Tuesday, November 18, 2014

A Dissenting View of Ike

I have no idea what to make of Eisenhower, nor have I systematically tried to figure him out. I know that he got in the way and prevented the nomination of a more conservative Republican candidate, like Taft. But in those days the Republican Party was mostly run by liberals anyway. I know he created a terrible precedent in Little Rock, and opened the floodgates for all the "civil rights" activism on the part of the Federal Government that has led to the mess we've got now.  And I know he gave the Brits, French, and Israelis a hard time in the Suez crisis, but I don't know why. My impression is that he had a fairly sensible plan to oust Castro, and JFK screwed it up. I know he was the last President to expel illegal aliens in a serious way.

And now, here's this, from the Irish Savant, here:

Was this man the greatest war criminal of WW 2?

Dwight D. Eisenhower enjoyed a miraculously successful military and political career despite (like John McCain) finishing close to the bottom of his graduation class at West Point, where he was known as 'that terrible Swedish Jew'. (His father was said to be Jewish but if so was of the crypto variety). But neither that nor repeated subsequent examples of incompetence (MacArthur wanted rid of him) held him back, as some mysterious(?) force at the highest levels in Washington kept the promotions rolling in.  As one of his biographers pointed out 'in only five years he had risen from a lowly lieutenant colonel in the Philippines to commander of the greatest invasion force in history'.


He ended WW 2 as a hero, loved and lionised by the American people, a reaction which he parlayed into becoming a two term President, one of the most admired of the twentieth century.

While he always professed himself appalled at German 'war crimes' and wanted to exterminate the whole German High Command after the war it seems he wasn't beyond a bit of war criminality himself. In fact, and this is not an exaggeration, he could justifiably be described as the greatest war criminal of the twentieth century.  Because there's compelling evidence to suggest that he deliberately and with malice aforethought consigned over one million German prisoners-of-war to their deaths in 1945.

Rense writes about it with great eloquence and passion here, but in essence Eisenhower had German POWs reclassified as Disarmed Enemy Combatants (DECs) the impact of which was to remove the need to provide sustenance and to put them outside the purview of the International Red Cross. Under normal circumstances this mechanism is understandable, the idea being that with the end of hostilities defeated soldiers can be let to their own devices rather than be a burden on their jailers.  However Eisenhower gave explicit instructions for the German soldiers to be imprisoned in camps and to be denied shelter and sustenance. The inevitable result of such a policy was death through starvation, disease or exposure.

Konrad Adenauer, the pro-Western Chancellor of West Germany during the fifties commissioned a report which found that 1.5 million German prisoners in Allied POW camps never came home alive nor were their deaths recorded. The report attributes this to their being 'penned up for weeks without protection from the weather, water or medical care'.  These events were detailed in the book Other Lossesby Canadian writer James Bacque (1989) and picked up by journalist Peter Worthington who wrote 'it is hard to escape the conclusion that Eisenhower was a war criminal of epic proportions.'

Naturally enough, once the crime was exposed a team of  house-trained court historians under the leadership of Stephen Edward Ambrose sprang into action. And  dismissed the book as....... (roll of drums)  a conspiracy theory. While there's undoubtedly room for discussion regarding the total figure there's none in relation to Eisenhower's DEC reclassification, his orders to deprive the captives of care and sustenance and the exclusion of the Red Cross from the camps.  Shortage of food cannot be sustained as an excuse as Bacque cites several documents from Allied logistics officers in the region to the effect that plenty of food was available should they have wanted to feed the prisoners and that American soldiers and German civilians were actually prohibited from doing so.

Interestingly, when I was a student in Germany in 1966 I had a drinking friend called Franz.  He had been in the war towards the latter end as a very young man.  He told me one night while in his cups that he and vast numbers of other soldiers had been imprisoned near Cologne with neither food nor shelter and that huge numbers had perished. He admitted that many had got away as security at some of the camps was weak and that many localised camp commanders, disgusted at what was taking place, simply left the DECs escape.

So it seems that Ike got away with mass murder.  Not just that but thrived and prospered and lived into old age, wealthy and admired. Meanwhile the German people have become synonymous with genocide even as the Holocau$t fairytale unravels and the knowledge of detailed plans to literally wipe the German people from the face of the earth  have emerged.  While the winners write the history, that covering the first half of the last century is surely unsurpassed in terms of grotesque misrepresentation.  Never has a people been so unjustifiably traduced as have the Germans.

Let us all in our own way continue our efforts to get the truth out there.
Note: some of this is corroborated by material in Piers Anthony's novel, Volk, which you can find here:


  1. Every line is false. Eisenhower never killed off lots of German prisoners, he wasn't Jewish , his class rank at West Point was 61st out of 164.

    When you're a Nazi, you gotta lie.The truth isn't any too appealing.

  2. Re the deaths of German captives:

    Other historians, including the former senior historian of the United States Army Center of Military History, Colonel Ernest F. Fisher, who was involved in the 1945 investigations into the allegations of misconduct by U.S. troops in Germany and who wrote the book's foreword, argue that the claims are accurate.

    He seems like someone who ought to have some idea. Or maybe he's just another "Nazi".

    BTW, isn't there some kind of internet rule that the first person who uses "Nazi" as an ad hominem gets branded an ass? Or something like that.

    I guess I should add: I do not know if the claims re the fate of the German captives, and Eisenhower's role in that, are accurate or not. I have not looked into it. But I'm not inclined to call anyone and everyone who makes those claims -- including someone who was "the former senior historian of the United States Army Center of Military History" -- a "Nazi" for making them.

    1. You may not have dug into it, but I have. It's all false. And I called this source a Nazi because he is one.

    2. Calling someone a Nazi as a hyperbole is considered rude and activates what is called "Godwin's Law." Having said that, when someone refers to "The Holocau$t Fairytale," the term "Nazi" really isn't being used metaphorically.

  3. Well nuts!

    And here I thought all he did was arrange the killing of Patton.

  4. Look up Operation Keelhaul and Ike's part in it. him and the horse he rode in on.

  5. @gcochran --

    Cognitive dissonance much or is it you're just a lying jew?


  6. eah:
    BTW, isn't there some kind of internet rule that the first person who uses "Nazi" as an ad hominem gets branded an ass? Or something like that.
    Yup, it even has a name: Reductio ad Hitlerum - sort of like the ''I can do wrong because all my relatives were turned into lampshades and bars of soap by the nazis!''* card.
    *Both stories are myths.
    Not unlike the African '' 'Cause of dem White raciss I'se din' du nuffins!'' card.

  7. Cochran wrote a gushing article about Eisenhower for American Conservaitive once.

    Typical delusional palecon.