Jail the ex Nazi?

[Massimo Giovanni]

I believe there is much more to this story. The guy volunteered his history as he wanted to argue against those that denied it happened or the scale of the murdering and suffering.
He was Hitler Youth and a committed Nazi, as were his family.
He is 93, he knows what he did and he knows he will meet his fate soon enough.
The trial will be an ideal stage for the world to be reminded of what happened and get the lesson from history.
Any punishment is notional.
I would sentence him to work at the camps as a guide and answer questions etc; thus relieving the hell over and over.

 

[LCBB72]

If he's 93 he's going to be dead before he's tried and convicted.

I hope not I want him to be scared ****less like those little Jewish kids were when they were thrown into the gas chambers .:smile:

 

[Benfleet A1]

I hope not I want him to be scared ****less like those little Jewish kids were when they were thrown into the gas chambers .:smile:

So it's revenge you're after rather than justice. I wonder where all the witnesses are going to appear from. Probably someone who was about 4 years old at the time who has one of those amazing memories and just happened to have managed to survive the selection process. I will never cease to be suspicious of those so-called witnesses.

 

[steveo]

Didn't realise the bloke was SS, which I understand you had to apply for. If that's the case don't bother with the trial, shoot the **** dead.

 

[LCBB72]

The slime says he is sorry , thats only because he was caught , let thoughs who lost family in these Death Camps judge him , then shoot the ******* .

 

[rigsby]

I believe there is much more to this story. The guy volunteered his history as he wanted to argue against those that denied it happened or the scale of the murdering and suffering.
He was Hitler Youth and a committed Nazi, as were his family.
He is 93, he knows what he did and he knows he will meet his fate soon enough.
The trial will be an ideal stage for the world to be reminded of what happened and get the lesson from history.
Any punishment is notional.
I would sentence him to work at the camps as a guide and answer questions etc; thus relieving the hell over and over.

So was Bert Trautman. Who won five medals on the Eastern front including the iron cross. Which means he did more than just follow orders. When he first signed for Man city there was a public outcry but as we know if your a footballer anything is forgivable.

 

[steveo]

He was Hitler Youth and a committed Nazi, as were his family.

I rally don't know but when these people became Hitler youth its probably fair to assume they were joining some sort of political organisation and not backing someone who intended to wipe out millions because he didn't like their religion.

 

[LCBB72]

But those that run the Hitler youth were out to brain wash them .

 

[jassyfa1]

He is 93, and now he is admitting what he done. Anybody else thinks that he is trying to get his house in order before he dies. And why wait till your 93 you have lived with what you have done for all these years, and you think you might get a lenient sentence? Lock him up and don't pay for any medical care, after all the Jews never got any. And when he dies bury him in an unmarked grave so he doesn't become a martyr for all the right wing idiots out there

 

[londonblue]

So was Bert Trautman. Who won five medals on the Eastern front including the iron cross. Which means he did more than just follow orders. When he first signed for Man city there was a public outcry but as we know if your a footballer anything is forgivable.

Following orders that involve being a soldier and fighting for your country is one thing. Following orders that mean you work in a death camp (and could have requested a transfer away from) is something completely different.

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

Gunter Grass was a member of the SS in the last year of the war in 44/45.He admitted that if he'd been older he would almost certainly have committed war crimes.

As far as Groening is concerned,I'd be happy to see him face trial.

 

[rigsby]

Following orders that involve being a soldier and fighting for your country is one thing. Following orders that mean you work in a death camp (and could have requested a transfer away from) is something completely different.

Actually no its not, in the eyes of the law. Whether we like it or not working in a death camp and even participating in the killings is not in itself a war crime. Many higher ranking SS officers have been put on trial and found not guilty as they were only 'following orders'.

Unless we change the Geneva convention and back date it I cant see any chance of a guilty verdict if he were to stand trial.
Sadly very few ever got justice in the aftermath of WW2.

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

Actually no its not, in the eyes of the law. Whether we like it or not working in a death camp and even participating in the killings is not in itself a war crime. Many higher ranking SS officers have been put on trial and found not guilty as they were only 'following orders'.

Unless we change the Geneva convention and back date it I cant see any chance of a guilty verdict if he were to stand trial.
Sadly very few ever got justice in the aftermath of WW2.

Actually, yes it is."The civilian population is protected under the Geneva Conventions and these .... Concentration camps, though not mentioned explicitly in the Geneva ... War crimes are againt the customary laws of war."

http://www.spj.org/gc-index.asp

 

[londonblue]

Actually no its not, in the eyes of the law. Whether we like it or not working in a death camp and even participating in the killings is not in itself a war crime. Many higher ranking SS officers have been put on trial and found not guilty as they were only 'following orders'.

Unless we change the Geneva convention and back date it I cant see any chance of a guilty verdict if he were to stand trial.
Sadly very few ever got justice in the aftermath of WW2.

Of course it is. The "following orders" argument is a myth.

I haven't read the Geneva convention in its entirety but I'm pretty sure that the killing of a soldier on a battlefield isn't a war crime. Deliberately killing innocent civilians is.

 

[steveo]

Of course it is. The "following orders" argument is a myth.

Maybe a myth but its a difficult position to be put in. Follow orders or possibly get shot.

 

[londonblue]

Maybe a myth but its a difficult position to be put in. Follow orders or possibly get shot.

But that wasn't the case. There is documented evidence (the Nazis documented everything!) of guards asking to be reassigned away from the camps. They were.

The problem for them was where they would end up, and for most I guess that wasn't a risk worth taking.

 

[LCBB72]

So was Bert Trautman. Who won five medals on the Eastern front including the iron cross. Which means he did more than just follow orders. When he first signed for Man city there was a public outcry but as we know if your a footballer anything is forgivable.

Bert Trautman was not in the slimey SS .

 

[rigsby]

Of course it is. The "following orders" argument is a myth.

I haven't read the Geneva convention in its entirety but I'm pretty sure that the killing of a soldier on a battlefield isn't a war crime. Deliberately killing innocent civilians is.

Obviously you don't know what you're talking about. Some of the top Nazis were acquitted at the Nuremberg trials because they were acting on orders so its certainly no myth.

If a soldier is ordered to shoot unarmed civilians, the officer giving the order could be put on trial but not the soldier or even the sergeant who organises the firing squad. Being a member of the SS was never deemed a crime and very few were ever punished for their atrocities.

The only order in the British army a soldier can refuse is to be part of a firing squad on one of our own soldiers.

 

[londonblue]

Obviously you don't know what you're talking about. Some of the top Nazis were acquitted at the Nuremberg trials because they were acting on orders so its certainly no myth.

If a soldier is ordered to shoot unarmed civilians, the officer giving the order could be put on trial but not the soldier or even the sergeant who organises the firing squad. Being a member of the SS was never deemed a crime and very few were ever punished for their atrocities.

The only order in the British army a soldier can refuse is to be part of a firing squad on one of our own soldiers.

I didn't say the argument hasn't been used. I'm saying doesn't really hold water any more.

 

[rigsby]

I didn't say the argument hasn't been used. I'm saying doesn't really hold water any more.

Unfortunately it does. Like I've already said we would need to change international law or just say sod it he was a Nazi and find him guilty anyway.

After WW2 Stalin wanted to execute some 50,000 of the top Nazis including most of the SS. Churchill was instrumental in stopping him from doing so. The reason so many Germans and Japanese escaped any form of punishment was that both Russia and the West were far more concerned with the immerging cold war.