Did the German's enjoy chopping off baby's arms or marching about with babys on bayonets, or collecting tubs of eyeballs, or cutting off womens breasts for fun in world war one, did the first world war Germans have the habit of distilling glycerine and fat from their dead in order to obtain lubricants, or crushing nuns with bells . At the end of world war one you had the Leipzig war crimes trials but the few people accused don't seem to be accused of that much, I think the worse was shooting at lifeboats, why didn't they catch the real bad Germans
There are thousands up to millions of atrocities in every war. Doesnt matter if they cut open people with knives, rip them open with bullets and bombs, destroy their homes, kill them with radioactivity (nuclear bomb, DU ammunition), burn them alive with phosphorus and napalm, torture them, poisen them with agent orange or terrible new weapons technology. There is no such thing like "clean" war. War is always the worsed thing and biggest crime possible. http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2004/04/30/16790301.php
It is not much more different than what did to my people in the schools of canada. I was lucky personne because my family had alternative living commune much way north. Before somone makes plaisantery about my english skill and I should have been forced into a school. My language is Inuit and english is my third language.
I recomment that you read George Orwell, Homage to Catalonia, to get a proper perspective on the more outrageous atrocity claims. Give or take, it's usually just a matter of applying a bit of common sense. For instance, "they used live babies to build barricades" was one of the accusations being thrown about in relation to the Spanish Civil War. Intrinsically unlikely to be true. Why? Well, as Orwell points out, babies are actually rather impractical barricade-building materials. THey are insufficiently solid to be of much use, and they have this disconcerting habit fo not staying where you put them. By contrast, you ideally want to builfd your barricades out of materials which are solid enough to deflect bullets, and which you can rely on to stay where you put them. You can probably work the rest out for yourself ...
a perspective United Kingdom against the red armyin 1919[18] Spain and France against Rif insurgents in Morocco during 1921 – 27[17][19] Italy in Libya during 1930[17] The Soviet Union in Xinjiang, Republic of China, during the Soviet Invasion of Xinjiang against the 36th Division (National Revolutionary Army) in 1934, and also in the Xinjiang War (1937) during 1936 - 37[18][19] Italy against Abyssinia (now Ethiopia) from 1935 to 1940[17] Nazi Germany against Poland and the Soviet Union in a few incidents during World War II[17] Poland against Germany in 1939 during an isolated incident, using a British product[17] The Japanese Empire against China during 1937 – 45[18] Egypt against North Yemen during 1963 – 67[17] Iraq against Iran and the Kurds during 1983 – 88[18][20] Possibly Sudan against insurgents in the civil war, in 1995 and 1997[17] In 1943, during the Second World War, an American shipment of mustard gas exploded aboard a supply ship that was bombed during an air raid in the harbor of Bari, Italy. 83 of the 628 hospitalized victims who had been exposed to the mustard gas died.[21] The deaths and incident were partially classified for many years. From 1943 to 1944, mustard gas experiments were performed on Prisoners of War held by the U.S. Army in tropical Queensland, Australia, by British Army and American experimenters, resulting in some severe injuries. One test site, the Brook Islands National Park, was chosen to simulate Pacific islands held by the Imperial Japanese Army.[22][23]
War is the biggest artocity again humankind , ever since the first wars have been fought man has shown his inhumanity towards his own kind.
True And thus all 'atrocity' claims by one side or another are a joke. All armies cause collateral human damage in wars. Especially armies of god or fundamental ideas. No army has NOT killed women and babies/children in a large conflict. The modern con job is that 'smart weapons' avoid this. But weapons are not smarter than those that aim them.. and huumans are stupid. prill
Utter shite! Like the Canadian soldier supposed to be nailed to a barn door. Pure propaganda, all wars one side linemen to spin misinformation . Ie British burning folk in churches in the American independence war . Russians shooting 25, ooo polish officers. Blaming it on the Germans. Don't believe all you read! Germans making soap out if Jews more shite!
i do not find that i have to wonder myself about that stuff about unilateral, means GERMAN atrocities, when i look at the source... whenever i was in the u.k.( this is twice every year ), i heard "heil hitler" and all that nazi-propaganda which in germany hardly anyone remembers. since i tell them that i park my tiger-tank just around the corner they usually laugh and stop being so nasty. i am german which does not mean i find my folks very sympathic: they are worldmaster in forgetting and denying their past...but many people in the u.k.think they could insult us this way - it is just one thing: BORING...zzzzzzzzzzz better keep attention not to become just another us-state without own foreign policy ( see, this assembles the quality that i mean, it is unfair even when it contains a certain part of truth).
This is a reply to the original question. Although there was reports of german atrocities during WW1 early on in the first weeks of the war, especially in Belgium, it did not take place on that large a scale. We're talking incidents here mostly. Civilian atrocities during WW1 were very limited when compared to WW2's.
