Walter Freiherr von Keyserlingk Quotes

One of the predictions of the oncoming war with Germany.

The Boers had just a few years before lost their war with the British who were then in control of South Africa. However, the British did not treat the Boers harshly in defeat and most Boers were at the time farmers and land owners who were a major force in democratic South Africa and had much invested in the nation. Others were still resentful of the British. The Boers sided with the British and fought the Germans who had troops and colonies in Africa. Like the Irish, culturally, they were always up for a good fight.

He was writing about the impending First World War.

While Queen Mary was presenting medals to British soldiers during World War I, she said this to a soldier who had exclaimed “No more bloody wars for me”.

He was warning the majority and blaming them for what was to happen. Ironically, at the end of the First World War, Germany was so harshly treated because the allies felt that the Germans had been aforewarned not only by others but by opposition Germans as well.

At Hamburg Harris organized a massive fire bombing of the German industrial city and the fire storm was so great that it sucked the oxygen out from huge sections of the city and thousands of people were roasted alive. Even with 100,000 Germans killed, Harris was convinced that it was a relatively humane way of waging a necessary war when compared to the classic artillery barrage followed by invading soldiers and street to street fighting.

War between England and Germany had just commenced.

The German naval command—without the permission of the Kaiser—at the eve of a losing war decided that the entire German navy would make a grand attack against the far superior English fleet. It was to be a virtual suicide attack on a grand scale. However, most German sailors heard about the plan and refused orders to attack in what was the largest mutiny in history. The German naval leaders then took the fleet out to sea and scuttled all the ships so that the English would not capture them. The result was the same but tens of thousands of lives were saved; many German officers felt that German naval honor had been lost.

This has been true in just about every conflict. In WWII however, there were a highly disproportionate ration of atrocities with those of the axis forces dwarfing those of the U. S. and its allies. Further, after the war, those allied atrocities that did take place were published. In addition, one basic difference is in the policies of the fighting forces and their governments as opposed to individual actions by soldiers. In WWII, the allied atrocities were of the latter type, but the axis atrocities involved both.

The Falkland Islands were very close to Argentina and far from England. The Argentineans had offered the few Islanders large sums of money to become part of Argentina, but this was rejected. Argentina was a military dictatorship with a terrible record of human rights abuses. The Falklanders preferred their traditional British style of government and affiliation. The Argentinean generals assumed that if they invaded, once they controlled the Falkland Islands, they could negotiate with the British over issues of sovereignty. They misinterpreted the American UN Delegate and concluded that America would not support Britain in a military response; they also assumed that while the British would complain in the UN, they would never go halfway around the world to invade the islands, now occupied and reinforced by Argentina. Thatcher would not negotiate unless the invaders left the islands. They did not do so voluntarily. The Argentinian military had been abusing their own citizens for so long that they had an inflated concept of their fighting ability. Britain freed the islands militarily, and Argentina was humiliated. The military government fell bringing democracy to Argentina—the only good that came out of the Faulklands War.

Some scholars look back at the allied bombing of German Cities in WWII with criticism that it was morally improper to bomb populated cities, and that the use of the adjective “exterminating” indicated that Churchill was more interested in killing Germans than strategic victory. This revisionist history has two failings. First, the Germans had already bombed Coventry, London and other civilian targets in England as well as cities in Holland, Poland and other countries killing many civilians. As a result, under the rules of war, Germany was no longer entitled to protection for their cities. Further, Hamburg and other targets were manufacturing sites of war material and as such lost the protection anyway. Even Dresden, which had very little war manufacturing was the main location for R&R of German Officers and by their military presence in the city converted it into a legitimate target. FDR agreed with Churchill, that the bombing was a good strategy to cause Hitler to fall as they thought the public would rebel. They were wrong however and his grip on the population through the Gestapo and the military was so strong that, it took a land invasion and occupation to put an end to Hitler. However, the devastating bombing all but crippled the German weapons development and deployment. For example. The Germans had developed the Jet Airplane Engine and actually put a few in the fight at the end if the war. Without the bombing, they would have had many more and countered the allied air supremacy. However, it is also true that Churchill and many Englishmen and some Americans believed that the English were morally entitled to retaliation for the innocent civilians killed with the German bombing of civilian targets.

At first reading, this is just a common report of a German war correspondent riding along on a bombing mission. However what makes it a very important historical quotation is the description of the fires and the date. In WWII the allies firebombed Hamburg {624722} and Dresden, and were then accused by the Germans—and by some historical revisionists in the 21st century—of bombing civilian cities and using the firbombing technique where one huge conflagrant sucked the air out of the area and roasted even people in bomb shelters. However, it was clear that the Germans had started the bombing of civilian cities, but the firebombing was less clear. This quotation proves that it was the Germans who first broke the rules of war and that made the subsequent Allied use of the technique legal and for most people then moral.

There was deep hostility and suspicion between Germany and England for several years before WWI. See {642066}.