Jump to content

Talk:Maurice Rose

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled

[edit]

I don't believe that a bunch of Germans were murdered in retaliation for General Rose's killing. That should be looked into. My dad who served in the Second Armor Division during WWII admired Rose. The way I heard it, Rose reached for his pistola bit too quickly, and a nervous German shot him.


                                                                                                                                                                                        • 8

Is "Paterborn" a misspelling of Paderborn? --Ponder 02:56, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC)

A check says that this is so. Changing the article to be Paderborn. --Cardozo 25 Mar 2005


Maybe it should be mentioned that after General Rose´s death his troops gathered 100 German POW´s and murdered them in revenge. A typical US war crime of that time.

(http://www.wansleben.de/body_haxtergrund.html)

(http://www.kreis-paderborn.de/wDeutsch/aktuelles/archiv/2005-05/2005_05_13_11181471_nachbewigdenk.shtml)


(trasolt@hotmail.com)—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 145.253.238.10 (talk • contribs) 11:11, 10 July 2006 (UTC).[reply]

your source kreis-paderborn.de (website of province paderborn) says the 100 mentioned were soldiers defending paderborns village "borchen". i don't think this was a war crime. and nobody knew that rose was jewish.. american side and german side didn't know this at the time.. for questions goto the Portal:USA in de.wiki: de:Portal:Vereinigte Staaten—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.61.44.74 (talk • contribs) 01:23, 12 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]
The article refers to the "Erschiessung" (erschiessen-to shoot dead) of these German soldiers. This term is never used for soldiers killed in combat. This as a side note.
The soldiers were lined up in front of a wall were the Americans machine gunned them.
Such act would qualify as a war crime, at least if Germans did it.. --145.253.238.10 12:03, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thats the Point.. if Germans did it, there would be an own article about this "massacer" but so its not even mentioned in the article! Every important Country fighting in WW2 had some soldiers that did war crimes, so the US too... I mean a killed General, the circumstances (sry if wrong spelling..) were not clear for the US-Soldiers at that time, they maybe thought "Nazis killed him because they are...!". So it would be a normal reaction for many people (=soldiers) to kill "some" Germans for it. Well I know winners write history but I really often miss some information about allied warcrimes, especially from the Soviet Union. They did so much shit. I'm polish, they took my grandma in early 1941 (she is polish too) from soviet occupied-poland to siberia! She stayed there for years, even after the war ended they didn't release her... just after 2 years (1947!). Stalin killed much more people than the Nazis, long before the war started he killed millions of people, because of his idiocy I think more than a million people died of starvation in the Ukraine, 1932 or so? If not here, make an own article about this massacer. Kilon22 (talk) 17:15, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The first link is dead (the site is some lawyer's personal page), and the second, which is merely a brief newspaper mention of a local lecture, appears to state that the link between the shooting of German POWs and the death of Rose was disproved. I can't find any reliable source for this story, so I am going to remove the reference from the main article. Djkuula (talk) 19:03, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the link again:
https://web.archive.org/web/20070928115359/https://www.kreis-paderborn.de/wDeutsch/aktuelles/archiv/2005-05/2005_05_13_11181471_nachbewigdenk.shtml
It's a bit ambiguous first a "reprisal action" was "disproved"... How exactly was that done? Then they mention the shooting of '100 young soldiers', which was commemorated. Taken from this... "Yes we shot a hundred, but it wasn't a reprisal action". There is an address given, so when can request clarification. But be advised, governing bodies in Germany are very reluctant to admit 'war crimes being committed against Germans'. They will try their best to cover that up. So any denial shouldn't come as a surprise. 105.4.0.75 (talk) 10:16, 28 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Can anyone help resolve the circumstances of General Rose's death?

[edit]

The entry on the 3rd Armored Division says that General Rose was drawing his pistol to surrender when he was shot. This entry says only that he drew his pistol when he saw the Germans. Are there any objective accounts one way or the other?

I would guess if a German general had come upon a group of American soldiers and drawn his pistol the Americans would have shot first and asked questions later. Who would not do that in a war zone?

If General Rose had intended to surrender he could have raised his hands and stood motionless -- a universally recognized sign of surrender that was usually honored during World War II (at least on the Western Front). Were other Americans taken prisoner at that time who were later able to testify that General Rose had drawn his pistol to surrender? How soon after the incident did the Americans learn that General Rose was dead, and from what source?

We know that the Allied forces spent more than 24 hours killing Japanese shipwreck survivors in the water after the Battle of the Bismarck Sea -- supposedly to avenge the death of an Allied pilot who had been machine-gunned in his parachute by a Japanese pilot. Assuming arguendo that American units attached to the 3rd Armored Division killed German prisoners after Rose's death is there any documentation showing that Americans commited this war crime or series of war crimes to avenge Rose rather than for other reasons?

Setting aside the general issue of German war crimes vs. American war crimes, is there reliable first hand documention about the circumstances of General Rose's death? (71.22.47.232 (talk) 09:39, 7 January 2011 (UTC))[reply]

Why are you asking ofr documentation when it is obvious you have an agenda? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.61.244.164 (talk) 01:19, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Maurice Rose. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:28, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Re-rating?

[edit]

Is someone willing and able to re-rate this article? I did a lot of work to expand it and add references and citations, so I don't want to be in the position of reviewing and assessing my own work.

Thanks,

Billmckern (talk) 13:15, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Maurice_Rose&oldid=1198077433"