Comments by "My Name Doesn’t Matter" (@mynamedoesntmatter8652) on "War Academy" channel.

Gotthard Heinrici was a brilliant strategist who kept so many of his men from being casualties. Hitler and Heinrici’s peers looked down on him because of his frugality in uniform and his refusal to wear the Nazi jackboots, and he preferred his old WWI sheepskin lined jacket. Too, he would refuse to carry out orders that would’ve wiped out his troops. Hitler hated his Protestant beliefs, and because of all this, he was sent to a sort of rest/curative home in Czechoslovakia that was for shell shocked and otherwise ‘spent’ field brass to mentally recuperate (some did not). Heinrici’s actions in the field were exemplary and saved lives; he refused to follow some commands that would’ve lost ground and likely his entire body of troops. His peers obeyed Hitler’s orders and lost. If he’d been taken seriously and allowed to command more of the eastern front, things would’ve at least gone the way of the Reich instead of collapsing the way it did with a maniac calling the shots. Too bad Heinrici was not one of the Allied leaders - he was heroic and extremely intelligent in his decisions (the bot voice mispronounces his name, btw - it’s Hein-ree-tse, emphasis on second syllable).
37
@jean6872 Heinrici was not a Nazi. He refused to join the party. My “praise” is merely an acknowledgment for a man who was indeed (whether you like it or not) a brilliant defensive tactician. There is nothing to discredit that. He came from a Prussian military background going back to the 12th century. I’ve been a history lover for decades, and that’s what I love to read. Because Heinrici was not an American - or British, or another Allied leader doesn’t mean that I can’t acknowledge his brilliance in defensive tactics. He was not a Nazi, as you say; it’s well known that he refused to join the Nazi party; he detested it. In fact, he was a monarchist. I am not defending anything that his men may or may not have done not have done on the Eastern front, or at the battle of Berlin, or whether Heinrici should or shouldn’t have been at Nürnberg (I’ve never read anything to that effect). You can lay out facts one way or another as you like, so long as they are facts. As for myself, I simply happen to find Heinrici to be a fascinating individual; in his personal life, his refusal to conform to Nazism, and his military strategies. I find his personal background fascinating. I find lots of people’s backgrounds fascinating throughout history. What you credit me with as “selective” and “uncritical praise” for Heinrici may be your take - and maybe you have a beef with the man, I wouldn’t know about that. But I’m not “praising” any man. I happen to find him to be an interesting and fascinating individual. It begins and ends there. If you have a problem with that I’m terribly sorry for you. But you still can’t call him a Nazi. He even wore his old WWI cap. Edit: What would be the definition of “uncritical praise?” Isn’t that redundant?
11
@jean6872 Okey dokey, and you have a nice day. Whooooooooooossssshhhhhh
3
@jefferyball7672 You are absolutely correct on both counts. He was not a Nazi, and good officers do care for their men. Heinrici came from a lineage of high ranking Prussian military leaders. He was a German monarchist openly against Hitler’s nazism and voted that way, but was an excellent and devoted military leader who built his reputation as the best defense strategist. He very much cared for his men and stood his ground in opposing scorched earth policies (both Nazi Germany and Russia were guilty of this). He was ordered to uphold them but did not follow them, defending his position by saying that had he burned down those places he would have not been able to retreat and save his men. He didn’t take huge numbers of prisoners, but his men did capture Russian partisans, and Heinrici hung one sixteen year-old partisan leader who later was later honored as a Russian national hero. He didn’t take pleasure in doing that; it was part of war. Heinrici was not “on my side” as far as that that goes, but as opposing leaders go I find him a remarkable and admirable man by his own right. He was definitely not a Nazi. I’m American. My father fought in Italy under the leadership of Gen. Mark Clark who notoriously made inept decisions. I am a serious reader of history, capable of giving credit where credit is due. The past is the past, with all its wrongs and rights. Russia has a long history of genocide before WWII ever started. Our other friend here (Jean) is pro-Russian so she is passionate about her heritage - and rightly so. There were millions of innocent people who died in the war, and millions who fought for their own lives and their family’s lives, not for Stalin but out of desperation and their personal loyalties, having no choice but to do so. I am outspoken about all the genocides and the Holocaust, and Russia (as well as Poland) had plenty of antisemitism; for all Stalin’s showing in liberating some death camps at the end of the war, he is guilty of killing tens of millions of his own people by starvation, outright murder, torture, imprisonment (the famous gulags) and using them for cannon fodder. It was his intention to starve millions of his countrymen and he hoarded most of the nation’s food in Moscow, all “for the good of Russia.” Moscow itself had mass starvation in the streets. Sadistic leadership knows no nationality. But this is about Heinrici. I’m merely pointing out his positive actions, his anti Nazism, and his excellent capabilities as the best defense strategist. Had he been Russian (or American or French or whatever other nationality) I’d do the same. He was, as I’ve redundantly overstated, a Prussian, a military leader, and a staunch monarchist: not a Nazi. And not an antisemite. His wife came from a mixed marriage of German father and a German-Jewish mother; she had a Jewish parent. Heinrici received a ‘German blood certificate’ from Hitler himself, but that was out of necessity and many times f Hitler’s underlings received the same. Heinrici was passed over for higher promotions in rank and assignments. He probably would’ve been at Hitler’s side instead of his field command postings and time spent in “restorative cure” on Hitler’s orders.
3