World War 2 crime trials too light. where is justice??

I just finished watching history channel on World War 2 and left me the feeling that justice isn't properly served. It appears that everybody just wanted to get it over with even if it meant lighter sentences. I even heard that the average whermacht soldier got lighter sentences than someone caught with possession of cocaine. Something tells me that is not right.

I don't understand why the Whermacht wasn't given capital punishment. There where at least several million of them and ninety percent of them are unpunished.

Wasn't the Wehrmacht made of volunteers who wanted revenge against the world? Evidence says that that is considered consent right? The Whermacht volunteer would at this point joined has consented that he wants to maime, rape and murder civilians and children for the sake of entertainment purposes and wants to be known to the world as a mass murderer because according to the psychotic scumbag of a dogmacht volunteer, its fun, according to this sonofab**h that is.

I am angry why? because the footages make the whermacht look so evil. They are always smiling in the camera. When they are underseige, they smile. When they are droping like flies, they smile. Lost an arm or leg? they still smile. The footages seem to tell me as if the whermacht are enjoying every moment of of the war, alot of pictures make them so look so sinister. That is what makes me angry. If there is a living tangable example of a hell-spawned daemon than it would be a whermacht slime-bag. The only good whermacht is a dead whermacht. Sure the majority are dead but they are nowhere near being punished as harsh as the Waffen SS for example. Whermacht and Waffen SS are just as evil, they both killed and ate children on purpose for fun.

Well the bottom line is. Do you believe that alot of the trials where not taken seriously enough?? Sorry if I offended some of you, I personally know people who are both holocaust survivors as well as those who are relatives of those who got KIA during WWII.

What the alliance did was to punish the head honchos of the third reich such as the gestapo, waffen ss and nazi politicians. What was missed was the facts the its the little insects like the whermacht who does all the killing enthusiastically and with a passion. Those who haven't died of age yet are probably bragging about how if they are given another life they will probably go kill and eat people again for fun the moment they get a chance.

Understand that through the whole post, I am not discriminating as that is not the goal. Sorry if I offended anyone. I am frustrated only at the whermacht who is still alive. Alot of them are retired in their cottages when they should be jailed and atoning their sins by generously giving their rear to the jail lord named bubba.

I mean I watched this documentary the other day where this former whermacht was being interviewed on history channel. This guy killed like 20 guys, including civilians. Talking with a big smile on his face as if he has enjoyed his murders. I was like WTF? why is he not punished then?
outragous. I say we should punish the still alive whermacht before they die. They need to feel the pain the alliance has endured.

I hope I didn't pass the line today. I really needed to vent today's stress somehow. I am open to corrections btw.

Quote:

---

I even heard that the average whermacht soldier got lighter sentences than someone caught with possession of cocaine. Something tells me that is not right.

---

I didn't know the soldiers were punished at all. Punishing everyday soldiers for genocide is seriously smurfed up, in my books.

Quote:

---

I don't understand why the Whermacht wasn't given capital punishment. There where at least several million of them and ninety percent of them are unpunished.

---

Wait, are you saying we should have executed every Nazi soldier? In otherwords, the punishment for genocide is genocide?

Quote:

---

The Whermacht volunteer would at this point joined has consented that he wants to maime, rape and murder civilians and children for the sake of entertainment purposes and wants to be known to the world as a mass murderer because according to the psychotic scumbag of a dogmacht volunteer, its fun, according to this sonofab**h that is.

---

For the sake of entertainment, and to be known as a mass murderer, because it's fun? Seriously, could the illogic in this statement be any more blaringly obvious? Nobody thinks like that. Nobody. Not you, or I, or Hitler, or the Wermacht soldiers. Nobody.

Quote:

---

I am angry why? because the footages make the whermacht look so evil. They are always smiling in the camera. When they are underseige, they smile. When they are droping like flies, they smile. Lost an arm or leg? they still smile. The footages seem to tell me as if the whermacht are enjoying every moment of of the war, alot of pictures make them so look so sinister. That is what makes me angry.

---

You must realizes that this does not represent every Wermacht soldier (or the majority). Do you seriously believe that the History channel is going to portray Nazi soldiers as human? No, they are going to be portrayed as badly as possible, and then the ratings will go up.

Quote:

---

What the alliance did was to punish the head honchos of the third reich such as the gestapo, waffen ss and nazi politicians. What was missed was the facts the its the little insects like the whermacht who does all the killing enthusiastically and with a passion. Those who haven't died of age yet are probably bragging about how if they are given another life they will probably go kill and eat people again for fun the moment they get a chance.

---

And that's what they should have done. You can't punish MILLIONS of people. It's impossible. Also, in regards to the latter half of this statement, it's simply untrue. People don't think like this.

The bottom line is that you're hatred (justified hatred) of Naziism has made you inable to think clearly on this subject. You think with you're hate, and it gets you nowhere.

Personally, I don't believe in revenge, so the idea that we should go out and punish the remaining Wermacht members is, well, morally bankrupt, at best.

I see where you're coming from with this, and in a way I see what you're talking about, but I don't think the way you do at all.

After World War 1 was over the Allied countries punished Germany severely and in a bizarre turn of events that's exactly why World War 2 started. They believed they were being treated unfairly, and Hitler came to power and the rest is history.

Had the Allies gone in and punished "every single soldier" after WWII was over it would have wasted millions of dollars and I believe that had we given harsher punishment, we would most likely have started another war a little ways down the road.
They lost the war and were embarassed in front of the whole world, that's punishment enough in my eyes.

WEll in a way yes but in a way no.It wasn't and it was the first time that the world actually came together and cracked on war crimes literally as a world.It was a first time for it and it actually worked.Most of the SS Guards were sentenced to death. A lot escaped to Argentina.But the nation of Israel cracked down on that and hunted them down in Argentina and did a good job at it.

Germany got screwed over in WW1 because they had no one of supporting themselves and they were forced into debt they couldn't pay off towards Britain and france thus someone like hitler got into power and WW2 happened.
The only thing I had a problem with was how the USA handled Japan.They did a lot of good things such as lowing there military power.Changing there economy into a free enterprise.But they never made Japan as a whole apologize to CHina for the war crimes they did.Japan can't even admit to it today.Can't even put it in a history book.Germany is the same way witht he holocaust.They can't put that into there school's history books.Not because no one is stopping them but because they are tooo ashamed.This is were I think USA society is really a bit better.In the fact that we admit to our wrong doings.TO the fact that we can ptu the most embarrassing and mos thorrible parts of our history in a history book.Such as slavery the slave trade and how so many people died in that that they couldn't count the deaths.To the monopolies and too our large gap between rich and poor during the late 19th century.And our Jim Crow Laws....but that stuff is another topic.

The topic here is that WW2 trials were too light.Phew.Seriously they weren't.Because the judges didn't allow "I was just following orders." to be an excuse.Most dealt with some serious jail time or death penalty.They didn't crack down on Russia and how they did a lot of war crimes.Such as the 200,000 German POWs going into Moscow and only 2,000 of them coming out alive.

Another thread which has enough misinformation to make me sad. You are suffering from Victors Justice Syndrome. The Wehrmacht were the German Armed Forces, simple soldiers, sailors & Airmen.
Whilst the regime that controlled their actions was inhernantly wrong, their actions as soldiers on the Western Front was no better or worse than than the Allied soldiers. WWII is something I've studied going on 10 years and I've read enough from both sides of the fence to make REASONABLE assessment. Any Allied soldier who fought on the Western Front would say exactly the same as I am saying right now, I've seen interviews & spoke to a few. The Eastern Front is a different matter altogether. As neither German nor Russia were signatories or the Geneva Convention, neither side worried too much about crimes. There were massacres on a major level by both & by the end the Germans were fighting for their lives as the Soviets had been in 1941/42. Around 2,8 million Soviet POWs died in captivity and as for German soldiers in Soviet captiovity, 8 out of 10 died in the Gulags. Western Allied Soldiers in camps faired a whole lot better & were, by in large, treated in line with the rules laid out at Geneva.
There were several War Crimes committed by Wehrmacht units, this is true, likewise there were several committed by the Allies...but we don't hear so much of them. The bombing of Dresden for example, whilst not 'officially' classed as a War Crime, it is classed by many as a major sore point, circa 35,000 people were killed for no military purpose, the only factories it had produced china, cups & saucers & cigarettes. More importantly, there were no military instilations at all. Another major one happened in Italy when the US rounded around 70 Italian & German soldiers in a cave & killed them.
I am not trying to avoid the crimes on the German side whatsoever, they were there & they were not ignored, history has recorded them for all to see & a google will fill you in.
It's needed to be remembered the Wehrmacht were not Nazi's or SS, it was illegal for a German soldier to join either until late in the war, even then most never. Most ordinary German's were lied to, dragged in & spat out.
In regards to the International Military Tribunials, I don't believe for one second that they were 'fair'. This is not to say the German's on 'got off lightly', a lot were executed & rightly so, but a large number weren't for on reason, they were useful to have around, the scientists, engineers, military advisors etc, both the West & East kept these men, who deserved their due punishment, to progress their OWN mascinations.
There were several instances where the IMT's sentences were too harsh. One example is Generaloberst Alfred Jodl, Chief of Staff to OKW (Armed Forces High Command) who's sentence of death was posthumously pardoned when the West broke from the USSR.
While I wholeheartedly agree that the Nazi regime was an evil organisation to it's very core & several weak or twisted minded Wehrmacht officers were drawn in, I won't sit here & listen to semi-educated diatribes about how millions of normal Wehrmacht soldiers and Officers should have got harsher sentences from the same nations that kept the brains behind the scenes alive to further their own world controling gains.

if you want to punish all war criminals, wipe out the american and british troops in iraq. participation in an illegal war is a war crime as much as genocide. obyeing orders is not an excuse.

"Whermacht and Waffen SS are just as evil, they both killed and ate children on purpose for fun." ate children? where the hell did you hear this? is this about stalingrad? or is it just the usual anti-german rubbish? if it's about stalingrad then that most certainly was not for fun. germans did not go round eating kids as part of their sunday roast. i have no idea were you got that idea from but it is wrong, horrible and totally undefendable.

the german army fought for their country. the vast majority of them were actually conscripted. they di not fight for revenge. they fought because they were told to. becauase if they ddin't either their commander or an american soldier was going to shoot them. they fought for the same reason why american soldiers fought. they believed what they were doing was right. for the good of germany and the world. they didn't fight because they were totally evil. they fought because at the time they had to. there were very little volunteers.

why aren't we punishing every american soldier that has every killed another human being? because he's not german? that is not justice.

the germans and allies fought for differing reasons in the same war with the same hardships. you cannot execute people for doing their duty. war involves killing people.

no ordinary german soldier saw the war as entertainment as you so hatefully put. they saw it as war. people had to die. it ws not fun or cool. it was a nasty horrible business. but there were no two ways about it. i doubt any german airforce man fought "yeah today i'm gonna kill some more civillians today, it will be cool to watch them all die i like that kinda that it looks all pretty when they scream" they were just as desperate to get their (50 missions was it) done so they could go home and get away from the front line. noone wanted to fight. noone wanted to be in stalingrad. noone wanted to be in the bulge, noone wanted to be in normandy. but they were. they did their duty, maybe because they were conscripted, maybe because they thought it was right and were defending their country. but noone fights a war instead of watching tv on a saturday afternnon.

i started a very heated debate in this forum regarding war heros' many people came to the conclusion that all soldiers are war heros (i still disagree). so in fact the concensus around here seems to be that instwad of being 70 year old men who you seem intent on hanging for fighting a war. they are in fact heros who were prepared to die for their country. they were prepared in the same way every other soldier, has been, is, and will be. they were soldiers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cloud No.9

if you want to punish all war criminals, wipe out the american and british troops in iraq. participation in an illegal war is a war crime as much as genocide. obyeing orders is not an excuse.

"Whermacht and Waffen SS are just as evil, they both killed and ate children on purpose for fun." ate children? where the hell did you hear this? is this about stalingrad? or is it just the usual anti-german rubbish? if it's about stalingrad then that most certainly was not for fun. germans did not go round eating kids as part of their sunday roast. i have no idea were you got that idea from but it is wrong, horrible and totally undefendable.

the german army fought for their country. the vast majority of them were actually conscripted. they di not fight for revenge. they fought because they were told to. becauase if they ddin't either their commander or an american soldier was going to shoot them. they fought for the same reason why american soldiers fought. they believed what they were doing was right. for the good of germany and the world. they didn't fight because they were totally evil. they fought because at the time they had to. there were very little volunteers.

why aren't we punishing every american soldier that has every killed another human being? because he's not german? that is not justice.

the germans and allies fought for differing reasons in the same war with the same hardships. you cannot execute people for doing their duty. war involves killing people.

no ordinary german soldier saw the war as entertainment as you so hatefully put. they saw it as war. people had to die. it ws not fun or cool. it was a nasty horrible business. but there were no two ways about it. i doubt any german airforce man fought "yeah today i'm gonna kill some more civillians today, it will be cool to watch them all die i like that kinda that it looks all pretty when they scream" they were just as desperate to get their (50 missions was it) done so they could go home and get away from the front line. noone wanted to fight. noone wanted to be in stalingrad. noone wanted to be in the bulge, noone wanted to be in normandy. but they were. they did their duty, maybe because they were conscripted, maybe because they thought it was right and were defending their country. but noone fights a war instead of watching tv on a saturday afternnon.

i started a very heated debate in this forum regarding war heros' many people came to the conclusion that all soldiers are war heros (i still disagree). so in fact the concensus around here seems to be that instwad of being 70 year old men who you seem intent on hanging for fighting a war. they are in fact heros who were prepared to die for their country. they were prepared in the same way every other soldier, has been, is, and will be. they were soldiers.

---

The SS guard actually got what they deserved they were a bunch of criminals before hitler came into power.

After the Nuremberg tribunals, most of the surviving nazi leaders were sentenced to lengthy jail terms, or were hanged. They were the ones ultimately responsible for the horrors.

Individual soldiers who actively participated in genocide were also punished, when they could be found, but the overwhelming majority of German troops were simply fighting for their country as all soldiers do. You can't punish the entire army of a nation just because they happened to lose the war. "Victor's Justice" is generally frowned upon in modern times.

Blaming - and punishing - the entire German military or populace would've been excessive and unreasonable.

The german troops did as they were told as would any military group. Like Big D said the leaders, the puppeters, were punished and they are the only ones that should be punished if anyone.

Some of my information came from the book titled "Hitler's willing executioners" I forgot the authors name but you can search it on the net. Do you believed it might be biased?? The author seems highly convinced that the whermacht acted on free will when it came to killing civilians.

On the other hand I haven't found any sources that portray the whermacht as humans. Alot of authors fear that sympathy for the axis will be viewed as anti-semitic behaviour. When I try to get sources from the axis side, I end up with unreliable sources made by holocaust deniers which in turn only fuels my rage even more.

Also its hard to say its too extreme and not be labeled as anti-semetic.

Both Churchill and Stalin suggested summarily executing major nazi figures. This would've resulted in approximately 10,000 being taken outside and shot. With the Nuremberg Tribunal, the idea was to put on trial and punish the key leaders.

Many smaller tribunals and domestic courts convicted others who had taken part in the crimes, too.

After the war Stalin wanted to keep the parts of Poland it had annexed in 1939. In 1945 it was Churchill that suggested, to appease the Poles, large areas of Germany should be granted to Poland. Silesia, East Prussia, West Prussia & Thorn were all given to Poland, about hundreds of thousands of Germans were forced to leave or die and fled west. We all know what part the German's played in the holocaust, we still don't know exactly the full extent of Stalin's genocide.
While we all know & rightly despise the brutal regime of Nazi Germany, it's important not to get sucked in to believing everything on the Allied side was pure & right. Lastly, 'Wehrmacht officers eating human's for fun'....what on EARTH did you read that made you come up with that?

Actually I don't think the Russians should be blamed for what they did to the whermacht. Besides its only a fraction of what the whermacht did to the Russians. The country who suffered the most seems to be hated the most and I don't know why. If anything blame the soviet government not the average citizen.

It was the whermacht who attacked them first. The whermacht's priority was to kill as many unarmed civilians as possible as to destroy the morale of the red army. The red army was only punishing the whermacht for killing their children.

The whermacht basically declared war against civilians, not the military. A majority of the whermacht missions involve going into house xy and killing the wife and kids of mr. A and Mr.B and then the whermacht compete against each other to see who can kill the most and then go home and excitedly brag about how much more they killed than their comorades. Hospitals, nursing homes and retirement buildings where the favorite targets of the whermacht. The whermacht motto was "civilians first then military". Basically the whermacht always try to kill all the civilians before confronting any armed force. Most of their tactics involve evading armed forces and go directly towards hospitals, schools, retirement centers, clinics and nursing homes. The most favorite target of the whermacht.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mecharmor25

Actually I don't think the Russians should be blamed for what they did to the whermacht. Besides its only a fraction of what the whermacht did to the Russians. The country who suffered the most seems to be hated the most and I don't know why. If anything blame the soviet government not the average citizen.

---

Whilst that is a comfortable view in theory, it's not strictly true. Stalin killed more Russians than Hitler did. Who do you think committed the murders? The suffering on both sides was about the same in the end, I'll get on to 'who started it' later.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mecharmor25

It was the whermacht who attacked them first. The whermacht's priority was to kill as many unarmed civilians as possible as to destroy the morale of the red army. The red army was only punishing the whermacht for killing their children.

---

Despite the fact that the Red Army invaded the Baltic Free States & annexed them in 1939, the Red Army invaded Poland the same time Germany did. They BOTH wanted to annex that nation & shared the spoils at the end of Setember. They even met for publicity shots. in November 1939 the USSR then invade Finland to taker control of the Karelina region & got a very blood nose. The Soviets had the same imperialistic asperations Germany did. Not only that but Stalin's purges & cleansing of his populous left more dead than Hitler's mad regime.
Whilst I agree, the average Russian suffered greatly from both the German's AND the Commissars, the Red Army is FAR from innocent. They 'punished' not only Wehrmacht soldiers but Russian civilians, Ukrainians, Latvians, Finnish, etc etc. The vast majority of these summary executions were non-military. Revenge for the death odf women & children by killing women and children? Please, educate yourself, even in theory that's ridiculous.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mecharmor25

The whermacht basically declared war against civilians, not the military. A majority of the whermacht missions involve going into house xy and killing the wife and kids of mr. A and Mr.B and then the whermacht compete against each other to see who can kill the most and then go home and excitedly brag about how much more they killed than their comorades. Hospitals, nursing homes and retirement buildings where the favorite targets of the whermacht. The whermacht motto was "civilians first then military". Basically the whermacht always try to kill all the civilians before confronting any armed force. Most of their tactics involve evading armed forces and go directly towards hospitals, schools, retirement centers, clinics and nursing homes. The most favorite target of the whermacht.

---

You are so wrong here it's almost hysterical but I'll try to give you an answer this whole paragraph doesn't really deserve.
The Wehrmacht never 'declared war on civilians' where on earth are your sources for this madness? In the East it was, for want of a better word, a 'free for all', on the West civilians of France, Greece, Low Countries etc were treated, by in large, with a great deal of respect & freedom of movement (within reason). The Wehrmacht's motto was NEVER 'civilians first then military' stop stating this madness as if it was fact. You clearly have little to no education on this subject, please stop TRYING to come across like you do by making stuff up, it won't rub, I know my stuff & will call you on every fictional statement you make to fill in the gaps on your statements. The last bit about avoiding Army targets is the single most insane statement I've seen here. Please, if you insist on posting on a subject, research it before you post. You are coming across very foolish here.

Okay I found the book I was talking about earlier. Some of the ideas I got came from here. Just for those who are curious.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg...glance&s=books

Hitler's Willing Executioners : Ordinary Germans and the Holocaust
by DANIEL JONAH GOLDHAGEN

I am familiar with the book and it's filled with as much mis-informtion & propaganda as Revisionist books of the opposite end of the spectrum. Do NOT base your views on that garbage. Open your mind.

the book has a certain amount of truth in it. yes alot of germans helped with the holocaust. the guy who desgined the gas chambers, the ovens, the guys who created zyklon b in the factories, the train drivers, engineers, timetablers, the men who built the autobahn.

but what's the point in arguening over it? first of all that wsn't the wermacht anyway so your ideas about the wermacht were not influenced by that.

am i going to ask for the death of the men who built the cages for camp x-ray?

they did what was asked for them.

being a soldier isn't about morals, it isn't about politics, it isn't about what you believe in. it is about following orders. the politics which alter your orders don't matter. what the order is doesn't matter. it is an order from your country so you obey it. the same was true in nazi germeny. but the idea was enlarged for the rest of the population. that is what authotarian is.

ps. the wermacht actually did alot more of the holocaust than they were blamed for. hitler thought it was a waste of his best soldiers (the ss) to be used for merely rounding up the untermench. they were more needed in russia (where the ss actually did alot of rounding up). but for the most part the holocaust was done by the lower ranks of the german army as it was not deemed worthwhile for the higher ranks.

Actually you're wrong about the SS. Hitler's 'best soldiers' as you call them were the Waffen-SS, a fighting machine so ruthless it stiked fear into it's opponents.
The men who guarded the camps were NOT these soldiers, or Wehrmacht soldiers, they were the general SS or Allgemeine SS. The Allgemeine SS were not a military organisation but a paramilitary organisation made up mostly of reject from both the Wehrmacht & Waffen SS and aging men & women.
The groups in the East that rounded up the resistance & jewish peoples of the USSR were Einstatzgruppen, literally translated, Operations Groups of the Allgemeine SS & Polizei.
Whilst I agree there were units of the Wehrmacht that committed atrocities it was certainly not organised by OKW. Army officers had to sign away certain papers to grant Einsatzgruppen access but they did not participate in large numbers.
The fact is, nearly every General opposed this, from Blaskowitz to von Kleist, from Rommel to v. Manstein. This is why German officers switched theatres with amazing frequency.
German officers of WWII were of the old Prussian style of leadership, they despised politics, most despised Hitler & his cronies but their anally retentive Army morals made them despise treachory, as they seen it, even more. This was their flaw. There were a great many who protested & a great many sacked, the ones who went too far were sent to camps themselves, or executed. Generaloberst Franz Halder, the Army Chief of Staff from 1938-42 was sent to a camp for disagreeing with Hitler. Guderian, the inventor of Blitzkrieg, was sacked in 1942 fort his opposition to the conduct of war on the east. Generalfeldmarschall v. Kleist & Generaloberst Blaskowitz were too sacked for their strong & vocal opposition against the treatment of Eastern natives.
It is a common misconception that if a German officer was not involved in the July '44 Bomb Plot, he was pro war & pro Hitler. This is simply not true, the vast majority despised him but simply thought the bomb plot was not the right way to do things.
Wehrmacht officers had a crisis of morals which Hitler played to them max.

tis true of the generals. i know the on in charge of normanday on d-day was in trouble and when asked if he wanted to ask hitler for reinforcemnets replited "i will not ask anything from that jumped up little coporal"

sorry about the wermacht thing. that part of my education 5 years old now. kinda getting ruisty.

Cuchulainn, just out of curiosity, do you hate the allied nations? Since your profile points that you are from Ireland, I take that you might be bitter about the British occupation of Ireland? On the other hand it is also the US who funded the British to keep the English Vs. IRA conflict going as long as possible. I am asking because you sounded angry about the alliance. I just want to get a neutral standpoint so I believe it is a good idea to understand who I am talking with.

Why on earth are you taking 'bitterness' from anything I say? I am speaking about a subject I know a lot about while taking an objective standpoint, something people on the victors side see to struggle to do. I have pointed out points people may not know, while recognising the Nazi regimes obvious abhorant history. I have mentioned little about British or American war crimes and zero about Ireland. This has nothing to do with anything. Has it got this bad that someone cannot point out glitches in the sanctimonious standpoint of the victors without the paranoia of it's citizens thinking I have a hidden agenda somewhere? If you must know, I firmly believe that Nazi Germany was rightly taken down, I also believe, while this was needed, some Allied nations motives were not pure, namely the USSR. Stalinism was not Communism, they are two seperate entities, so this isnt anti-Communist either. I'd answer further, but I think you need to ask yourself some questions before you ask me any further where I stand.

PS: Americans funded us too you know.

You want to talk about the Whermacht and how soldiers should be punished? What about Stalin's armies? What about the Turks and what they did to the Armenians? What about the Serbian forces under Milosevic? Should all of those soldiers be killed?

You're an eighteen year old kid, fresh from home and in the army for the first time. You go someplace, doesn't matter where or when or why, and your superior officer tells you to shoot a man/woman/baby. You shoot them or your head gets blown off. Which do you think you'll choose? We'd all love to say we'd die before committing an atrocity like that, but you'd be suprised how far the survival instinct goes.

I'm not saying that the soldiers of the Whermacht are guiltless, far from it. But you can't dehumanize a soldier because s/he did something awful under orders. That's just being a soldier. It doesn't mean s/he liked it, and it doesn't mean s/he has no remorse.

Grouping the Whermacht as a bunch of bloodthirsty, inhuman ghouls is just like grouping people based along race, religion or any other thing that they can't really control. And yeah, soldiers can control their actions, but when the penalty is your life, can you really say you'd do any different?

Also, even if the soldiers had no remorse, should they be punished when it wasn;t thier decision?

If a childs father tells his child to steal, and that child does it, enjoys it, and doesn't think twice about it afterwards, who is to blame? Who should be punished? Not the child.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nik0tine

Also, even if the soldiers had no remorse, should they be punished when it wasn;t thier decision?

If a childs father tells his child to steal, and that child does it, enjoys it, and doesn't think twice about it afterwards, who is to blame? Who should be punished? Not the child.

---

Both should be punished, else the child may never learn that stealing is wrong. Of course the child's punishment would be the proverbial slap on the wrist, wheras the father would be punished with a full sentence for whatever he had stolen.


As for the regular soldier bit. It was war, happens. You can't genocide the enemy for the decisions of a few. And the lack of remorse for a few.

Quote:

---

their actions as soldiers on the Western Front was no better or worse than than the Allied soldiers.

---

I don't recall hearing about Allied soldiers conducting genocide on a massive scale, never seen before in history, and hopefully never to be seen again.

Yes, troops fighting and losing should not be punished simply for fighting. However... there's fighting, and there's fighting. Axis soldiers (not just Germans, by the way, but many others) did not fight for a 'reasonable' cause, like gaining terrian, resources, or for somehow bettering the conditions of their country and people... they fought for the complete annihiliation of their opponents, they fought to further the effort of genocide, they fought for absolute and ultimate evil, for complete domination and control. It's problematic to have mercy for someone with that kind of intentions.

Morally, they should've all perished. However... it cannot be done, neither practically, nor morally on our side. We are not murderers like they are. We got the 'big sharks', for the symbolism of it, and left the others for their courrput, hideous existence as losers of a rediclously evil attempt.

the germans actually did not conduct a genocide on the western front. they were too bus fighting a war. the even treat american jewish POWs equally. the americans had some fun tricks for POWs. the would have them sleep in a field. no tents. sorrounded in barbed wire and goven shovels to create their own sleeping holes. and sometimes at night a fun game was to fire machine gun fire about 6 foot in the air over their heads. the germans had similar such fun.

but a genocide was not commited against the fighting forces (except russia)

germany fought for gaining resources as much as anything else. living space. to be self sufficient. they believed that wiping out the jews would allow it to be less corrupt and cleaner. and wiping out the slavs gave alot of spare room.

the normal german soldier did not fight for politics, genocide, invasion, evil. he fought for one thing, his country.

if a war crime was committed it should be punished. but an innocent soldier cannot be punished merely for figthing. that is his job. no matter for what reason he fights. if he obeys the rules of war he is an innocent man. a mans views are not what should be judged in a war. merely the way in which he fights for them.

regarding war crimes though....... it comes back to that age old problem. is a man responsible for what he was ordered to do?. at nuremburg it was decided that he was. but was that a mistake?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by War Angel

Quote:

---

their actions as soldiers on the Western Front was no better or worse than than the Allied soldiers.

---

I don't recall hearing about Allied soldiers conducting genocide on a massive scale, never seen before in history, and hopefully never to be seen again.

---

I'm talking about the Wehrmacht, German Armed Forces, NOT the SS, read what I type next time, properly, before you reply & make yourself look foolish. Also please research a subject before you decide to get involved.

Quote:

---

they even treated american jewish POWs equally.

---

Yes, they killed them. Also, many times, the Jewishness of an American soldier was un-known to them.

Quote:

---

read what I type next time, properly, before you reply & make yourself look foolish.

---

This applies to you, actually. I was talking about ALLIED soldiers did NOT commit genocide, while AXIS soldiers DID commit genocide. Get it? Also, about this -

Quote:

---

Also please research a subject before you decide to get involved.

---

is something I can only adress with a dismissing smile. You don't have a clue who you're talking to, obviously.

Quote:

---

innocent soldier

---

The terms 'innocent' and 'soldier' cannot be used together. A soldier is a trained killer, or one that supports the killing. There is no innocence in that.

Quote:

---

cannot be punished merely for figthing.

---

Fighting, no. He was fought against as well. However, for the Hell-wrought destruction Axis soldiers have brought upon this Earth... they most certainly can, and should be punished. Many of them have.

Quote:

---

the normal german soldier did not fight for politics, genocide, invasion, evil. he fought for one thing, his country.

---

Exactly. His country was the embodiment (if you could call it that) of evil and genocide. Fighting along-side or for Germany was fighting for the mass-killing of millions of innocents, and fighting for the annihiliation of the free world.

Quote:

---

is a man responsible for what he was ordered to do?

---

Most certainly. A man is ALWAYS responsible for what he does. Here, it is ILLEGAL to obey immoral commands, like if your commander tells you to kill a kid (who is not posing an immediate threat) and you do it, you'll get jailed for life, as will your commander. Saying 'I was ordered to' when regarding to illegal orders relieves you of no guilt or responsibility.

Cute reply, enough to full the casual observer. I on the other hand am not fooled. Show me evidence that German soldiers participated in Genocide on a mass scale, concrete proof. Until then everything you say about the Wehrmacht will be laughed at by people who know this subject well.
You appear to be naively confusing Wehrmacht with SS & don't care aout the truth, just harp on & on with the same old same old.

PS: I don't know who I'm talking to, but I know what I'm seeing & the person behind those woirds can't be up to much. Quit the aloof persona, you need to be able to back that up. You are simply making statements warped & clutched by memories of Pinewood & Hollywood war movies & western school books. Possibly you may have occasionally ventured to the History Channel. Excellent. :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by War Angel

Quote:

---

they even treated american jewish POWs equally.

---

Yes, they killed them. Also, many times, the Jewishness of an American soldier was un-known to them. .

---

In many cases, POWs received reasonable treatment in German camps. Not universally, by any means, as there are many recorded POW murders - but by and large, the treatment was adequate. As opposed to, say, Japan's routine torture and murder of captured enemies, whether military or civilian.

It's interesting that Russia's direct involvement in the invasion of Finland and Poland was never called into question by the post-war tribunals. It was deliberately determined that only the Axis powers would be punished for their acts. This has led to the long-standing accusation that the tribunal was a politicised entity, with implications of "victors' justice" taking a role.

I personally believe it'd be abjectly stupid to condemn or punish every German soldier who fought in the war. Those who participated in war crimes and genocide, certainly - but not those who abided by the rules of war.

Cuchulainn, please stop the personal attacks against other posters. Disagree with their sources, certainly, but do not criticise the member responsible. A debate like this should remain impersonal and respectful. War Angel is an Israeli citizen, so he's naturally going to have strong views on this topic. Please bear in mind that opinions, and reasons for those opinions, are many and varied. I'd hate to have to close a thread on an important topic.

Fair point and I apologise unreservedly if anything I said came across as a personal attack, it was not meant as one. I've never used the British treatment of the Irish as leverage in any argument, I just hope others do the same.

Thanks, that's mighty decent and much appreciated:)

It's sad that the Second World War is now so far in the past... in another generation or so, there will be no veterans still with us. It'll become harder for the layperson to separate myth, hyperbole and historical fact. I think it's important that the wars and atrocities of recent history should not become taboo subjects, so that the memory and truth can be kept alive.

Society's more likely to remember lessons from the past if those events can be remembered with a clear head - rather than muddying the issue by turning it into a 'legend' of sorts. Already, there's a trend for protraying Hitler and his allies as some kind of utterly inhuman, truly demonic evil force, utterly devoid of humanity. A fair description, one might think, when you consider the extent of the horrors his regime committed. But the worst mistake, I believe, would be for us to start pretending that he wasn't human. If we pretend that Hitler wasn't "really" a part of our species, then we can deny the potential that our future leaders might sink to the same levels of depravity. Indeed, many have tried; some have come very close - but since Hitler is this 'taboo figure', it's almost unheard of for anybody to be compared to him. That is why history needs to stay history, rather than becoming mystified.

Quote:

---

I've never used the British treatment of the Irish as leverage in any argument, I just hope others do the same.

---

If this discussion was about British war-crimes in history, then I'd certainly hope you take it personally, and use your own knowledge and observation on the matter.

The SS were an elite segment of the German army, the Vermacht. They were mainly in-charge of special operartions, including the death-camps. However, that does not mean 'regular' soldiers in the German army did not help in the genocide itself. Wherever the German army marched, death followed. When they conquered a town, they killed every living soul there, especially Jews. The Vermacht were normal fighting troops... but seeing as the Holocaust was the major effort of the Axis forces, Vermacht troops were also very much guilty of genocide. Yes, many were at the front, especially later in the war, fighting against other soldiers... but numerous others helped in the extermination attempt of the Jewish people.

The SS were not in the Wehrmacht. The SS were a seperate organisation attached to the Polizei & answered to SS High Command or Oberstab. The Wehrmacht were the Heeren (Army), Luftwaffe (Air Force) and Kriegsmarine (Navy).
There were two SS organisations, the Allgemeine SS, a non-military armed civil organisation which guarded camps, organised the home front and answered directly to Himmler & Hitler. The second is the feared Waffen-SS, originally SS-VT, the Armed SS. They WERE a combat organisation. When the war started they were never more than Regimental in size, growing to Divisional level, corps, then in 1944, the 6th SS Army under Sepp Dietrich, founding leader of the SS Leibstandarde Adolf Hitler (Hitler's Black Shirted personal bodyguard).
The Wehrmacht units, on the whole, didn't like the Waffen-SS. They claimed they got all the glory while the ordinary Heeren units did the donkey work. They also didn't want a non-Wehrmacht unit in their rank & file as the Waffen-SS answered to their immediate superior, this was usually a Heeren General This officer had to go throw Hitler first before giving orders to the Waffen-SS.
I realise this may be a sensitive subject, if not for you (you're too young) but MAYBE for your grandparents, but I still feel that getting facts correct is important when discussing a topic such as this. The Wehrmacht & Waffens-SS und Polizei were seperate entities.
I mentioned Britain & Ireland simply because I have, to the best of my discretion, remained objective about Britain & not let their conduct here in Ireland interfere witgh my evalution of this topic. When there was a topic about Britain's conduct in Ireland, everything I said was instantly dismissed. I wonder if the same would happen with this sensitive subject.
I feel your comment 'morally they should have all perished' was deliberately ignored by myself as I hoped it was a spare of the moment comment you didn't think through. Surely advocating the death of every German who picked up a gun between 1939-1945 is advocation of Genocide itself. There was more to that massive, destructive, complicated mess that was WWII than just Good Vs Evil, Right Vs Wrong. Living in Israel at this time should show you this. It's important, always to try to fully understand a topic before your emotions of it control your knowledge on it.
I wish you a good day.