Talk:Schindler's List

Goethe's alternate sidearm

While trying to execute Rabbi Lewartow for not producing enough hinges (Goethe was a cruel bastard, wasn't he???) his Luger won't fire. A moment later he tosses it to one of his officers & pulls out a 2nd handgun that looks something like a Walther PPK - anyone know what it is? Tommyt 20:50, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Deletion?

There are no screencaps since December 2008 and not much here. - Kenny99 05:47, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

I have the movie so I could screencap it. --Mauser 16:46, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

I finally capped it. Considering the last movie I capped was Black Dynamite, this experience was much more draining. --funkychinaman 05:14, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Mosin Nagants

I didn't have time to watch the whole movie again, I just skipped around, and I didn't see any Mosin Nagants. I did see some mausers with straight bolt handles, though, maybe whoever added the Mosin Nagants just got confused. There's two scenes with Soviets, and there aren't any guns in those scenes. --funkychinaman 05:14, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Terminology

I deliberately avoided using the word "soldier" to describe SS men here, and if you've seen the film, you'd understand why. To use the term "soldier" would be an insult to real soldiers and would imply these men were serving their country instead of being goons for murderous thugs. I'm not in any position to enforce this, I'm just explaining my reasoning, hoping anyone who wishes to edit this will agree. I think "trooper" would be an appropriate substitute, considering the lowest SS rank was trooper. --funkychinaman 16:40, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

The definition of a soldier is an enlisted man or woman who serves in an army. The SS men are real soldiers, just as real as any that serve today. Don't romanticize the term and add a moral quality to it. --Anon

The SS started out as a paramilitary force, a personal bodyguard for a political party. THEIR OWN COUNTRY declared the organization criminal. --funkychinaman 21:33, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

What you say is true but the Waffen-SS was an elite army sort of like the US Marine Corp so they were soldiers also. As for there own country declaring the organization criminal a lot of that has stemmed from the jealousy of former Wehrmacht officers in the German government. Soldiers in the Waffen-SS had very little if nothing to do with the guarding of the camps so they could have been separated from the regular SS that controlled the camps. But they were all bunched together due to the fact they wore SS runes on their collars and were further up the supply and celebrity status than Wehrmacht soldiers. --phoenixent 22:28, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

In 1942, the Waffen SS took over administration of the death camps, and by 1944, they took complete control. The primary mission of the Marine Corps, if I recall my midshipman knowledge from 13 years ago, is to seize and defend forward naval bases. I'm sure there's more to that, but I'm also pretty sure "running death camps" isn't included. And it was the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg who declared them a criminal organization, not postwar German politicians. Hitler also made a point to never allow the Waffen SS to be controlled by the German Army, and they had different ranks and even different oaths.

Here's my logic: After the death sentences were handed down at the Nuremberg trials, the Allies denied requests by the condemned to be shot by firing squad, their reason being, firing squads were for soldiers, and hanging was for criminals, and they wanted to ram home the fact that these men were criminals. Thttp://www.imfdb.org/index.php?title=Talk:Schindler%27s_List&action=edit&section=4herefore criminals ≠ soldiers. According to the International Military Tribunal, SS = criminals. Thus, using substitution, SS ≠ soldiers. --funkychinaman 00:09, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Who ran internment camps in the United States? A job posting, however despicable, does not suddenly make you a non-soldier (although it might certainly make you a thug as well). The SS could certainly constitute an Army as a great many of them constituted a land-based fighting unit loyal to a government. They were also enlisted with ranks, hierarchy, and oaths. Should the United States be overturned by a foreign government, god forbid, would historical revisionism turn soldiers into criminals? I think this discussion is important because it tries to "other" and "dehumanize" the Nazis. They were despicable and deplorable and this is unquestioned. But they were not monsters, they were men, just like you and me, and it's a virtual certainty that the martial loyalty of US soldiers would have been given to the Third Reich if they had been born in Germany instead. --Anon

1)US troops swear oaths to uphold the Constitution of the United States. This goes for all branches of the armed service, and I believe for all police forces as well. The SS swore their oaths to Adolf Hitler. 2) SS stands for Schutzstaffel, which is roughly "Protection Squadron." And the "protection" part of it was for the bodyguard for the Nazi Party leadership. No branch of the US armed forces does that. Marines are charged with guarding DC, but again, they, as well as Secret Service, swear their oaths to the Constitution, not to any one man or party. 3) The SS were declared a criminal organization in 1946. That is the statue quo. Any attempt to rehabilitate their image is thus historical revisionism. --funkychinaman 05:54, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

This has nothing to do with rehabilitation of their image. They were an organization used for many evils, and it would be folly to say they were the perfect moral equivalent of many of their peers. But to call them "not soldiers" is to pretend that soldiers are something other than they are. Soldiers can fight for a leader or a party or a constitution. Schutzstaffel may mean "Protection", but the United States Armed Forces style operate under the aegis of the Department of "Defense." Like the DoD, the SS were used in many offensive actions regardless of what their title was. The Nuremberg War Crimes Tribunal called the SS a criminal organization, yet exempted conscripts who joined after 1943 as they were forced to join, so apparently, joining the SS does not automatically make you a criminal. Again, what is the definition of a soldier? An enlisted man or woman who serves in an army. The SS were enlisted and served in an army, so that makes them soldiers. The logic is impossibly simple unless you choose to add some other definition to the word.

"[Helmut] Kohl confirmed that in the last days of the war he was able to avoid service in the SS because he was only 15, 'but they hanged a boy from a tree who was perhaps only two years older with a sign saying TRAITOR" because he had tried to run away rather than serve.'" That's why an exemption was made for conscripts after 1943. --funkychinaman 03:55, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Save your breath. funkychinaman is on a crusade and he won't listen to anyone, even the TWO MODS who specifically told him that SS soldiers could be called soldiers since there were many Waffen SS units which operated just like Heer units. He can change THIS page, but if I catch him mass changing ALL of the WW2 movies on IMFDB, then he'll have an appointment with the Banhammer. MoviePropMaster2008 03:41, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

No, I'll leave them be. I respect the authority of the mods when it comes to operations, but it doesn't mean that they're infallible. (And the Nazis must have had some pretty terrible lawyers in 1946 if they didn't try arguing that they were no different from the army.) --funkychinaman 03:50, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Bergman MP18 or MP28?

Can someone confirm if the weapon carried by this soldier is a Bergman or Haenel-Schmeisser type weapon? (Mp18 or Mp28).

Historically they were carried by German troops during this time period, such as in this photo from 1943. [1]

Dudster32 16:06, 17 January 2012 (CST)