Hitlers Commando Order

[Toddy1]

Hitler had his famous commando order enforced on many occasions throughout the mid to latter parts of WWII, this was extended not only to allied SAS/Commando's but also to the Maquis and resistance fighters, there were known examples when SS made these units put on civilian clothes, drive them into the forest, line them up then shoot them.

My question is, are there any known instances where Allied forces committed the same atrocities? I know it is far fetched to think that Brits/US/Aussie/NZ etc etc would take part in this. I know the Russians were pretty brutal when they took Berlin.

Thanks in advance.

Hitlers Commando Order:

The Fuhrer SECRET
No. 003830/42g.Kdos.OWK/Wst F.H. Qu 18.10.1942
12 copies
Copy No.12.
1. For a long time now our opponents have been employing in their conduct of the war, methods which contravene the International Convention of Geneva. The members of the so-called Commandos behave in a particularly brutal and underhand manner; and it has been established that those units recruit criminals not only from their own country but even former convicts set free in enemy territories. From captured orders it emerges that they are instructed not only to tie up prisoners, but also to kill out-of-hand unarmed captives who they think might prove an encumbrance to them, or hinder them in successfully carrying out their aims. Orders have indeed been found in which the killing of prisoners has positively been demanded of them.
2. In this connection it has already been notified in an Appendix to Army Orders of 7.10.1942. that in future, Germany will adopt the same methods against these Sabotage units of the British and their Allies; i.e. that, whenever they appear, they shall be ruthlessly destroyed by the German troops.
3. I order, therefore:-
From now on all men operating against German troops in so-called Commando raids in Europe or in Africa, are to be annihilated to the last man. This is to be carried out whether they be soldiers in uniform, or saboteurs, with or without arms; and whether fighting or seeking to escape; and it is equally immaterial whether they come into action from Ships and Aircraft, or whether they land by parachute. Even if these individuals on discovery make obvious their intention of giving themselves up as prisoners, no pardon is on any account to be given. On this matter a report is to be made on each case to Headquarters for the information of Higher Command.
4. Should individual members of these Commandos, such as agents, saboteurs etc., fall into the hands of the Armed Forces through any means - as, for example, through the Police in one of the Occupied Territories - they are to be instantly handed over to the S.D.
To hold them in military custody - for example in P.O.W. Camps, etc., - even if only as a temporary measure, is strictly forbidden.
5. This order does not apply to the treatment of those enemy soldiers who are taken prisoner or give themselves up in open battle, in the course of normal operations, large scale attacks; or in major assault landings or airborne operations. Neither does it apply to those who fall into our hands after a sea fight, nor to those enemy soldiers who, after air battle, seek to save their lives by parachute.
6. I will hold all Commanders and Officers responsible under Military Law for any omission to carry out this order, whether by failure in their duty to instruct their units accordingly, or if they themselves act contrary to it.
(Sgd) A Hitler

[bersaglieri]

There were a number of incidents involving, shall we say , double standards during WW2. For example , the men of Skorzeny's unit captured in US uniforms during the Ardennes were executed but the US felt it was perfectly acceptable to use the same tactic against the Germans. A German general was executed after the war for having ordered the execution of US troops captured behind German lines in Itay in civilian clothes.
Also , in the 1970s in France , a mass grave of around 200 men of the Waffen SS division "Gotz von Berlichingen" was discovered , they had all been captured and many had their hands tied.
This is not exactly surprising given the nature and extent of the conflict.

[Toddy1]

I know the Brits executed a German general for ordering the murder of SAS/Commandos as well, this was after the war. The 200 men of the Waffen SS dicision could have been cut down by resistance fighters, they did not seem to follow the same ROE as standard military units, and would probably have been seeking some sort of revenge from the Germans.

[Kitsune]

Spies and saboteurs were customarily executed anyway (by all sides) and many commando troops simply toed the line between military and these. Also paragraph 5 of the order does explicitely exempt regular troops, including soldiers of airborne or seaborne operations. While I see no particular reason to be proud of it, I doubt that the Commando Order is worth the fuzz which is often made about it, especially in the light of the downright systematic doublestandards regarding the matter which the Allies themselves used once they had the upper hand.

[Toddy1]

Spies and saboteurs were customarily executed anyway (by all sides) and many commando troops simply toed the line between military and these. Also paragraph 5 of the order does explicitely exempt regular troops, including soldiers of airborne or seaborne operations. While I see no particular reason to be proud of it, I doubt that the Commando Order is worth the fuzz which is often made about it, especially in the light of the downright systematic doublestandards regarding the matter which the Allies themselves used once they had the upper hand.

I agree with your comments mate. The commando order is the most well known example of this kind of warfare, I was asking if anyone had established proof that the allies were acting in the same way. It would be naive to think that they did not act exactly the same way when capturing german troops in civvies.

What makes this a little bit heinous is that the SAS particulary wore uniform, I am pretty sure the commandos did as well, so in effect they were no different in their appearance than regular troops.

[BugHunt]

Spies and saboteurs were customarily executed anyway (by all sides) and many commando troops simply toed the line between military and these. Also paragraph 5 of the order does explicitely exempt regular troops, including soldiers of airborne or seaborne operations. While I see no particular reason to be proud of it, I doubt that the Commando Order is worth the fuzz which is often made about it, especially in the light of the downright systematic doublestandards regarding the matter which the Allies themselves used once they had the upper hand.

25th S.S. Panzer Grenadier Regiment, under Kurt Meyer was responsible for the killing of twenty-three Canadian prisoners of war at or near the villages of Buron and Authie.

After Falaise the unit could barely muster something like 25 men (out of thousands) - none taken prisoner.

Im sure more then a few were killed out of hand by the Allies.


But i still think there a world of difference between the Allies and Axis on this regard.

SAS and commandos were in uniform - and Hilters order was against essentially any working in a guerilla role. They would expect to suffer torture as well.


Plus your kinda comparing apples and oranges - when you take into account what even "ordinary" Whermarcht units got up to on the eastern front.



Things get hazeir when we executed Japanese Generals for torture (specifically waterboarding) - when the US are doing it currently.

The Yanks might argue extreme circumstances now - but then again so might the Japanese who were facing annhilation and actually got nuked...

[I'mOnlyHalfPolish]

25th S.S. Panzer Grenadier Regiment, under Kurt Meyer was responsible for the killing of twenty-three Canadian prisoners of war at or near the villages of Buron and Authie.

After Falaise the unit could barely muster something like 25 men (out of thousands) - none taken prisoner.

Im sure more then a few were killed out of hand by the Allies.


But i still think there a world of difference between the Allies and Axis on this regard.

SAS and commandos were in uniform - and Hilters order was against essentially any working in a guerilla role. They would expect to suffer torture as well.


Plus your kinda comparing apples and oranges - when you take into account what even "ordinary" Whermarcht units got up to on the eastern front.



Things get hazeir when we executed Japanese Generals for torture (specifically waterboarding) - when the US are doing it currently.

The Yanks might argue extreme circumstances now - but then again so might the Japanese who were facing annhilation and actually got nuked...

*Wehrmacht
*hazier

Sorry it bothered me :)

[Mackie]

British/US bomber command.
The attacks on Wuerzburg and Dresden for example.

[wilhelm]

British/US bomber command.
The attacks on Wuerzburg and Dresden for example.

My mother was a child refugee on the outskirts of Dresden when it happened.

She sort of goes all shivvery-like if I mention it. She remembers it and the aftermath clearly.

It was an odious affair, and a definite war-crime in my books. But then, I think war crimes have never been monopolised by only one culture or people...:-(

...only the accusation has.p-)

[I'mOnlyHalfPolish]

It was an odious affair, and a definite war-crime in my books. But then, I think war crimes have never been monopolised by only one culture or people...:-)

As well as V-2 rockets on London.

[wilhelm]

As well as V-2 rockets on London.

I'm sorry? I'm not sure what you're trying to say...?

[Mackie]

As well as V-2 rockets on London.

I know what you mean. But the Nuernberg Trials never claimed the bomber/V2 attacks on London and the British bomber command was never honored.
We know our history. But we also know that crimes were on both sides. And the facts that Nazis like von Braun and Barbie became influential citizens in the US are perfect examples.

[I'mOnlyHalfPolish]

I'm sorry? I'm not sure what you're trying to say...?

Sorry, bad english mistake on my part. I was saying I think that Dresden is comparable (maybe not in size or destruction but the action of bombing civilian populations) to the V-2 rocket program bombing London.

[I'mOnlyHalfPolish]

I know what you mean. But the Nuernberg Trials never claimed the bomber/V2 attacks on London and the British bomber command was never honored.
We know our history. But we also know that crimes were on both sides. And the facts that Nazis like von Braun and Barbie became influential citizens in the US are perfect examples.

True. Thanks to German rocketry the US has a space program and all of the technology that came of that. Although I think the importance of the scientists superceded the machines of war they made that created so much destruction, at least in the eyes of the American leadership.

Ah, Nuernberg, how I love thee Franconia. I will be back in three weeks, need to check out the Palace of Justice since I have not seen it yet. Sorry, just had to throw that in there.

[BugHunt]

*Wehrmacht
*hazier

Sorry it bothered me :)

I didnt feel a thing m8 p-)

[little icebear]

Sorry, bad english mistake on my part. I was saying I think that Dresden is comparable (maybe not in size or destruction but the action of bombing civilian populations) to the V-2 rocket program bombing London.

I´d rather compare it to the destruction of Coventry.

[Kitsune]

The claim that the British area bombings were only revenge for what the Germans did to Britain is convenient but not quite true. It were the British who first dropped bombs on Germany, it were the British who first bombed the Berlin and it were the British who first bombed indiscriminately civilian areas of Germany - not the other way around. The claim that the British area bombings were only revenge for what the Germans did to Britain is convenient but not quite true. It is amazing that most British still seem to find the systematic bombing of any Germany city as something totally acceptable, while the V1 and V2 seem to be regarded as something criminal.

And the bombing of Coventry can hardly be compared to the one of Dresden. The town of Coventry was a nexus of the British arms industry (yeah, it's true), with the industrial plants being distributed all over it. The German attack was directed against those industrial plants, and as a result the output of that part of the British army industry was considerably reduced for months. There were a couple of hundred of dead as well, but the attack was not intended to systematically kill civilians. All in all it was actually one of the "cleaner" bombing raids of the war. But somehow the British manage to still regard Coventry as one of the worst warcrimes of all, it seems.

Compared to this, the attack on Dresden was quite different. It had the explicit purpose to destroy the city, with everything in it. The deaths of as many civilians as possible was deliberate and by no means an unwanted side-effect or something. And, in contrast to Coventry, Dresden wa also not especially important for the German military effort (although the British almost desperately tried to come up with facilities that could be seen as war important, as you can probably for any larger city, but in any case there had been no attempt to attack them before, or, during the raid, to concentrate the bombings on them). The real reason for the attack was apparently Churchills attempt to show Stalin what great and reliable allies the British were. If that is true, they killed around 40.000 civilians to demonstrate this, many of them being women and children who had fled from the rampage of the red army. This is definitely on another level than the attack on Coventry had been.

[BugHunt]

Eh? Since when did any of us claim the V (for vengance) attacks were warcrimes?

Just part of there totalitarian murderous war tactics. And part of total war.

Btw accounts of Dunkirk have Luftwaffe strafing what was clearly French civilians on the roads for no military purpose.



Amongst the rubble lay human remains some of whom were never identified; 554 men, women and children lay dead and 865 injured. It was perhaps a miracle that the figures were not higher considering the city had been hit by 30,000 incendiaries, 500 tons of high explosive, 50 landmines and 20 oil-mines, non-stop for eleven long hours. The world had never previously witnessed this sort of airborne destruction before and the Germans coined a new word for it 'coventrated'.'

Coventrated.....sounds like the germans reveled a bit in how badly there surgical strike destoryed the place...


Kit i agree to a degree theres double standards and bomber command DID catch flak for its actions, but some of your arguments above are a stretch m8.

[Eztyga]

Also , in the 1970s in France , a mass grave of around 200 men of the Waffen SS division "Gotz von Berlichingen" was discovered , they had all been captured and many had their hands tied.


Yet they probably were not the most ruthless Waffen-SS troops to be found in the West as the Division as a whole hadn't been blooded on the Eastern Front. Without knowing the full details, we can only speculate as to why, and who, executed them. They had their hands tied, so it was organised as opposed to a spur of the moment decision.

Ezy

[nemowork]

The closest thing the Nazi state had to a resistance was the Werewolves, i'm fairly certain the allied treatment of them wasnt delicate when they were captured, although i dont think there was any official policy for dealing with them beyond the geneva convention and the tolerance of the individual units who captured them!