Auschwitz guard, 93, charged with 300,000 counts of accessory to murder

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: kosmicjack

and not prosecuting him sends the message that its ok to participate in the death's of hundreds of thousands of people

Here's a problem, though... every presently standing government today has sedition laws and willfully disobeying a superior officer in their military codes of law. Many of these countries, including the USA, considers both to be punishable by death. That fact does NOT send the message that it would have been "ok" for any of these lower ranking Nazi guards at the concentration camps to have refused their orders. Don't get me wrong, I'm not in any way advocating for what those guards did, but I'm also not of the opinion that it is at all fair to put any man in a situation where he has NO action which he can take that will not lead to him being deemed guilty of major offense. That is exactly where most of these guards found themselves.

In the decades between the war and the fall of the Berlin Wall, it seemed like Germany had a pretty reasonable strategy when dealing with former Nazis. The first question they sought answers for, before even bringing anything to a trial, was "What did this soldier do?" For the majority of the guards and infantrymen rounded up in that era, the answer was that they followed orders as soldiers are demanded to do, derived no pleasure from it, and possessed no distinct or substantive qualities that indicated they were serving in a position where their opinions or attitudes meant jack squat to what happened during the Holocaust. It seems like, in the years since the wall came down, Germany has changed and now recoils in horror and hate at the suggestion of anyone who had any connection whatsoever to Nazi Germany.

We even saw this in regards to Pope Ratzinger 9 years back... a lot of the early discussion amongst the European and even American detractors revolved around the fact that he had been forcibly conscripted into the Hitler Youth at the age of 14. I was honestly not really sure exactly what those who brought that up in an accusatory manner were thinking, and I sort of feel the same way about a lot of these elderly former guards today. Is it at all reasonable or just to expect a man to choose their own death over following the orders of their nation's military in time of war? We also know that the Nazi officers were fond of killing dissenter's wives, children, parents, siblings, etc... Sorry, but I have to question the sincerity of anyone who would not place the lives and safety of their own family above all other things in the world.

originally posted by: burdman30ott6

Here's a problem, though... every presently standing government today has sedition laws and willfully disobeying a superior officer in their military codes of law. Many of these countries, including the USA, considers both to be punishable by death. That fact does NOT send the message that it would have been "ok" for any of these lower ranking Nazi guards at the concentration camps to have refused their orders. Don't get me wrong, I'm not in any way advocating for what those guards did, but I'm also not of the opinion that it is at all fair to put any man in a situation where he has NO action which he can take that will not lead to him being deemed guilty of major offense. That is exactly where most of these guards found themselves.

Speaking for the US any member can refuse an order if the order is illegal. Also, as I said a person had to meet criteria for joining the SS and knew what was occurring at the hands of the SS.

Sitting back and watching can make a person as guilty as those actively engaged. The simple fact that the bulk of those executed were civilians would have also been a red flag.

I would rather sacrifice my life by refusing those types of orders rather than becoming a coward and saving my life at the expense of someone else's.

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
In the decades between the war and the fall of the Berlin Wall, it seemed like Germany had a pretty reasonable strategy when dealing with former Nazis. The first question they sought answers for, before even bringing anything to a trial, was "What did this soldier do?" For the majority of the guards and infantrymen rounded up in that era, the answer was that they followed orders as soldiers are demanded to do, derived no pleasure from it, and possessed no distinct or substantive qualities that indicated they were serving in a position where their opinions or attitudes meant jack squat to what happened during the Holocaust. It seems like, in the years since the wall came down, Germany has changed and now recoils in horror and hate at the suggestion of anyone who had any connection whatsoever to Nazi Germany.

I was only following orders was invoked many times during the Nirenberg trials and just like today that excuse failed back then. Just as that excuse failed during the court-martial for the my-lai massacre.

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
We even saw this in regards to Pope Ratzinger 9 years back... a lot of the early discussion amongst the European and even American detractors revolved around the fact that he had been forcibly conscripted into the Hitler Youth at the age of 14. I was honestly not really sure exactly what those who brought that up in an accusatory manner were thinking, and I sort of feel the same way about a lot of these elderly former guards today. Is it at all reasonable or just to expect a man to choose their own death over following the orders of their nation's military in time of war? We also know that the Nazi officers were fond of killing dissenter's wives, children, parents, siblings, etc... Sorry, but I have to question the sincerity of anyone who would not place the lives and safety of their own family above all other things in the world.

The Hitler youth members were, to my knowledge from research, never charged / tried for their actions. The reason given was their age made it difficult to actually prove they understood the gravity of those actions.

All the more reason to take a stand at the outset rather than waiting until it comes knocking on your door in the middle of the night.

Those people who lost loved ones in the camps are entitled to see those individuals be brought to justice.

Finally a charge is just that - a charge.

It still must be proven in a court of law that the individual in question is guilty. There are cases where courts have thrown out charges due to lack of evidence etc.

The other point to consider is who is being charged. The prosecutions are against SS member and not Wehrmacht. Granted the Wehrmacht was accused of war crimes however those crimes were waging war of aggression and violations of the Geneva convention for executing soldiers and not for the systematic slaughter of civilians.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Launching a military attack from the middle of populated civilian areas with the intent on creating civilian casualties from the response is also a war crime.

So just because Hamas commits a war crime Israel should get a free ride on the war crime they commit?

The Geneva convention allows for reprisal if one side violates it.

Yes it does and as a hostile occupier of Palestine Israel cannot claim that right only the Palestinians can make that claim.

Maybe if Hamas would drop their "wipe Israel off the face of the Earth" from their charter peace might come.

Maybe if the Likud party were to drop "all of this land belongs to us" from their charter then maybe peace will come.

Maybe if people went after both sides instead of just concentrating on Israel for what ever their reasoning things might improve.

Right now the ICC is trying to get both the leaders of Israel and the leaders of Hamas and put them on trial for the crimes they have committed.

Absent that Hamas will murder from the middle of population centers knowing Israel will respond. Its not Israel killing civilians in Gaza, its Hamas.

Quite possibly the most ignorant statement you could have made. The people that launch the bombs that kills the people are always at fault trying to blame the victim is pretty low.

But who cares about facts right?

It sure seems like you don't.

originally posted by: buster2010
So just because Hamas commits a war crime Israel should get a free ride on the war crime they commit?

Not at all.. Your post only stated Israel. I was pointing out that its occurring on both sides.

originally posted by: buster2010
Yes it does and as a hostile occupier of Palestine Israel cannot claim that right only the Palestinians can make that claim.

Actually no they cant considering they are not signatory to the Geneva convention. Secondly Israel has a right to respond, just as you argue Hamas does.

originally posted by: buster2010
Maybe if the Likud party were to drop "all of this land belongs to us" from their charter then maybe peace will come.

that happens when over the course of decades you have Arab countries trying to invade Israel and getting their asses handed to them in the process resulting in loss of territory. You dont get to attack / invade a country and then bitch about losing territory.

originally posted by: buster2010
Right now the ICC is trying to get both the leaders of Israel and the leaders of Hamas and put them on trial for the crimes they have committed.

Israel has already stated they would welcome the ICC process.

originally posted by: buster2010
Quite possibly the most ignorant statement you could have made. The people that launch the bombs that kills the people are always at fault trying to blame the victim is pretty low.

When Hamas launches rockets into Israel from populated areas they are doing it intentionally. They know Israel will respond and it allows Hamas to run up the body count. The problem is they want to blame Israel for all those deaths when in reality Hamas are the ones who killed civilians by engaging in populated areas.

originally posted by: buster2010
It sure seems like you don't.

I can lob the same comment back at you but I wont. I get tired of the bs attacks. Your posts mentioned nothing about Hamas's actions. You only singled Israel out which to me comes across as you saying only Israel is to blame.


When Hamas stops using the Palestinians to further their goal for Israel maybe peace can occur. The Palestinians have been getting screwed over by both sides and Hamas does not care. So long as Israel responds to Hamas attacks, resulting in civilian deaths, Hamas will use it as propaganda.

Interestingly enough the number of charges is inconsistent. Some media reports 300k and others report 170k. However the constant part is the fact the charges are for accessory to murder and not murder.