Why Didn't Nazis just Kill POWs

[Deano!]

Given that they weren't that interested in good manners, why did the Nazis bother to keep enemy prisoners? It would have been easier to just shoot 'em.

The only reason I can think of is their use as hostages or bargaining chips.

Anyone? - You down the back there, young Adolf.

[andy at handiwork]

On the Eastern Front, the Germans were a lot less careful with prisoners than in the west. Several million Russian POWs died from execution, disease, neglect, overwork etc, whilst the Russians didn't look after their prisoners any better. Of the 95000 6th Army soldiers captured at Stalingrad, less than 5000 got back to Germany many years after the war. Stange as it may seem, to some extent the war in the west and North Africa was waged with a modicum of decency by both sides. Each side allowed the Red Cross to have access, and realised that as the enemy were treating their prisoners decently, it would be sensible to do likewise. In the East, the sheer mutual hatred made that impossible. There were obviously occasions when prisoners were shot such as at Malmady during the Battle of the Bulge, and I'm sure we did our own bit of 'Take no prisoners'.

[Guilbert]

>On the Eastern Front, the Germans were a lot less careful with prisoners than in the west.

It could be argued that Hitler was a lot less careful with GERMANS on the East as well, thousands of his soldiers perished in the cold after he told them not to retreat.

[Officer Dibble]

"Given that they weren't that interested in good manners"

Oh but they were interested in good manners. They considered themselves (along with other western European peoples) to be an extremely civilized and cultured. Hitler is reputed to have said about the British "They will always behave like gentlemen." So it's a good job he's not around to see the carry-ons in Britain's town centers of a Saturday evening, then.

But Hitler and the Nazis were not so enamored of the eastern Slavic peoples, who they considered to be barbarians, and to be treated accordingly. Regrettably, in many instances the Slavs did not disappoint him.



Officer Dibble

[Trumpton]

The Japanese killed many POWs.

[planeterotica]

When the invasion took place the allies were told not to take any prisoners for the first 24 hours as looking after prisoners takes up manpower, so no doubt the allies shot a lot of would be prisoners but so did the nazis !sad!

[Alex L]

Not taking prisoners in the heat of the battle may be one thing but for sheer delight in inflicting suffering on prisoners, the Japanese were the masters.

I posted this: recently on another OT thread, the book draws attention to the plight suffered by many naval prisoners at the hands of the Japanese, many being sailors from merchant ships.

[Trumpton]

My great uncle was captured at almost the very end of WW2 (March 1945) and he was taken to a small prison camp which was next door to a larger camp that held Russian POWs. He was treated well - but that wasn't the case with the Russian POWs. At night he could hear the screams and gun shots coming from the camp next door.

One day he woke up to discover that all the German guards had vanished overnight. The Germans had left everything - including a radio, and they discovered that the war had ended. A couple of days later they were liberated by passing British troops. Then they found out that the Nazis had murdered the remaining Russian prisoners before they fled!