Spy is revealed (SPOILERS)

First, since the Germans had long established that they invariably did shoot escapees, Sefton was certainly right to assume they'd do so again. And in fact, the Allies (at least, the Western Allies) generally did not shoot escaping POWs. Few Germans tried to escape anyway, and those who did were almost all caught and reinterned. Only one German POW ever successfully escaped from the British (twice!), and he was finally shot down in combat after his second escape. The largest escape attempt of German POWs in the US came at an internment camp near Phoenix in December, 1944 -- the same period as in Stalag 17 -- when eight POWs made it out of a prison camp in an effort to take a raft down the Gila River to the Colorado, then down into Mexico. Unfortunately they discovered that the Gila "River" was mostly a dry riverbed without water. Stranded, they split up and were all caught or surrendered (unable to cope with the hazards of the desert) within a couple of weeks, although the leader dodged around Phoenix for a month before finally being captured. The handful of Axis POWs who were shot by the Allies had been found guilty of murdering their fellow prisoners. In fact, in America, many were put on work release programs in nearby US towns!

Second, while I agree that von Scherbach's actions at that point in the war seemed reckless from the standpoint of later war crimes trials (as the Geneva man warned him), the fact is, he did risk being branded a war criminal by his actions. This is not a matter of dispute: it's what's in the movie. Whether it makes sense is another issue. Personally, I think his behavior, and the hopelessness of the POWs' position, would have been much more effective and believable had the action of the film taken place in 1942 or '43, rather than at the end of '44.

Von Scherbach was warned by "the Geneva man" about postwar war crimes trials in regard to his treatment of Dunbar, but didn't care. I agree that logically he should have begun having second thoughts about his actions, but clearly he wasn't.

Off hand I know of no instance where guards in US or British POW camps ever shot escaping Axis prisoners. It may have happened, but most camps were in England or North America (the US or Canada), and on the record few POWs made any effort to escape what were not only good conditions for them but which, even if successful, would leave them stranded far from home. Of course, Soviet guards let German prisoners die by the thousands, but this was mostly from starvation, disease and overwork. I don't know if any Germans made an attempt to escape a Soviet camp, but if they did they would certainly have been shot -- which to many of them would doubtless have been preferable to staying in the hell of those camps.

Only one German ever escaped a British POW camp -- three times! He was recaptured twice before finally escaping, only to be shot down over the North Sea not long after returning home. That story was told in the 1958 British film, The One That Got Away.

Eight Germans attempted to escape from a POW camp near Phoenix in December 1944, thinking they could take a raft down the Gila River to the Colorado, then down to Mexico...only to discover the "river" was a dry bed. They dispersed into the desert but all either surrendered or were eventually caught, glad to be back in a nice, safe camp. I believe some German POWs were executed for an escape attempt from a US-based camp, but this was done after the attempt was foiled.

Anyway, again on the record, German and Japanese prisoners were treated far better by the British and Americans than vice-versa (especially by the Japanese). However, the Soviets were on a par with the worst of the Axis powers in this regard, just as the Germans were especially harsh to the Russians.

You're right that von Scherbach would have faced trouble from Berlin (the Gestapo, and his own military superiors), and would have had to answer for the death of the spy and the escape of Dunbar -- particularly after he himself had drawn attention to Dunbar's being responsible for blowing up the train.

But that doesn't mean he would not have wreaked retribution on the prisoners -- he certainly would have. His entire means of running the camp, and his contempt for his job (as he made clear to Dunbar when interrogating him) as well as of the prisoners would have given him no hesitation about shooting them all. He certainly would have taken harsh measures against the men from the barracks where Price had been (as well as Sefton and Dunbar). The fact that he himself might have faced punishment would have made no difference -- in fact, it likely would have increased his fury and made him even more likely to kill them off.

Goering's "respect" for anyone is highly debatable and suspect, and he was basically an unprincipled blowhard without ethics who did whatever he needed to to get ahead in the Nazi hierarchy, including murder. In any case, the notion that POWs were necessarily well treated (relatively) and basically immune from execution by the Nazis is belied by the fact that the Germans did shoot prisoners during the war -- most notoriously, the recaptured 50 escapees, murdered in cold blood, as told (accurately) in The Great Escape. Granted it was the SS that carried out those particular executions, but prisoners were shot even by camp guards and other military men. The fact that it was the duty of prisoners to escape did not necessarily mean that they escaped any retribution -- far from it. And in the case of Stalag 17, their responsibility for getting Price killed off, as well as letting Dunbar escape, would have made them prime targets for execution. Remember, von Scherbach routinely had his men shoot any escaping prisoners (as happened at the beginning of the film).

Sefton did what he had to do to survive and, as he said, make himself as comfortable as possible while he was a prisoner. They all did that, but none as well as Sefton. But he never had any interest in escape, as he made plain repeatedly -- let others be the heroes, he said, he was just going to do whatever he had to to live as best he could. He only decided to escape at the last minute when he knew he could set Price up as a decoy and because he had lost his favored position (and supplies) anyway, and because he figured he could get money from Dunbar's famly for getting him out. To him, it was just another scheme, with better odds. But that still left the others to their fates.

It always struck me that the men were a bit too ready to listen to Sefton when he set about exposing Price, given their hatred for him. We used to have a thread around here on the manner in which Sefton begins to suspect something -- when he sees the shadow of the looped light cord on the wall as the men are marching around the barracks, and suddenly assumes that's the signal used for sending messages. Quite a leap, as there'd been no mention of noting the cord looped and unlooped previously. I think this is another weakness in the plot.

Sorry, but -- the answer to what? And what would Sefton and Dunbar have reported on to Allied officials anyway, beyond basic conditions in the camp, the story behind their escape (including the spy), and Dunbar's saga...none of which would have meant a thing to the prisoners left behind?

That's a really interesting idea, DaRitz, although, as the lawyers say, it assumes facts not in evidence. But you're right, it might have been better for von Scherbach to bury Price as Dunbar and cover up the rest. He could always punish the barracks in small ways short of massacring them. Of course, he'd have to make sure that the other guards and camp staff kept their mouths shut about what had happened.

But would someone in Berlin begin to wonder at some point what had happened to their spy Price? That might have put a crimp in things. Still, since it's December 1944, von S. would only have to string his superiors along for four more months at most before the war ended. That's when he'd start having other troubles.