I think there is a distinct non-Nazi German patriotism (as opposed to German nationalism) which is very present but usually brushed off as a form of fascism by the mainstream media and left-wing politicians. It's very sad.

It is interesting to hear a younger persons point of view.  I met many older Germans who were patriotic, not nazi, who fought for their country, not the nazis, and who were still proud to be German.  My landlord in Lampertheim was a prisoner of the Russians for ten years after the war was over.  He didn't like the government or some of the leaders but he fought bravely and honorably for his country.  Erich Jaeger and many like him deserve to be honored.  There are memorials in many towns and villages all over Germany with a depressing number of names listed who fell during both wars.  Not all Germans were Nazi, not all German soldiers committed war crimes.  I am glad to see the kind of joy and pride that the world cup brings to you guys, your history is rich in culture and shouldn't be overshadowed by a small chunk of it.  We all have periods in our histories that we are not so proud of. 

Thanks Utemia for showing us this POV.  I never thought of what it must be like in Germany when it comes to patriotism. 

How sad, that a country can't come together in unison to celebrate their fallen soldiers. 

We all know that we sooner or later have to not only reap what we have sown but it's alot more than expected or sometimes than we can bear.  The sad fact is that there are innocents who do get punished for what their leaders did before them.  They are the ones left holding the bag long after the trouble makers are gone.  That's why it's so important for the government to be represented by the people instead of the few tyrants at the top who have no regard for the wishes of their people. 

I'm seeing America's decision making these days found wanting and our children will also reap what they have not sown. 

Very sad. 

Hmm. That is a very soldierly view, doing your duty to your country.. but what if your country orders you to attack a helpless and unsuspecting neighbour? Germany attacked first to conquer and vanquish land in the east for Hitlers dream of a 1000 year empire. He wanted the land and to kill the people living there or well, turning them into a slave labour force.

I know that not everybody who fought was a Nazi, I had a good friend, Walter, who joined the Wehrmacht voluntarily when he was 18, he wanted to be a medic, and joining voluntarily spared him from being drafted and sent to the russian front; that was like getting a death sentence. He was in Krete and on the balkans and the horrors of what he saw never left him. He'd come to visit every Sunday and showed the pictures he drew - mostly pictures of destroyed cities and skulls and falling bombs - and told of his experiences. I loved that old man, he as unique. He passed away a few years ago.

My hometown has one of those memorials as well, it is a favourite destination for taking walks. The dead there honoured are from WW1+2 and other conflicts. There is a memorial for WW1 victims in Freiburg - but commemorating those who fought and died is never done with pride but rather a feeling of sadness and remorse that they had to die at all, along with the silent vow to try to stop future wars from happening.

This is changing, slowly but surely, as Germany takes on a new role in the world, again sending out soldiers - which is a new experience.

German culture has alot of things to be proud of, and I am very proud of them. But it will stay an ambigous issue for a while. You always have to clarify what exactly you are proud of and what you aren't.. otherwise you run the risk of being misunderstood.

No, they didn't. They fought for the Nazis.

No, they don't. The numbers show clearly that it took less courage to follow the Nazis' orders than it took to refuse them. Had all German soldiers refused the orders, World War II wouldn't have happened. We have to thank the "many like him" for the fact that those few who dared to speak up were, indeed, just few.

Attacking Poland to make room for death camps was a war crime.

Exactly.

I am perfectly fine with this. Germany should send out soldiers and fight along her allies.

The Nazis' crime was not to fight a war. The crime was to start the war.

I disagree with Germany "Starting" WWI. They honored the alliance they had with Austria-Hungary, when Russia declared war on them. Now as things progress, things like invading neutrals would be considered unjust, but the tit for tat was the real culprit. Vengeance after the war was taken to extremes and helped cause the next.

As far as WWII it is easy to blame the Germans, because it's convent to hide behind indifference and appeasement, the West showed at the time (seems so familiar today). WWI was the direct cause of WWII. Without harsh requirements imposed on Germany, Hitler would never have had his soap box. Imagine what Germany would be like today. The geo-political environment of the world would be totally different. The US and Russia might never have emerged as global powers.

In war soldiers have little use for politics unless it's going to bring them home. Of course no soldier wants to lose. I don't fault the fighting man/woman from any nation past or present. It's a pity terrible things happen during war, remember though the winners write the history books. When I see the care taken today by the US military to try and avoid civilian deaths and collateral damage to property, I wonder if a war like WWII could even be accomplished today.  

I was just out walking and pondered this issue some more.. patriotism, what it means to stand absolutely behind your military, and the military doing what the government asks it to do is not worth anything if the cause isn't just. Being a warrior or fulfilling a mission is not an intrinsic value in itself, otherwise the SS deathsquads would have to be honoured in the same fashion.

It is also not possible to seperate an army into individuals. If some US soldiers commited crimes in Iraq or Afghanistan or elsewhere, the Us military is POed about it not only because of the crimes but because it also reflects badly on every soldier and the whole of the US military. But the same principle works also in the other direction. If the whole war would be unjust, it would reflect on every single individual soldier in it as well in a negative way.

Germany is in the unfortunate position that we caused WW2 and had to take the sole blame for WW1, and we did not fight to defend ourselves but attacked and started the war in the first place. There simply is no honour at all to be found in doing your duty in an attackwar to conquer and dominate new territory, unless you are an imperialist. Even if a lot of soldiers in the Wehrmacht did not kill innocents or rape and pillage civilians, they still didn't fight in a just war because their orders were never just. How can you honour men that followed unjust orders from a fascist regime that preached white supremacist ideology? That is the dilemma in Germany.

Germany didn't start World War 1. A Serbian nationalist group did. The Bosnians did not even want to be independent from Austria-Hungary. (Look at today. Non-Serbish Bosnians still have better ties with Austria than with Serbia.)

The war was caused by German Nazis (and the Soviet-Union who ALSO invaded Poland at the same time).

For some reason the "German" stuck, but the "Nazi" went away.

The world still looks at _Germany_ as the country with the "history", but non-German allies, most prominently Arab nationalists including Nasser and the PLO (which was founded by WW2 allies of Nazi Germany) are somehow not "evil".

Heck, Iraq fought on Germany's side in WW2.

And the Shah of Iran, who was a loyal ally of the West was called a fascist by the German left.

Poland was treated much worse more often and it never started a World War.

The appeasement of the West was wrong, but it was not morally wrong. What Germany did was morally wrong.

Yes, another issue that comes up every February in Germany, because of the allied bombing raid on Dresden on February 9th, 1945. The casualty estimates vary from 30 000 to 100 000 to 200 000, the city was full of refugees and nobody really knows for sure how many died. The war was already lost so there wasn't really any military need to destroy the city but Dresden was a transportation hub.. the airwar was waged to crush the civilian spirit. I doubt that similar circumstances will occur again, or I sincerely hope they don't. They still find unexploded ordenance from WW2 on a regular basis in Germany, 500 to 1000 pound bombs. Sometimes I think it would be poetic justice if one was found on a US base in Germany .. but im a humanitarian and don't really want anybody to get hurt.

It is nearly impossible to fight a war against a regime but not against a people, and it is admirable that the US takes so much care in trying. Civilian casualties occur despite all efforts though.

Regarding Dresden, anyone interested should read Slaughterhouse 5 by Kurt Vonnegut who was present in Dresden at the time of the bombing.  I started it one night - reading to my wife as she made dinner (which is sort of an arrangement we have) and we wound up staying up late into the night to finish it.  Great book.

That aside, I also am interested in your POV, utemia, and I have but one bit of advice.  Don't be too hard on yourself or your countrymen, and don't worry too much about the past.  It's over.  I had a friend once tell me "If you have one foot in the past, and one foot in the future, you're pissing on now."  Enjoy your day, every day.  That's the best thing any person can do, regardless of the past.

Yeah. Good advice I am all for letting the past not influence the present or future, but sometimes if the events in question are important enough they just do, wether you like it or not. I enjoy every day, I live in a way cooler country than the USA lol (sorry folks, I know it's the 4th of July and all but still) and we are a great nation. Just saying what I just said is already enough for some to point fingers though. As long as that doesn't change, it is prudent to be careful of what you say just to not be misunderstood.

And then there is the case of turning the whole thing against certain political parties when certain laws are debated because Germany will bend over backwards to avoid looking anything remotely neonazistic or apologetic. Making laws against illegal imigration e.g. will be interpreted as being racist etc. - but that is a whole set of other problems.

The war was already lost but the Germans still remained loyal to their evil masters.

The allies had a choice between killing more Germans or letting the Germans kill more of the allies.

It doesn't matter how moral one wants to be; at some point a decision-maker has to explain to some mother in America that her son died because someone decided not to frighten the Germans into ending the war.

True.

Oddly enough this is more often used as a political weapon of convenience. It didn't stop Germany from selling poison gas installations to Saddam Hussein's Iraq.

http://www.gfbv.de/pressemit.php?id=1210&PHPSESSID=bf9ba5ba3fad8ca3b89b60627a8f9498

The idea that German politicians and business men didn't make the connection between a nationalist dictator with a moustache trying to acquire poison gas with German history doesn't really strike me as bending over backwards to avoid looking neonazistic.

Similarly German business deals with the Iranian regime are not a problem and apparently do not remind many of Germany's past in the "Death to the Jews" business.

But try to change immigration laws, and you are a Neo-Nazi.

You're right. It is a a weapon of convenience, I didn't want to imply otherwise. It is used in domestic policy making. If a politician so much as appears to be apologetic or overly nationalistic and antisemitic in a domestic debate his career is over. Take the example of Jürgen Möllemann

By February 1945 there wasn't a huge loyal fanatic nazi majority in the population anymore. The war was all but won by the allies. Most  wanted the war and the airraids to stop, the Russians were advancing steadily from the east and the  westfront was crumbling, cities surrendering everywhere. I am not really in a good position to call bombing Dresden a warcrime.. puh, but it was certainly not a waressential tactical necessity.

It is probably difficult to really condemn the airwar over Germany because hey, the nazis started it and bombed Coventry and London - it was eye for an eye.

The Iranians probably like Germany because of the "Death to the Jews" business, as twisted as that is. And there are enough businessmen around for who money is money and who don't care who buys what as long as there is hard cash. Germany is a pretty big exporteur of weapons, too, but then tries to assuage any feelings of remorse by not seeling them to any countries/regimes that would use them in a unjust war - that is hypocritical as well.. they sold tanks to Turkey that the turks used against kurds - I remember that being a huge scandal around +10 years ago. If you don't want weapons to be used in war then don't sell them, its as easy as that.