Nuremberg Trials or Nuremberg Lynch Mob
- Thread starter MHz
- Start date
I honestly don't care that much whether or not the head Nazis got a fair trial. I was just answering the question.
The trials were neither fair nor objective. Their purpose was to appease the blood lust of millions of angry people. I doubt you could find an objective third party to give a fair trial anyway. They lost the war, and their punishment was a public humiliation followed by execution. Some Nazis were insanely cruel. Others less so, but they all had it coming. IMO
I support bring all war criminals to justice.
If the post war judgments were about being fair and obnjective, Goering and Harris would have gotten about the same sentences. They could have even shared a cell together and swapped stories about firebombing cities.
That's old history now. Few people remain alive from that era.
Since then we've laid waste to cities in the middle and far east (Hanoi, Tehran, Beruit, Fallujah...). War criminals still commit war crimes and get away with it. Some even win re-election (George W. BUsh). Periodically we have genocides on the same scale... (DRC, Rwanda...)
I believe you, so much for searching for facts. Knocking the site or the article as rubbish should be done by showing the references to be in error, that hasn't happened once so go ahead close the thread, better yet delete it.Aha.... Nobody really reads those stupid C/P's anyways
BTW what is a 'pastebin'? not that I will be using it
Last edited:
I lead a sheltered life, what can I say. The latest vid I saw was 'who killed John O'Neil'. I like the format it was made in, and the guy in the hat is the one I am supposed to be if a poll was taken on this site. That didn't stop me from paying attention to the charts and the various connection. BTW was got me watching for liars and no they aren't everywhere or behind every rock. That is where you find them though. I told my x that when she was lying you could see a pulse at her breastbone, I couldn't but if I looked there when I thought she might be lying (all the time really) she would see that and think I there was a way, if she was lying she would blush, that isn't a luxury I have with the critters I chat with on-line with. I could be worse I could be an Oriental NHL player who is working the international freighters to keep in shape in the off-season..
How about the Japanese War crime trials were they any different from the Nuremberg trials? Crimes were similar (approx. 10 million killed. 5+ million Chinese, plus 5+ million from other occupied nations). How come those trials get little mention today, almost as if the world wants to forget that part of history.
They were fair. Just because evidence was so overwhelming and there was little they could say to justify their acts does not make it unfair.
I believe you are not far wrong in your estimation of the support the Nazi's got from ordinary people. I recently finished a book called, "The Hitler Youth". It was a real eye-opener. It was not only brown shirts the citizens feared, many times it was their own children - steeped as they were from childhood in Nazi propaganda. The Hitler Youth were a formidable force for the Nazi's.
Agreed. If the parents got a little concerned about what their kids were learning at "camp" all was needed was a son or daughter to rat out their parents and they would get a visit by the Gestapo.
As one 16 year old daughter put it to her parents after finding she was impregnated at camp...
"Leave or I will report you"
Sick em...
ElBaradei suggests war crimes probe of Bush team
This is a skill testing question, do you have to do false-flag events on a population that is 'already willing'? The fire in 1933 for example.
ElBaradei suggests war crimes probe of Bush team
This is a skill testing question, do you have to do false-flag events on a population that is 'already willing'? The fire in 1933 for example.
What makes the trials unfair was how they were conducted. All judges came from Allies, not neutral countries. Effectively these people were judged by their prosecuters. If the trials were fair and objective, then the judges would have came from neutral countries like Switzerland and Sweden. The intent of the trials were to humiliate and execute Nazis, not to seek truth or justice.
Consider Goering. Goering never supported an aggressive war of expansion and its a stretch to say he was an architect of Nazi crimes against humanity like the extermination of undesirables. In 1939, he argued against invading Poland and for working through international diplomacy (backed up by threats of military force) to take parts of Eastern Europe. His position was overruled by Hitler and other Nazis who sought total war to conquer all of Europe. I'm not convinced that Goering believed in the Master Race, but he did support the use of slave labor. The evidence is inclusive that he supported death camps. While Goering is hardly an Oskar Schindler, he did intervene to prevent some undesirables from being sent to the extermination camps. For example he protected his deputy who was Jewish. There are other examples where his anti-Nazi brother in law got him to intervene occasionally to save people's lives. Goering issued a written order in 1941 for the "complete solution of the Jewish Question" and passed responsibility to the SS. He never authorized the mass exterminations which started almost two years later. Even after Goering was sentenced to death and had nothing to loose either way, he still denied ordering or supporting mass exterminations. Given his answers to other questions where he admits to committing war crimes, I find it difficult to believe he lied to the end about the mass exterminations.
I've read his interviews and the guy was arrogant, obnoxious, brilliant and in the end, open and honest. His worst crimes were similar to Bomber Harris. He ordered the destruction of cities and targeted civilians. If he fought with the same record on the Allied side, he would have been decorated like Harris. But he was on the losing side so he was executed. Hardly fair or objective.
BTW, I am not sympathetic to Goering or Bomber Harris. I believe all war criminals should be held responsible for their crimes including Goering. But I doubt Goering had much to do with the mass exterminations. He was mostly concerned with the air war. He was no idiot, so he probably was aware that people were being exterminated and did little to oppose the policy, just like many other German officers and civilians who were not held accountable for their actions/inactions.
Karl Dönitz, head of the Navy conducted a campaign of submarine warfare which was copied by the Americans from the day they entered the war. A project at Yale University examined his case here:
The Avalon Project : Judgment : Doenitz
I don't see evidence that Donitz violated international law. As soon as merchant vessels became armed and carried arm shipments for war, they became legitimate targets.
Hmmm. So why aren't our criminals here is the US tried in, let's say Canada? Why aren't your criminals tried in the US?
And if it was to humiliate and execute, why were some aquited or received jail time and were later released?
The proper place for trying war criminals is the International Court of Justice at the Hague. None of the judges should have personal involvement in the events leading to the charges.
IMO, there is a good case against George W. Bush and his henchmen for starting an aggressive war of expansion. If Bush got the same consideration as the Nazis, he'd be tried in Iraq and the judges would be Iraqis who lost family members as a result of the US led war crime. I'm pretty sure Bush would not get a fair trial and instead get a public humiliation in a show trial and execution just like the Nazis.
Well, that was a text book goal post move. Was there even an International Court at the Hague?
Then perhaps they should be trying the Canadian Prime Minister for Libya. Is it not Canadian led?
What about all the leaders that participated in the war in Yugoslavia?
At any rate, it's all Tom Foolery to be talking about trying Bush for war crimes. It just ain't happening.
Again, did all those Nazis on trial get executed? Are you purposely avoiding that fact because it sounds better to insinuate that they all were executed?
No the ICJ didn't exist at the time. I was using it as an example of how war crimes trials can be fair and objective.
Sure not all the Nazis were executed. Dönitz got 10 years and he probably never violated international law, committed any war crimes and or crimes against humanity. IMO, he was punished for taking over when Hitler committed suicide and giving the order to continue the war. His excuse was that he was trying to give German soldiers and civilians a chance to flee to the West, rather than get caught behind the Soviet front line, where they would be treated harshly.
Cheney and the other PNAC members were the real architects of the unprovoked Iraq war crime against peace which resulted in hundreds of thousands of civilians deaths and millions of homeless refugees, few of which were absorbed by the US.
Sure not all the Nazis were executed. Dönitz got 10 years and he probably never violated international law, committed any war crimes and or crimes against humanity. IMO, he was punished for taking over when Hitler committed suicide and giving the order to continue the war. His excuse was that he was trying to give German soldiers and civilians a chance to flee to the West, rather than get caught behind the Soviet front line, where they would be treated harshly.
I agree. Bush was just the salesman. I doubt he knew more than what he read on his teleprompter.
Cheney and the other PNAC members were the real architects of the unprovoked Iraq war crime against peace which resulted in hundreds of thousands of civilians deaths and millions of homeless refugees, few of which were absorbed by the US.