of VII Corps (Patton's unit) describes individually several attacks by the Werwolves including some recruits -- probably from the Hitler Youth -- as young as 12.

They were there in theory and intent, but had very limited results.

John / Billybob

[olliemb]

Thanks for the reply. One of posters on FR said the werwolves were from the comic books. Google search did not help me. Thanks for sharing your knowledge. I am from Texas so cn't vote for ya. But will keep ya in my prayers for your success.

[Ragtime Cowgirl]

Thank you for setting the record straight, Congressman!

You know the left treats the subject of post-Hitler Germany as powerful pro-war symbolism - in need of burying at any cost - as they did with PFC Lynch, the USS Lincoln landing, Todd Beamer (it was the hijackers who intentionally crashed, they'll say), and even by trying to seduce the fireman who stood atop the WTC rubble with the President's arm around him into attending the SOTU address as a guest of the Democrats. Thus, some of the confusion surrounding the history. The press is spinning stories to confuse and deceive - as usual.

In short, the major drawbacks to the American occupation in Iraq are not in Iraq. Compared to the one close example, Germany, the major defects of the Iraqi occupation are only in the pages of the American press and in the stump speeches of assorted badly-informed American candidates for President.

 Thanks, Tonkin!

If you want on or off my PRO-coalition ping list, please Freepmail me. Warning: it is a high volume ping list on good days. (Most days are good days). All links are added to my homepage, link above.

[tet68]

Reporters, bump and raise!

[CGVet58]

This is an outstanding piece of work!!! To which, I add the following Link:

http://www.rand.org/publications/randreview/issues/summer2003/nation1.html

The above is a thoughtful and objective study on nation-building done by the RAND Corporation. Among the comparisons and conclusions - also using Germany & Japan - is the belief by the writer that there exists a higher likelihood of a messier Iraqi occupation because the active combat phase was so relatively bloodless for the enemy. Highly recommended reading, all

Juan

[Carolinamom]

Outstanding. Any chance of your sending copies to receptive reporters, members of Congress, New Republic, Byron York, Brit Hume, etc.?

[Lady In Blue]

Good thinking,Carolinamom!