[Grunch]

Why do armchair historians have such a hard-on for Rommel? Is it his rugged Teutonic face? The only thing that I can think of in his favor is that he wasn't the complete monster that most high ranking Nazis were, but he was still complicit in the rise of the 3rd Reich. A victory for Rommel is a victory for Nazism etc etc. Why should he be celebrated? Idolized?

[Far-Right Sage]

Rommel wasn't an acceptable Nazi, primarily because he wasn't a Nazi. Rommel never joined the Nazi Party. The Wehrmacht was not a political organization, as, for example, the Schutzstaffel was. Officers in the Wehrmacht were actually discouraged from getting involved in politics, whether pro-Nazi or anti-Nazi.

Is it his rugged Teutonic face?

No, it is probably his impressive battlefield performance.

but he was still complicit in the rise of the 3rd Reich.

How so? By serving his country? That's as foolish as saying that Timoshenko was "complicit" in the rise of the Soviet Union. Who would not be "complicit" in the support of their own nation, particularly in wartime?

A victory for Rommel is a victory for Nazism etc etc

A victory for Rommel was a victory for Germany. Rommel was a German citizen. Is love of and duty to country that hard of a concept to understand?

Why should he be celebrated? Idolized?

I don't think he is celebrated or idolized anymore than any other World War II-era military figure. Why should Patton be celebrated? Why should Yamamoto be celebrated? Why should De Gaulle be celebrated? Etc.

[Grunch]

Is love of and duty to country that hard of a concept to understand?

Yes.

Why should Patton be celebrated? Why should Yamamoto be celebrated? Why should De Gaulle be celebrated? Etc.

They shouldn't.

[Far-Right Sage]

Yes.

A man's duty to his country is as pure as a man's duty to his children, his wife, his parents, and the rest of his family. Wanting to further the cause of one's tribe is as pure a feeling as the desire to eat, drink, sleep, and mate.

They shouldn't.

I disagree to an extent, but why single out Rommel?

[Grunch]

Because he was fighting to defend something especially reprehensible.

[Far-Right Sage]

Because he was fighting to defend something especially reprehensible.

Actually, as I stated earlier, Rommel was fighting to defend any single political ideal or set of values, but for Germany as a whole. He wasn't a politician, but a patriot. No more or less reprehensible than fighting for the United States, Japan, France, etc.

[Swagman]

A man's duty to his country is as pure as a man's duty to his children, his wife, his parents, and the rest of his family. Wanting to further the cause of one's tribe is as pure a feeling as the desire to eat, drink, sleep, and mate.

Maybe.....if by 'pure' you mean 'natural' that is.

It's natural for one to be protective of "one's children, one's wife, one's parents, and the rest of one's family". The 'tribe' or nation therefore is just an extension of one's family.

Protection of your family is primordial and stems from survival of the fittest or 'natural' selection so to this end you're pretty close to the mark.

Because he was fighting to defend something especially reprehensible

Not directly, Rommel fought for his own self-interest, which coincided with the interests of his country, which consequently coincided with the interests of the Nazis.

[The Immortal Goon]

Though I hate to do so in such a thread, the reason Rommell is respected is as FRS says.

For instance, when he learned of the July 20 plot to kill Hitler, Rommell didn't tell any of the authorities but let the thing ride out. He probably would have continued to serve under the German Republic had it been successful.

Not that I wouldn't have happily shot him against a wall, but that's generally why he gets a nod before the whole thing is denounced.

[Prosthetic Conscience]

There's also the question of whether he was involved in the plot to assassinate Hitler. That adds to his image as a German who didn't like the Nazis. If he'd lived to the end of the war, it seems possible he wouldn't have been charged with war crimes - he seems to have obeyed the international war conventions.

[PredatorOC]

Rommel was a traitor of the socialist movement! He betrayed the people to serve his neo-liberal masters!

[Oxymoron]

Rommel is celebrated and should be so the same way as Robert E Lee in the US. Because both men fought for their countries honorably like true warriors. Rommel actually was involved in the plot to kill Adolf when it became apparent that Hitler was the main enemy of Germany.

[Falx]

Because Americans have a hard on for Germany, and Rommel is the only thing that Nazi Germany had that wasn't completely disgusting. That and animal rights.

[Far-Right Sage]

Hitler did also eventually force Rommel's suicide, via Keitel and Burgdorf, so this, as far as history is concerned, also probably makes Rommel appear to be on the other side of German policy and politics at the time.

Because Americans have a hard on for Germany

I think younger Americans seem to have an obsession with U.S. involvement in the Second World War in general. There aren't that many Germanophiles amongst the American population as you seem to think.

[keso]

Actually, as I stated earlier, Rommel was fighting to defend any single political ideal or set of values, but for Germany as a whole. He wasn't a politician, but a patriot. No more or less reprehensible than fighting for the United States, Japan, France, etc.

Or Islam?

[Zagadka]

Quite. Rommel actually was very disliked at Nazi HQ - he had MANY enemies in command above him, but Hitler liked him, so he was somewhat untouchable.

But more important than that are two facts; 1) He was a pretty fucking good general, and 2) Unlike most other fronts, he maintained a "humanitarian" hold on prisoners of war. The Brits (at least, before Monty) had a high regard for him, there were frequent prisoner transfers (handy, since land changed possession so rapidly)... and if the assassination attempt on Hitler had succeeded, it is generally accepted that Rommel, who was very popular in Germany, would have taken over and sued for peace.

[Far-Right Sage]

Or Islam?

Islam is a religion, not a nation.

There's a difference between patriotism/nationalism and religious zealotry.

[casper77]

Yes, he was never involved in Hitler's mass murders. He was a soldier fighting for Germany.

[Thunderhawk]

1) He was a pretty fucking good general

Disturbing to see propaganda still works, 60 years later.

He wasnt transfered to command units in the East. Why? because they didnt want him to loose campaigns and thus be one more generals with a series or recent losses. His PR value was too high.

Nor was he given sole command of Northern France. Why? because he wasnt as popular within the German higharchy as is made out by their PR machine. Had the war gone on longer his image would have been reduced - traitors arent glorious heroes for very long.

[Zagadka]

He wasnt transfered to command units in the East. Why?

Because the Nazi leaders hated him?

[London Calling]

Because the Nazi leaders hated him?

Absolute nonsense. He was the Nazis favourite general as is well known, which is why he was not executed even after being involved in a plot to assassinate Hitler and overthrow the Nazi government. Many German military leaders disliked him for that reason.

You will not find Soviet historians or propaganda eulogising any German military scum they fought, which should be noted as it shows Anglo-American fascist leanings.