Talk:Sepp Dietrich
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Cornel general (Generaloberst, Oberstgruppenführer) was higher than Obergruppenführer (General). The normal general ranks (without the field marshal) were then: Generalmajor (Brigadeführer, US brigadier general), Generalleutnant (Gruppenführer, US major general), General (Obergruppenführer, US lieutenant general), Generaloberst (Oberstgruppenführer, US general).
Sure that it's Joseph, not Josef? Difficult to say, Josef is more common, but it may really be that he was registered as Joseph at birth.
Hello,
I doubt that S.D. had anything to do with the s.c. spartacus uprising in Berlin (~January, 1919). It seems quite clear that he was in bavaria all the time; suppose there is mixing up with the putting down of the red Munich Raete Republic in which he participated with the Freikorps Oberland (April/May, 1919), as some sources say. Thanks, WernerE - 09.2.05
Just wondering, but does anyone know the source of the pictures? --203.17.44.84 09:01, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- There is a very similar photo of Sepp Dietrich (same outfit, but without the teeth-showing smile) on the cover of a paperback book due out on 19 October 2005, according to amazon.com. Bibliographic entry: Messenger, Charles. Hitler's Gladiator: The Life and Wars of Panzer Army Commander Sepp Dietrich. No location: Conway Maritime Press, 2005; paperback; 264 pages. P.S.: For what it might be worth, I wrote my Master's Thesis on the early career of Sepp Dietrich back in 1977. DonBruce 14:08, 12 August 2005 (UTC)
Who was second in command of the SS? Was it Dietrich?
-
- I would assume it was Karl Hanke, who succeeded Himmler as Reichsfuhrer-SS during the final days of the war. Being that Dietrich was Waffen-SS and showed little of the "qualities" of the likes of Himmler, Heydrich, et al., I doubt he would have been been considered for that position in any case. user:Jsc1973
[edit] POV
Anyone reading this article without knowing Sepp's career will think that he was a normal military man, and not the ruthless and murderous thug who he actually was. I still don't know if I should laugh or if should cry. A real tragedy he didn't fall in Soviet hands.
- Cry.--217.230.254.116 23:03, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
WOW! What an astute comment. Ruthless murderous thug? Try reading a book, it might give you some insight onto the actions on both sides, especially during the US advancement through France. There were atrocities on both sides. And any commentator who has read the transcripts and the evidence during his "war crimes" trial will see that it was a complete miscarriage of justice. Even in the US at the time there is evidence to support this. The only murder he could be found complicit with would have been the deaths of the SA men killed while he was commanding the men at the prison. He did act on orders to kill them, and as such was found guilty at his trial after being released from prison the first time.
69.143.8.152
-
- Nonsense...Dietrich was an early and ardent Nazi...Ok, so some on the Allied side committed 'atrocities'? That in no way mitigates the German side...Now, I'm not saying he was a "ruthless and murderous thug" as posted above - but he sure wasn't a "normal military man" either ! Engr105th 04:15, 11 October 2007 (UTC)