But hasn't the last 67 years been enough for the withhunt? Haven't the old men who once proudly declared Deutschland Uber Alles and threw their right arms in a Roman salute suffered enough since 1945? I read a lot in European news about new programs to 'bring Nazis to justice', to 'deport Nazi murderers from America to Europe where they can be tried to killing innocent people!' etc. There was a story about an ex-Lithuanian MP who served alongside the German army during its libera..'occupation' of Lithuania, and who came to America after the war. In the 1980's he was sent to Europe where he was tried, and found innocent of 'war crimes'. Late last year, the charges were brought back up and the man was re-tried in Europe after having his citizanship revoked in America. Again, found innocent. This old man must've been put through hell since 1945, and then, 50+ years after the war he has his citizanship revoked and is deported to be tried for crimes he didnt commit? Twice?.
What are these supposed war criminals now? decrepid old men, some reminiscent and some guilt ridden. What are they going to do? Put a 70+ year old man in jail for life because he was in a 'suspicious' unit of the SS? It's a sad state of affairs. Can't these men be left in peace?
Just a thought..
I'll agree with you for the most part. I have a Luftwaffe veteran living in my neighborhood. I saw him at the local grocery store and decided to ask him about his past (he was wearing a hat with the modern german flag on it). He looked both ways and hardly murmered "I was in the Luftwaffe."
I don't think the gentlemen who fought hard for their country have anything to be ashamed of.
However, those who were in the Gestapo/Totenkopfverband/Allgemeine SS should pay for their crimes one way or another. I don't think they should suffer a horrible sentence though. It's like slapping a dog along time after it ate something valuable. It will just be mostly confused.
Honestly, excluding major war crimes punishing these old men really serves no purpose. No real justice is being found by doing it.
I don't think the gentlemen who fought hard for their country have anything to be ashamed of.
However, those who were in the Gestapo/Totenkopfverband/Allgemeine SS should pay for their crimes one way or another. I don't think they should suffer a horrible sentence though. It's like slapping a dog along time after it ate something valuable. It will just be mostly confused.
Honestly, excluding major war crimes punishing these old men really serves no purpose. No real justice is being found by doing it.
I partialy agree. No one should be held responsible for serving in "suspicious" units, not only in Waffen SS, but also Gestapo/Totenkopfvebände/Allgemeine SS. In most cases soldiers couldn't choose which unit to serve in and there are even documented cases of soldiers in Dirlewanger unit which requested transfer because they couldn't bear with attrocities and looting.
BUT, if someone is suspected for being responsible for war crimes, he should be tried, no matter his age. Once again, it's what the people did that should be an issue, based on personal responsibilities, and one must not generalize.
MaPen
BUT, if someone is suspected for being responsible for war crimes, he should be tried, no matter his age. Once again, it's what the people did that should be an issue, based on personal responsibilities, and one must not generalize.
MaPen
-
Gwynn Compton
- Member
- Posts: 2840
- Joined: 10 Mar 2002, 23:46
- Location: United Kingdom
I feel that certain groups provide a focus for investigation, but each case must be treated individually and not on the foundation of "they were a member of such and such an organisation, and therefore are guilty"
We must also consider the situation that they were in at the time, a soldier or officer is hardly likely to disobey orders when they've got a gun pointed to their head, and thats what I feel warcrime tribunals fail to recognise. It seems to me that those who sit on these courts feel that everyone should disobey their orders and get shot for it, a situation which I suspect most of them haven't been in.
What interests me is the Israeli courts, while they case warcriminals from WW2 around the globe, it seems Israeli as a country is happy to violate human rights, and practice a form of segregation similiar to apartheid in it's dealings with Palestine.
But don't even think that I'm saying that the Palestinians are innocent.
However thats a different story, the point I'm making is that it appears these courts operate in an unfair way. There are people who deserve to be punished for their horrific crimes, but there are others, many who I fear have already been hung, who are also victims of those higher in the pecking order.
Thats my thoughts anyway.
We must also consider the situation that they were in at the time, a soldier or officer is hardly likely to disobey orders when they've got a gun pointed to their head, and thats what I feel warcrime tribunals fail to recognise. It seems to me that those who sit on these courts feel that everyone should disobey their orders and get shot for it, a situation which I suspect most of them haven't been in.
What interests me is the Israeli courts, while they case warcriminals from WW2 around the globe, it seems Israeli as a country is happy to violate human rights, and practice a form of segregation similiar to apartheid in it's dealings with Palestine.
But don't even think that I'm saying that the Palestinians are innocent.
However thats a different story, the point I'm making is that it appears these courts operate in an unfair way. There are people who deserve to be punished for their horrific crimes, but there are others, many who I fear have already been hung, who are also victims of those higher in the pecking order.
Thats my thoughts anyway.
"Obeying higher orders" was what many defendants at war crimes trials and posterior murder trials before West German courts defended themselves with.
However, as the evidence collected and assessed by the courts at the various trials showed, the allegation of having had "a gun pointed at their head" was but a red herring in most cases.
At the first Treblinka trial which ended in 1965, for instance, the Düsseldorf County Court assessed thirteen cases of German servicemen who had refused orders to take part in deportations or executions of Jews and other "undesirables". The worst thing that happened to these people was being degraded, transferred to another post (never to front-line duty) or suspended from service and sent home with full pension rights. Several of them suffered no disadvantages whatsoever. Some were exempted from execution duty by their understanding superiors. One member of a police unit who refused to take part in an execution of Jews was called a "whimp" and a "coward" by the unit's less understanding commander, but nevertheless taken out of the execution squad and not punished.
However, as the evidence collected and assessed by the courts at the various trials showed, the allegation of having had "a gun pointed at their head" was but a red herring in most cases.
At the first Treblinka trial which ended in 1965, for instance, the Düsseldorf County Court assessed thirteen cases of German servicemen who had refused orders to take part in deportations or executions of Jews and other "undesirables". The worst thing that happened to these people was being degraded, transferred to another post (never to front-line duty) or suspended from service and sent home with full pension rights. Several of them suffered no disadvantages whatsoever. Some were exempted from execution duty by their understanding superiors. One member of a police unit who refused to take part in an execution of Jews was called a "whimp" and a "coward" by the unit's less understanding commander, but nevertheless taken out of the execution squad and not punished.
-
Richard Murphy
- Member
- Posts: 753
- Joined: 09 Mar 2002, 20:24
- Location: Bletchley, England
Another thought
Guys,
Being as the "Superior orders" defence was ruled invalid, and with regard to the ongoing debate on the "Bomber" Harris war criminal issue. Doesn't the apparent majority view that the CO was guilty of indiscriminate bombing render all bomber crews subject to prosecution?
I seem to remember an earlier quote along the lines of "We didn't like doing it, but did as we were told".
Regards,
Rich
Being as the "Superior orders" defence was ruled invalid, and with regard to the ongoing debate on the "Bomber" Harris war criminal issue. Doesn't the apparent majority view that the CO was guilty of indiscriminate bombing render all bomber crews subject to prosecution?
I seem to remember an earlier quote along the lines of "We didn't like doing it, but did as we were told".
Regards,
Rich
-
[email protected]
- Member
- Posts: 13
- Joined: 26 Mar 2002, 15:04
- Location: USA
Procedures when a war criminal is caught, Spandau
When will the search for "Nazi War Criminals" end? These men may have done wrong, but they are inactive now. No amount of prosecution will change the past. If a "Nazi War Criminal" were found, how would they be tried? I mean, by which court? What procedures are taken when this happens? How exactly was Spandau? Can anyone recommend any good books on Spandau?
Being inactive now doesn't mean they shoult not be accoutable for the war crimes they did. It's all about justice. Of course this also applies to allied commanders who ordered war crimes, but were never prosecuted.
It is imperative that war criminals are tried in countries where those war crime were commited but only if judical system in that particular country is capable of just trial. If not, there should be an international tribunal.
Richard,
you brought up an interest question. Indisriminate bombing of civilian targets in Germany was war crime, but IMO the crews in those planes should not be held accountable because they were not the ones who selected the targets.
PsychedelicChic,
didn't quite understand question about Spandau. It was a prison Hess died in. Or is your question reffering to Nürmberg trials?
Best
MaPen
It is imperative that war criminals are tried in countries where those war crime were commited but only if judical system in that particular country is capable of just trial. If not, there should be an international tribunal.
Richard,
you brought up an interest question. Indisriminate bombing of civilian targets in Germany was war crime, but IMO the crews in those planes should not be held accountable because they were not the ones who selected the targets.
PsychedelicChic,
didn't quite understand question about Spandau. It was a prison Hess died in. Or is your question reffering to Nürmberg trials?
Best
MaPen
I just wanted to add a comment...
About the chasing down of war criminals 65 years later, I agree that it is pretty useless to the victims, but the point is for the future. I think it should be clear to anyone who desires to commit attrocities like the Holocaust, should understand that once the war is over, they will be hunted for the rest of thier natural lives. Hopefully, this can help curb such things in the future.
Smiles
About the chasing down of war criminals 65 years later, I agree that it is pretty useless to the victims, but the point is for the future. I think it should be clear to anyone who desires to commit attrocities like the Holocaust, should understand that once the war is over, they will be hunted for the rest of thier natural lives. Hopefully, this can help curb such things in the future.
Smiles
-
[email protected]
- Member
- Posts: 13
- Joined: 26 Mar 2002, 15:04
- Location: USA
Spandau
When I asked about Spandau, I meant how it's conditions were and how they varied depending on who was responsible for it (was it America, Russia, France, and Great Britain?) Hess's son believes his father was murdered. Ok, Donitz, what did they have to convict him of? He was an adorned Navy man and wasn't involved with the camps.
Re: Spandau
Chic,[email protected] wrote:When I asked about Spandau, I meant how it's conditions were and how they varied depending on who was responsible for it (was it America, Russia, France, and Great Britain?) Hess's son believes his father was murdered. Ok, Donitz, what did they have to convict him of? He was an adorned Navy man and wasn't involved with the camps.
If you want to know what Dönitz was convicted of, here's a transcription of the judgment:
http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/imt/proc/juddoeni.htm
Agreed wholeheartedly all those "swines and bastards" without any exeptions or nationality and country, should be paying for their crimes.So when would you suggest we bring those murderous slavs etc to justice?General Anders wrote:Every last one of these swines should be caught and punished to the full extent of the law. I don't care if it's 100 years after these bastards perpetrated the crimes and they'e so old that they're being drip fed in hospital.
-
Scott Smith
- Member
- Posts: 5602
- Joined: 10 Mar 2002, 22:17
- Location: Arizona
- Contact:
LOSING SWINES
Sounds good in theory. In practice it means that every regime will fight to its dying breath just as the Third Reich did because defeat will mean criminality.General Anders wrote:Every last one of these swines should be caught and punished to the full extent of the law. I don't care if it's 100 years after these bastards perpetrated the crimes and they'e so old that they're being drip fed in hospital.
We can't assume that just because the "First World" that defeated the Axis and then defeated the "Second World" in the Cold War, will always be a superpower colossus that cannot ever be defeated. History shows that have-nots (maybe like the Third World today) have a way of making the mighty pay dearly for their arrogance. When successful, they are heroes and liberators; if not, then they are criminals.
