It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Nine ex-Nazis given life sentences

page: 3
3
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 28 2009 @ 03:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by tezzajw

Originally posted by Ace High
Years that 6 million Jews never had.

Just like the 200,000 Japanese who were incinerated by the nukes.

Why aren't the Manhattan war criminals hunted down like the Nazi war criminals?


LOL. You know the answer, I think you already mentioned it. The winners write the history. War is ugly. The winners punish the losers. The Nazis went out of their way to kill civilians.

The US had a positive goal, end the war, stop the sufffering.

The Nazis goal? Kill everyone who was not blonde haired and blue eyed.

What do you think would have happened if Germany had discovered the nuclear weapon five years earlier?

I think we would be speaking German and the NE would still be inhabitable.




posted on Jun, 28 2009 @ 03:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by merka

Originally posted by Ace High
Old men now. They have evaded justice for 60+ plus years. Years that 6 million Jews never had. That is why I say a public hanging is more appropriate.

And also years that you cannot take back... Or give.

The war ended over 50 years ago, we should put it to rest sometimes. Sentencing old men will do nothing except tear up old wounds.


So your argument is that these Nazis did such a good job hiding, we should give them a pass?

50 years ago, who can even remember the mass slaughter of communists, gypsies, homosexuals, elderly, mentally handicap, or jews?



posted on Jun, 28 2009 @ 03:29 AM
link   
These people will face judgement, as we all will, and being so old they do not really have to worry about earth's judgement.

By the same token, I think that these old men, as young men, were brainwashed.

I do not excuse the Holocaust, I do not deny the Holocaust, but I am merely saying that humans are flawed and often make bad judgements.

Imagine if we were in their situation way back then - how many of us could have foreseen the Holocaust, or had the strength to fight it?

I would like to say RIP all Holocaust victims, and I wish peace of mind to their families.



posted on Jun, 28 2009 @ 03:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ace High
LOL. You know the answer, I think you already mentioned it. The winners write the history. War is ugly. The winners punish the losers. The Nazis went out of their way to kill civilians.

As did the USA and the nukes.


Originally posted by Ace High
The US had a positive goal, end the war, stop the sufffering.

As did the Nazis. They wanted to end the war, stop the suffering.


Originally posted by Ace High
The Nazis goal? Kill everyone who was not blonde haired and blue eyed.

The US goal? Kill two Japanese cities.

Hitler built gas chambers to get his job done. His henchmen are being hunted until the end of time.

US forces split the atom to get their job done. Their henchmen were untouched and applauded as heros.

I notice how you conveniently avoid the nukes, Ace High. It happened though. The US war heros were nothing but war criminals themselves.

Anyway, I'm repeating myself. A sure sign that I'm getting bored of the thread.



posted on Jun, 28 2009 @ 03:39 AM
link   
reply to post by Ace High
 


There's the problem..
We're talking about two different people.

I thought you called Jews cowwards for not standing up. It is a different case with the military, since as a collective they decided what happens.. I mean Hitler and Himler could of run around with lugers trying to enforce their tyranny.. But they wouldn't have gotten very far.



posted on Jun, 28 2009 @ 03:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by tezzajw
As did the Nazis. They wanted to end the war, stop the suffering....I notice how you conveniently avoid the nukes, Ace High. It happened though. The US war heros were nothing but war criminals themselves.

Anyway, I'm repeating myself. A sure sign that I'm getting bored of the thread.


Bored? LOL


Nazis wanted to stop the war and end the suffering!!! What. Give me one source, anything that ever showed Hitler wanted to stop suffering. Please listen to this, he went after and tried to kill all communists, mentally challenged, gypsies, elderly, and Jewish people. This is historic FACT. Please tell be how this was wanting to end suffering???

The nukes did less damage than the fire bombing and they were atrocities. I have agreed to that repeatedly in this thread.



posted on Jun, 28 2009 @ 03:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Miraj
reply to post by Ace High
 


There's the problem..
We're talking about two different people.

I thought you called Jews cowwards for not standing up. It is a different case with the military, since as a collective they decided what happens.. I mean Hitler and Himler could of run around with lugers trying to enforce their tyranny.. But they wouldn't have gotten very far.


NEVER called Jews cowards. READ what I wrote. I mentioned the irony that the members of Reserve Battalion 101 killed Jews for fear that they would be called cowards when really the most coward like act they could commit was killing unarmed women and children.



posted on Jun, 28 2009 @ 03:52 AM
link   
I never heard cases of Nazi Germany soldiers trialed for firing V-2 into London and killing scores of civilians. And this is understood - there was a war and their tried to hurt infrastructure and industry of their enemy. Killing scores of civilians. I never heard about U-boat crews being sentenced for life for sinking ships with civilians - it was war and they reduced tonnage of enemy fleet. Nazi bombers are not under trial - even though they clearly bobmed civilian targets - but it was the war and their purpose was not civilians but again - infrastructure, industry and such. This is not ok, this is actually very very very bad - but this is what happens during war.
However , assembling unarmed man, old, women and children in stables and then machine-gunning them down is a little different, and if it is what realy happened,as proven in this trial - they should be punished.



posted on Jun, 28 2009 @ 04:18 AM
link   
reply to post by tezzajw
 


Listen man, bombing two cities was horrible. One big difference is that the Japanese were attacking others! The attacked others and were never provoked into attacking. Same with the Nazis. The Japanese nation was not the same then as it is now. The used to hack the heads off of the Chinese and toss them from bayonet to bayonet.



posted on Jun, 28 2009 @ 04:51 AM
link   
These men deserve any justice that will be awarded them in their trials for atrocities committed in the Second World War. So it is over 60 years after the the war, so what, these men should face justice! So they are very old and a couple years in prison is not enough? Any justice given to those men is enough. Thank goodness it happened and they will not die free men.

They need to atone for committing wanton violence and carnage to the countries they occupied. These men were barbarians but at least they will be given a civil trial instead being taken out the back of the courthouse and executed. The treatment they are receiving is more than what they gave the people they terrorized. Some who say that the US are barbarous criminals on the scale of the Nazis should have their heads checked. Of course the US has committed atrocities, but name one country that hasn't committed atrocities? If the US is guilty of said atrocities past and or present, one day justice will come upon it's head. What goes around comes around. However, these men need to answer for their crimes against humanity and so lets put the semantics aside for a moment.



posted on Jun, 28 2009 @ 05:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by tezzajw

Originally posted by Ace High
Years that 6 million Jews never had.

Just like the 200,000 Japanese who were incinerated by the nukes.

Why aren't the Manhattan war criminals hunted down like the Nazi war criminals?


Ya well you may not like it but the fact remains that those 2 A-Bombs saved millions of lives on both sides. 200k is a drop in the bucket compared to the lives lost if we would have had to invade mainland Japan. I would also contend that the threat of Nuclear annihilation saved many more millions of lives by stopping the many conventional wars that would have sprung up in the years after WW2.

To me, a war crime is a few(or many) soldiers killing or torturing people for no other reason than that they can, or they don't like that group of people. Not dropping WMD's on 2 City's of a country that attacked us first, in an effort to end a war that was all but over but still costing way to many lives on both sides.



posted on Jun, 28 2009 @ 06:13 AM
link   
The amount of people killed by the atomic bombs is far less then the amount of people that would have died had we had to launch Operation Olympic - the invasion of mainland Japan. The estimated casualty figures were 1,700,000 dead and wounded for Allied forces and 5,000,000 - 10,000,000 dead Japanese.



posted on Jun, 28 2009 @ 09:02 AM
link   
reply to post by ZeroKnowledge
 


And i've never heard of any of the allies tried with a warcrime. I've never heard of the allied bombers who killed over 600,000 innocent german civillians in indiscriminate bombing of cities as opposed to less then 20000 victims of the V2 bombings. I've never heard of a trial for the Soviets who killed millions and invaded other sovereign nations i.e Latvia, Poland, Ukraine, Finland. I've never heard of a trial for the warcrimes commited against 2 million european women children and old ladies who were raped repeatidly for weeks on end by the americans and the soviets. I've never heard of a trial for the allies who controlled germany after the war who allowed over 1 million innocent civillians to starve because of spite. These atrocious war crimes were never addressed or will be which makes it all the more discusting how they can do this to these old men. The fact that the holocaust is a taboo sub)ect which will get you arrested and heavily fined and sub)ect to mass character assassination if you question it or propose a different opinion )ust goes to show it for what it really is. A war profiteering, out of control propaganda sham.




Reports of widespread torture at the postwar American-run "war crimes" trials at Dachau leaked out, resulting in so many protests that a formal investigation was eventually carried out. A US Army Commission of inquiry consisting of Pennsylvania Judge Edward van Roden and Texas Supreme Court Judge Gordon Simpson officially confirmed the charges of gross abuse. German defendants, they found, were routinely tortured at Dachau with savage beatings, burning matches under fingernails, kicking of testicles, months of solitary confinement, and threats of family reprisals. Low ranking prisoners were assured that their "confessions" would be used only against their former superiors in the dock. Later, though, these hapless men found their own "confessions" used against them when they were tried in turn. High ranking defendants were cynically assured that by "voluntarily" accepting all responsibility themselves they would thereby protect their former subordinates from prosecution.





One Dachau trial court reporter was so outraged at what was happening there in the name of justice that he quit his job. He testified to a US Senate subcommittee that the "most brutal" interrogators had been three German-born Jews. Although operating procedures at the Dachau trials were significantly worse than those used at Nuremberg, they give some idea of the spirit of the "justice" imposed on the vanquished Germans. Virtually all of the US investigators who brought cases before American military courts at Dachau were "Jewish refugees from Germany" who "hated the Germans," recalled Joseph Halow, a US Army court reporter at the Dachau trials in 1947. "Many of the investigators gave vent to their hated by attempting to force confessions from the Germans by treating them brutally," including "severe beatings."





The case of Gustav Petrat, a German who had served as a guard at the Mauthausen, was not unusual. After repeated brutal beatings by US authorities, he broke down and signed a perjured statement. He was also whipped and threatened with immediate shooting. Petrat was prevented from securing exonerating evidence, and even potential defense witnesses were beaten and threatened to keep them from testifying. After a farcical trial by a US military court at Dachau, Petrat was sentenced to death and hanged in late 1948. He was 24 years old.


www.patriot.dk...

Lest we forget these poor victims of war crimes who will never get )ustice for the great in)ustices given to them.

[edit on 28/6/09 by fapython]



posted on Jun, 28 2009 @ 10:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by spellbound
By the same token, I think that these old men, as young men, were brainwashed.


I respectfully agree and disagree with this statement. Yes, they were brainwashed in the same way that Americans were brainwashed to look at anyone who was not white as "sub-human".

These men may have been brainwashed but we all have accountability and individuality. I personally feel they should be put to death for their actions. We all have a choice, and if a person would rather live and let others die, they themselves are no longer living, but rather waiting to die. They may or may not be found guilty for their actions, and the courts should respond accordingly.



posted on Jun, 28 2009 @ 11:07 AM
link   
To me, it's nothing more than some purist vision to try and convince us all that the legal/justice system 'works'.

www.news.com.au
(visit the link for the full news article)

That is exactly the point. The legal/justice system works. Sometimes it works slowly but it does work.



posted on Jun, 28 2009 @ 05:35 PM
link   
Hypocrisy ...

we shouldn't even bother having a thread on this ( no offens,e OP). In a way, it's like our community accepts this crap of seeing old farts going to trial at age 90...
i mean, come on, i can kill 200 guys and get punished 50 years after that ? some people just don"t do their jobs. In a way, nazism survived.
the empire never ended.


[edit on 28/6/09 by MattMulder]



posted on Jun, 28 2009 @ 05:42 PM
link   
They shouldnt be punished. They probably did what they were commanded to do. If you dont listen, it is called insubordination. And knowing the NAZIs, they might have been killed on site, or sentenced to prison in the concentration camps. Insubordination is a seriuos crime to these military people.

Charging some one for something they did at the most,64 years ago, isnt right. How could they have even proved they did it. Why are people STILL hunting down people of the 3 Riech(empire). They should looking for the 4 Riech. The NAZIs of the future. But w/e. If america wants to do that, i cant stop them....

-Shadow



posted on Jun, 28 2009 @ 07:30 PM
link   
reply to post by ShadowLife
 


How would you feel if this happened to your mother or father or sister or any other relatives. Would you not want them hunted down and brought to justice? I for one would.

They have been brought to justice, which I say good. They deserve to be in jail. At least those jewish women men and children, have not been forgotten.



posted on Jun, 28 2009 @ 08:12 PM
link   
"Well.. I have to call B.S. On that one. NO we didn't commit mass murder but...

A Nazi kills a civilian and it's a war crime.


A soldier "accidentally" kills an Iraqi and we call it a casualty.

But in both cases, soldiers killed innocent people.

Still want to continue that logic? "




Yours is a very selective (and neglective) logic.

When Nazi troops herd an entire village, men, women and children, into a town church then start throwing hand grendades through the doors and windows, that's a little different to American troops accidentally killing Iraqis.

The point your missing entirely is that the Nazi's committed such atrocities systematically and relatively regularly.

The 9 Nazi's sentenced this week killed 350 civillians. Can you find me 9 American troops operating in a single combat zone of Iraq who have killed 350 Iraqi civillians in the same premeditated manner? No.



posted on Jun, 28 2009 @ 08:28 PM
link   
As much as I hate the Nazi's, I must disagree with about the trial. The fact is every nation has caused atrocities. It was a war, and since it was a war it should be game.

People also forget that US was allied with Russia. Russia invaded Poland in 1939 and took 8000 officers as prisoners, and were executed. The Russians
who were involved have never been to trial nor has anyone ever tried to
do a thing about it, well except for the Polish families.

What about when the US soldiers massacred men, women and children in South Vietnam? My Lai massacre in which 504 people died ages 1-81.

The list goes on and on. Were the Nazi's right to do it? No, but it was probably ordered from the higher chain of commands.

One more thing to add.

The way I see it, it is always the weaker countries who get the harsher penalties. US would never go after China, or Russia for war crimes. Why should they go after weaker countries when there is bigger fish to fry.



[edit on 28-6-2009 by Equinox99]



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join