Ethics of pilots fighting for the sides in WWII
 

I don't really feel like discussing this. But, I'm deferring to the judgment of the community and posting the reply in this new thread.

The war shouldn't have happened. Following orders didn't help.

I recognise that the difference between one person fighting for their life and another isn't that great. Many people on the allied side were fighting for the wrong reasons as well (even though the side was the one that needed to win for humanity's sake).

But it doesn't change the fact that a lot of good people and innocents were killed by German pilots fighting the war. It also doesn't change the fact that they were fighting on behalf of a nation which had a horrible and inhumane regime that was simultaneously conducting horrible crimes.

Does that make sense?


I agree that Triggaaar is right that there were choices btw. Not easy ones though (especially for patriots or people who cared about what other's thought).

One can look at the treatment of draft dodgers or people who went AWOL in the past decade - in America - during wars of lower intensity, less ideology and less risk to the home country.

It's a good subject for a thread. I would rather ask the question "Why do you fly for the side you do in IL-2, or why won't you fly for a certain side?". But either way, it's sort of asking the same question though.

I honor all that fought honorably. Most of the young men who fought were doing it for their country at the beginning and then for their comrades (most likely) once they got a taste of combat.

Did the German pilot believe in the same ideology as the SS leaders? No way to tell. But chances are that they were called to do a duty for their country and they simply answered the call. I do not think that they knew what was going on in the concentration camps. they were fighting for the Father Land.

Allied soldiers fought Nazi tyranny. They fought for their country and for their comrades.

So for the common soldier, the common pilot, there was no real difference. That is why I can respect all who fought honorably. These soldiers weren't into the politics, they were doing their duty.

Of course, I can make a differentiation for the soldiers who did not fight honorably. They occurred on all sides (yes, some more than others) and deserve no respect. But those are the individuals, not the services as a whole.

Personally, their is no side I will not fly for in the IL-2 virtual world. I am only playing the part of a common soldier/pilots. I don't fly Japanese aircraft because I don't like the planes, it has nothing to do with shooting down Allies.

But....I could see someone not flying for a certain side because of deep felt convictions.

Splitter

From where I see it, it's just Human vs. Human in a futile attempt at proving who's more right than another about some dynamic subject or another. We just use symbols and solidified policies to tell each other apart when we're more or less biologically the same.

And hey, war's inevitable anyways. XP

Anthony Beevor wrote something of that in his book on Stalingrad. The Germans physical courage wasn't in doubt, but their moral courage was nowhere. I always respected the Italian troops who recognised things for what they were and surrendered. If only 5 million Germans were as brave as that.

Ethics? I suspect this thread'll rapidly unravel and get locked really quickly. Or at least it would on a lot of other forums, but we'll see how things progress!

There were enough men and women of honor in various uniforms to be cautious of stereotyping a nation, or nations. I am fascinated by the views of the opposing sides in '39/'40 when things were very different to '44/'45 - for example the section in Paul Richie's "Fighter Pilot" (Battle of France) where the RAF types enjoy drinking and laughing with a downed compatriot aviator who happened to be wearing the uniform of the Luftwaffe. Things changed after the war ground on and cities became targets, no doubt.

But it's a sticky discussion and I think I'll steer clear :)

As for Splitter's question "why do you fly for x in IL2"... I tend to fly RAF/Luftwaffe equally.

I like 109s, 110s, Hurricanes and early Spitfires, because as a young lad I grew with tales of the Battle of Britain (I actually have a bit of a downed Me-110), and Mosquitos, because my Grandfather fixed them up during the war. So I'm pretty much going to be in aeroplane heaven when SoW is released.

I have less interest in Italian aircraft (other than for the novelty value), or indeed Russian/USAAF/IJN when they no doubt arrive in this new go-round.

I do, however, try to fly everything at least once :)

Well as they say "History is written by the victors."

Interestingly the German soldiers of the time are now criticized for obeying orders and fighting for the Nazi's, apparently they should have realized fascism is immoral and surrendered at the first opportunity.

Meanwhile the Italian's (especially the more illiterate farming conscripts with no enthusiasm for fascism Hitler or Mussolini) are criticized for surrendering too easily and lacking fighting spirit.

Sooooo ... apparently the Germans should have surrendered more often and the Italians less often :D ... go figure.

Does the name Stalin mean anything to you?

I support the Italians surrendering early. ;)

Splitter,

The basic fact is that the war was horrible for almost everyone caught in it, on both sides. However, a lot of beliefs (including one's held on the allied side) made that war possible.

I guess I'm so aware of the horror that people allowed to happen - all sort of people, for a few generations leading up to the wars - that I view the big picture as being decisive.

You might say that I'd hold the moral character of the troops on both sides as being less important than the moral character of the people and societies on both sides. Perhaps not even that, but rather the moral character of what some people and societies were willing to create or to allow to happen.

As for your other question:
I admit that there are some days when I can't fly for blue, there are some when I can't fly for anyone and most days I'm simply using toys that represent technology (and technology I admire). It is a give and take between enjoying the meaning given to the history and getting to close to it. That is how I react.

And as wise. Thanks for the quote.

Very true.

Yes, exactly what I was thinking. I immediately regretted taking people's advice and creating the thread.

Although the forum is suddenly and inexplicably civil and sane these days. We'll see how long it lasts.

Yes, a great deal. However, it would have been worse (for everyone) if the other side had won. I'm eternally grateful to those who stopped the German armies - regardless of how disagreeable the current Tsar may have been.

Remember that history is written largely by the victors and that slants the debate in such things. That said everyone has been fairly even handed in the discussion and left things open for a very good debate. Great job guys! :)

This is a complex issue but I think that in any war scenario that you consider - there are always going to be young men (and women) sent off to war to fight for their country and they believe the thing they are doing is right. The higher level moral ethics aren't always as easy to figure out when you're in the middle of all of that.

I feel that in many cases there were what I would call "professional soldiers" fighting on either side of the conflict. They do kill for their country but there is a honor code amongst these individuals. There were also some real crazies out there who probably very much enjoyed every moment of it. Nobody has exclusivity on either of these extremes...