General Eisenhower, a war criminal?

[Gurdur]

.... The execution of the dozen or so surrendered German soldiers at Dachau was murder, and a war crime.

Dachau was Dachau. The soldiers knew what they were doing there.

I would say this incident was one where the spirit of the law triumphed over the letter of the law. Eisenhower did the right thing.

 

[MaGZ]

Dachau was Dachau. The soldiers knew what they were doing there.

I would say this incident was one where the spirit of the law triumphed over the letter of the law. Eisenhower did the right thing.

Then you agree, Eisenhower was a war criminal?

 

[Gurdur]

Then you agree, Eisenhower was a war criminal?

No.

I do say you're an eternal whiner, though, and as far as those shot guards go, they can kiss my arse. Well, they can't, being dead and all that. Too bad. Cry me a river, MaGZ, cry me a river, cry me a river, oh, cry me a river!

 

[Gregory]

This is what I'm talking about; the "spirit of the law" is that we should shoot unarmed, surrendered people as long as they're bad-guys?

At any rate Eisenhower didn't do anything, so he can hardly be a war-criminal because of it.

 

[Nick Terry]

Thanks for making the point that under international law concentration camps are legal.

No, that doesn't follow. The combatant status of KZ guards derived from their membership of the Waffen-SS and Wehrmacht. Like all other military forces, they could be deployed towards criminal ends, e.g. running camps that violate international law.

 

[Nick Terry]

Then you agree, Eisenhower was a war criminal?

Nope. Not even the divisional commander can be considered a war criminal because no one ordered the summary shootings.

 

[MG1962]

Nope. Not even the divisional commander can be considered a war criminal because no one ordered the summary shootings.

This is an important distinction - In the west from late 44 onwwards German commanders were issued with written orders not to take prisioners. There is not equivelient order on the American side. So if POWs were shot illegally, the responsiblity lays with the ranking officer at the time, not after the fact

 

[dudalb]

Yup! Far more SS should have been shot.

Hey, MaGZ, your poor diddums SS got shot, oh dear, how tragic good.

One of my great fears is the the farther we get away from World War 2, the more the memories will fade and eventually a "Well, the Nazis were no worse then the Allies" attitude would gain ground.
Some of the posts on this thread are proving my fears are not ungrounded.
Considering their record , I find it hard to sheds tears over the demise of the SS.

 

[Gurdur]

This is what I'm talking about; the "spirit of the law" is that we should shoot unarmed, surrendered people as long as they're bad-guys?

Dachau was Dachau.

They should not have been shot; they should have been hanged instead. Shooting is too respectful for criminals like those.

 

[Gregory]

Putting aside, for the sake of argument, my objections to the death penalty, they should have been shot or hanged after a fair trial was held to determine that each of them, personally, deserved it.

Dachau was Dachau. And Treblinka was Treblinka, but of Karl Emil Ludwig, SS guard at said death camp, surviving prisoner Joe Siedlecki had this to say: "There was one SS, if I saw him today, if there was anything he needed, I'd give it to him, Karl Ludwig. He was a good good man. The number of times he brought me things, the number of times he helped me, the number of people he probably saved, I can hardly tell you. I don't know where he is now, but I wish I did." Similar testimony was given at his trial, and he was acquitted; how nice, therefore, that he was given a trial, instead of being shot on site by overenthusiastic soldiers who figured, "Treblinka is Treblinka."

Every singe one of the soldiers at Dachau should have been given the same opportunity. I don't care if every single one of them was obviously guilty; statistically speaking, they probably were. And I don't care if every single one of them deserved to die. When they were denied a fair trial, it was an affront against justice.

 

[MaGZ]

No, that doesn't follow. The combatant status of KZ guards derived from their membership of the Waffen-SS and Wehrmacht. Like all other military forces, they could be deployed towards criminal ends, e.g. running camps that violate international law.

They were made criminal organizations by waving a magic wand at the end of the war at Nuremberg.

Ex post facto law

 

[Gurdur]

And I don't care if every single one of them deserved to die. When they were denied a fair trial, it was an affront against justice.

And I don't care that they were shot. An affront? Give me a break. They weren't locked up for ages, treated like ****, tortured, used as experimental animals like at some camps, and the entire direction of anti-semitism in Germany was damned clear to everyone who looked and damnable from 1935 onwards.

They got mercy. They were quickly shot. The inmates of the camps were not so lucky. Not so lucky at all.

And as far as I'm concerned, since the Führerprinzip, anti-semitism and sheer dictatorialness of the non-Waffen part of the SS were well-known to everyone who joined, then all those who joined the non-Waffen SS prior to 1945 deserved a death sentence.

The presence of one or two who changed their minds does not change that.

 

[Sunni Man]

Many of the German SS guards were good people who were just at the wrong place at the wrong time.

I believe the Allies, at the direction of the Zionists, had many of the guards killed so that they could hide the true evidence. And create the hoax now known as the Holocaust.

 

[Gurdur]

Many of the German SS guards were good people who were just at the wrong place at the wrong time.

God, you're a laugh and a half. The SS: humanitarianism personified! Kind to guard dogs!

I believe the Allies, at the direction of the Zionists, had many of the guards killed so that they could hide the true evidence. And create the hoax now known as the Holocaust.

But then you would believe anything that suited your psychotic hatreds, wouldn't you?

 

[Nogbad]

Putting aside, for the sake of argument, my objections to the death penalty, they should have been shot or hanged after a fair trial was held to determine that each of them, personally, deserved it.

Dachau was Dachau. And Treblinka was Treblinka, but of Karl Emil Ludwig, SS guard at said death camp, surviving prisoner Joe Siedlecki had this to say: "There was one SS, if I saw him today, if there was anything he needed, I'd give it to him, Karl Ludwig. He was a good good man. The number of times he brought me things, the number of times he helped me, the number of people he probably saved, I can hardly tell you. I don't know where he is now, but I wish I did." Similar testimony was given at his trial, and he was acquitted; how nice, therefore, that he was given a trial, instead of being shot on site by overenthusiastic soldiers who figured, "Treblinka is Treblinka."

Every singe one of the soldiers at Dachau should have been given the same opportunity. I don't care if every single one of them was obviously guilty; statistically speaking, they probably were. And I don't care if every single one of them deserved to die. When they were denied a fair trial, it was an affront against justice.

That pretty much sums up my view. One cannot claim the moral high ground down in the gutter.

 

[Gurdur]

That pretty much sums up my view. One cannot claim the moral high ground down in the gutter.

I'm sure you can find far more appropriate subjects for what the SS themselves would have called Humanitätsduselei.

True justice can exist in the gutter too, and isn't afraid to get its hands dirty dealing with scum.

 

[Cleon]

Putting aside, for the sake of argument, my objections to the death penalty, they should have been shot or hanged after a fair trial was held to determine that each of them, personally, deserved it.

Dachau was Dachau. And Treblinka was Treblinka, but of Karl Emil Ludwig, SS guard at said death camp, surviving prisoner Joe Siedlecki had this to say: "There was one SS, if I saw him today, if there was anything he needed, I'd give it to him, Karl Ludwig. He was a good good man. The number of times he brought me things, the number of times he helped me, the number of people he probably saved, I can hardly tell you. I don't know where he is now, but I wish I did." Similar testimony was given at his trial, and he was acquitted; how nice, therefore, that he was given a trial, instead of being shot on site by overenthusiastic soldiers who figured, "Treblinka is Treblinka."

Every singe one of the soldiers at Dachau should have been given the same opportunity. I don't care if every single one of them was obviously guilty; statistically speaking, they probably were. And I don't care if every single one of them deserved to die. When they were denied a fair trial, it was an affront against justice.

I agree. But I'm not going to shed any tears over their deaths.

 

[Cleon]

They were made criminal organizations by waving a magic wand at the end of the war at Nuremberg.

They were made criminal organizations by the fact that they organized a massive extermination campaign against innocent civilians.

 

[Sunni Man]

But then you would believe anything that suited your psychotic hatreds, wouldn't you?

Why are you talking about hatred?

I just want the TRUTH of the so called Holocaust to be discussed from a neutral historical perspective. Not the Zionist version we have been force feed over the years.

Is that too much to ask??

 

[Nogbad]

I'm sure you can find far more appropriate subjects for what the SS themselves would have called Humanitätsduselei.

True justice can exist in the gutter too, and isn't afraid to get its hands dirty dealing with scum.

That kind of justice just leads to the people who like shooting people calling the shots - which is how a bunch of thugs started out in the 1920s. The Nuremberg trials were the correct route to go.