Trial,execution or else ...for the Nazi elite.

Discussions on the Holocaust and 20th Century War Crimes. Note that Holocaust denial is not allowed. Hosted by David Thompson.
User avatar
Nagelfar
Member
Posts: 1102
Joined: 08 Sep 2002 06:31
Location: Pacific Northwest

Post by Nagelfar » 23 Feb 2003 05:38

witness wrote:I understand that you are a proponent of the court of Lynch ?


no, just the difference of where a court is needed and where it is not in accord to times of war. when the militarists 'gave themselves up', even by their own standards they made for their underlings they would have been shot as defeatists. so in respect of the times of war they should have seen 'giving themselves up' as giving up their lives, the other side, in respect to soldierly manner, should have not held them as trophies to gawk at, or even lynched to pose & posture around like Mussolini was. but they should have been ended like the enemy they were. there is not a trial for the individual lesser fighting men who gave themselves up, and if its the cause and not the men forumlating/acting for the cause of the enemy regime. respective rank, no matter who achieved it, had little pull, as each would have acted according to orders (just as they said in the trials, of course it was true), it was simply a long term historic propaganda purpose to hold a trial at all, not ultimately a true moral evaluation of the individals picked apart for their 'judgement'; if such a thing can have any meaning at all. the society made under Nazi germany was to be subversive quite apart from the individuals making it so, no single person could have been blamed for the inertia of their own actions under a hierarchy as such, it was driven by historic forces. the trial though was driven by historic opportunism at the moment to make people into proactive instigators and take the view away from the sea of historic circumstance which built up to the facts creating it the type of war it became.

User avatar
witness
Member
Posts: 2279
Joined: 21 Sep 2002 00:39
Location: North

Post by witness » 23 Feb 2003 15:32

Nagelfar wrote: if such a thing can have any meaning at all.

Of course it has meaning.Again this trial was not about the War per se. It was about the war crimes and first and foremost the crimes against humanity,
no single person could have been blamed for the inertia of their own actions under a hierarchy as such

Not true. Those who issued the criminal orders and those who obeyed them were to be responsible.
And this is not true that everybody was guitly of this in the German Army.
There were high ranking officers who didn't follow such orders .
Example ? Please .I hope the name of Guderian sounds familiar ?
So this is the man who consciously didn't distribute the criminal order issued On September 1941 containing instructions concerning the treatment of civilian population in the USSR.The order which Guderian felt "ran counter to the provisions of the Geneva Convention"
This extract is taken from the interrogation of General Heinz Guderian on December 5 1945 .The interrogation was conducted by Major -General Alexandrov (Nuremberg ):
Q. (Alexandrov )Would you tell us now what in particular in this order was not in conformance with the International law ?
A. ( Guderian )I could not give you the details any more .The gist of the order was that in case of any resistance on the part of the civil population or the prisoners of war this resistance should be broken with armed might and without any consideration for the people who might be affected . The order was formulated in such a manner that excesses on the part of our own troops could not have been prevented . This is why I did not distribute the order

Emphasis is mine.
So as you can see even the high ranking officers were able to refuse to carry out the criminal orders ( in the case of Guderian without any consequensec for him. )

the trial though was driven by historic opportunism at the moment to make people into proactive instigators and take the view away from the sea of historic circumstance which built up to the facts creating it the type of war it became.

Sorry many high words but not much truth .
The trial was retribution for those who were quitly in originating criminal policy which inabled the State and Military representatives to issue criminal orders leading to the death , privation and enslavement of innocent people.
P.S. General Guderian was released without being indicted ...
Last edited by witness on 23 Feb 2003 16:13, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
witness
Member
Posts: 2279
Joined: 21 Sep 2002 00:39
Location: North

Post by witness » 23 Feb 2003 15:59

This is the order which General Guderian didn't distribute to his troops :
TOP SECRET

The Chief of the OKW
WFST. / Abt. L (IV/Qu)
Nr. 002060/ 41 g. Kdos.

F. H. Qu., 16 September 1941
40 copies, 32nd copy

Subject: Communist insurrection in the occupied territories.

1. Since the campaign against Soviet Russia started there have been communist insurrections everywhere in the territories occupied by Germany. The actions range from propaganda and assaults against single members of the armed forces to open revolt and spreading guerilla warfare.

It should be noted that this is a mass movement which is centrally directed from Moscow and to which also the single and seemingly trifling incidents are to be ascribed occurring in areas which have been quiet so far.

Due to the manifold political and economic tensions in the occupied territories we must also expect nationalistic and other groups to take advantage of the situation and to instigate difficulties for the German occupation troops by joining the communist insurrection.

This way an increasing danger for the German conduct of the war arises which becomes apparent first by generally unsafe conditions for the occupation troops and already has led to troops being, detached to the main centers of the unrest.

2. Previous measures to counteract this general communist insurrection have proved inadequate. The Fuehrer has now ordered that everywhere the most drastic means are to be employed in order to quench the movement within the shortest time possible. Only in this manner which has always been employed successfully by great nations in the history of their conquests quiet can be restored.

3. The following directives are to be observed:

a. In each case of revolt against the German occupation force Communist sources are to be suspected regardIess of what the individual circumstances are.

b. To nip the plots in the bud the most drastic means are to be employed immediately at the first provocation in order to make the authority of the occupation force prevail and to prevent further spreading.
Attention should be paid to the fact that a human life in the countries concerned often means nothing and only by unusual severity can a deterrent effect be achieved. In these cases the life of one German soldier must be atoned for by the death sentence for 50 to 100 communists, as a rule. The manner of execution shall further increase the deterrent effect.

The opposite procedure to use relatively mild punishment first and to do with the threat of more severe action as a deterrent is not in accordance with these principles and therefore should not be employed.

c. The political relationships between Germany and the respective country in question are irrelevant for the attitude of the military occupation authorities. To the contrary, it is to be considered and emphasized by propaganda that striking with energy will also liberate the native populations from communist criminals and result to their benefit. Clever propaganda of this kind consequently will not cause undesirable reactions of the friendly parts of the population on account of the severe measures against the communists.

d. Native men will generally be a failure in the execution of such measures of force. Their strengthening brings an increased danger for our own troops and therefore must not be allowed. However, prizes and rewards should be lavishly offered to the population in order to ensure its cooperation in a suitable way.

e. If as an exception court martial is to be opened in connection with communist revolts or other offenses against the German occupation force, the most drastic penalties are to be imposed. In such cases the death penalty only can be an actual means having deterrent effect. Particularly acts of espionage and sabotage and attempts to join a foreign army are, as a rule, to be punished with death. Also in cases of bearing arms without permission the death sentence is to be imposed in general.

4. The commanders in the occupied territories see to it that these principles are made known to all military offices without delay which have to deal with communist acts of revolt.

Keitel

Emphasis is mine

Keitel was indicted at Nuremberg.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
Nagelfar
Member
Posts: 1102
Joined: 08 Sep 2002 06:31
Location: Pacific Northwest

Post by Nagelfar » 24 Feb 2003 07:28

witness wrote:Of course it has meaning.Again this trial was not about the War per se. It was about the war crimes and first and foremost the crimes against humanity,


thats the thing. it was a war of social engineering, the term 'crimes against humanity' was a retroactive conception, this is what the goal was for the trials to oppose, which lay in the ideology.

witness wrote:Not true. Those who issued the criminal orders and those who obeyed them were to be responsible.
And this is not true that everybody was guitly of this in the German Army.
There were high ranking officers who didn't follow such orders .


of course, then the fact to be followed or not by the officers is seen from an individual moral perspective, their entire empire wouldn't have functioned nor the purpose of their ideology. this would of course be in the interest of the opposing sides and is a ridiclous thing to pre-suppose to be assumed by the individuals in question. from the views of National Socialism, the criminals may very well have been pacifists who were "humanists", and they were in effect commiting "crimes against civilization", by not weeding out 'asocials' and allowing universal welfare amongst people not of equal value.

a 'crime against humanity' can be said to be allowing people to freely breed. or not herding their qualities through extermination, for some applied purpose. to neglect a statist priority over the nature of humanity is exactly what would have been seen as the most detrimental thing for the future by a National Socialist worldview. however, the social outlook of the so-called "social democrats" certainly weren't in accord to theirselves with the trials, and that is the only real definer of the differences between justice to different honestly held viewpoints.

MausPanzer
Banned
Posts: 79
Joined: 07 Feb 2003 01:16
Location: United States

I agree with Nagelfar

Post by MausPanzer » 27 Feb 2003 01:59

I agree with Nagelfar. "Hail Wotan"!!!

J Heller
Member
Posts: 41
Joined: 25 Feb 2003 03:19
Location: Milwaukee, WI

Post by J Heller » 27 Feb 2003 04:03

I believe the whole trial was simply for political and revenge reasons. The outcome of the trial was a joke anyways, if they were planning on killing Goering, Speer should have went also since he was one of Hitler's right hand men, but his "claim" to have wanted to kill Hitler was enough to let him off the hook? Obviously thats all they wanted to hear. All that trial was for was to try to squeeze information out of them and try to get them to die traitors. I don't think any American's would have said they were wrong if they knew they were going to die anyways, it's ridiculing and embarrassing. I dont believe you can kill a man for following orders.

User avatar
witness
Member
Posts: 2279
Joined: 21 Sep 2002 00:39
Location: North

Post by witness » 27 Feb 2003 05:12

Nagelfar wrote:
witness wrote:Of course it has meaning.Again this trial was not about the War per se. It was about the war crimes and first and foremost the crimes against humanity,


thats the thing. it was a war of social engineering, the term 'crimes against humanity' was a retroactive conception, this is what the goal was for the trials to oppose, which lay in the ideology.

witness wrote:Not true. Those who issued the criminal orders and those who obeyed them were to be responsible.
And this is not true that everybody was guitly of this in the German Army.
There were high ranking officers who didn't follow such orders .


of course, then the fact to be followed or not by the officers is seen from an individual moral perspective, their entire empire wouldn't have functioned nor the purpose of their ideology. this would of course be in the interest of the opposing sides and is a ridiclous thing to pre-suppose to be assumed by the individuals in question. from the views of National Socialism, the criminals may very well have been pacifists who were "humanists", and they were in effect commiting "crimes against civilization", by not weeding out 'asocials' and allowing universal welfare amongst people not of equal value.

Of course in the human society which is run by reasonable people "individual moral perspective " is taken into consideration.
In the rogue societies ( the Nazi Germany as a point in the case ) it is not so.
In such a rogue state every possible crime can be declared as a virtue and a virtue a crime depending on how it fits with the needs of those who have power at the moment.I agree with you on this.
However when the rulers of the rogue states are driven out of the power positions ,the state of affairs , under which all humanist values of the individuals making up these societies are respected anew ,is bound to come true.It is simply in human nature to rebel against totalitarian
methods of imposing values of the state on every individual.
(In the case of Guderian he didn't obey the criminal order by having decided not to distribute it to his troops.)
There are universal values which we all share as humans .
Very simple ones such as unacceptance of murdering women ,children and elderly when waging warfare. And no matter if a particular ideology
declares some other values such as class (Communism ) or race (Nazism ) to be supreme, all the same these universal human values would not be easily uprooted.This is exactly the reason why the crimes of NKVD or Einsatzgruppen were concealed from the general public regardless of the extreme indoctrination of the populations both in Germany and Russia.

a 'crime against humanity' can be said to be allowing people to freely breed

Again this is the position of one particular extreme ideology ( Nazism ) as for example killing of all "class enemies " is the position of the extreme communist fractions and at a certain point in history the official Communist position ( hense the shooting of the Czar family when all the family members were murdered also including women kids and elderly .And again this crime was concealed from public in Russia)
But these extreme positons are quite in odds with the universal values we all share ( see above )
So Guderian is being not some strange example of an extreme individualism in the National-Socialist society but rather an example of the normal reaction of a normal person to the criminal execces of the regime he happened to be part of.

User avatar
witness
Member
Posts: 2279
Joined: 21 Sep 2002 00:39
Location: North

Post by witness » 10 Jun 2003 19:48

mistake

Return to “Holocaust & 20th Century War Crimes”