MontyB
All-Blacks Supporter
Some interesting post war photos.
http://edition.cnn.com/2016/05/12/world/gallery/tbt-europe-after-world-war-ii/
http://edition.cnn.com/2016/05/12/world/gallery/tbt-europe-after-world-war-ii/
Some interesting post war photos.
http://edition.cnn.com/2016/05/12/world/gallery/tbt-europe-after-world-war-ii/
I sort of agree but I do believe while the war was touch and go for the Allies those bombings were "justifiable" even if immoral.
However, by 1945 there was no need for them and they became purely about killing Germans without any regard to their age or sex which should have been a war crime and to a large degree made a mockery of the Nuremberg trials in that the people running the trials were as guilty as those they were prosecuting.
Well, your credibility certainly has nose dived........The Nuremberg show trial which is still a horrible black mark on the idea of Anglo-Saxon justice condemned German leadership and many military figures to harsh prison terms or to death. Those who carried out the proceedings were the governments that carried out the Dresden, Trier, Hamburg and Tokyo firebombings, the sinking of the Wilhelm Gustloff and the Goya. These are the same culprits who forced the return of Russian refugees and POW's to almost certain death. They carried out the murder's in the Katyn forest and the mass rape of well over a million German women. And let us not forget the very unnecessary atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. This is the same bunch who allowed DD Eisenhower to murder about one and a half German prisoners of war after the hostilities by changing their status from POW to unarmed enemy combatants. This is the same bunch who locked up the peacemaker Rudolf Hess and finally strangled him in a final act of anti-German barbarity.
The Nuremberg trials were one lie after another just to get that extra pound of flesh from a completely defeated people. 99% of the charges made at Nuremberg were complete drivel, astounding preposterous nonsense dreamed up by sick minds. Hitler's only real crime as far as the elitists were concerned was his audacity to take Germany out of international central banking. That was the real reason for the world war along with his anti-Jewish legislation. Britain and France wouldn't have pulled a hair over Poland otherwise. It was just the excuse and nothing else. 40 to 50 million people die horribly over a German/Polish border incident. Doesn't make a lot of sense to me.
The Nuremberg show trial which is still a horrible black mark on the idea of Anglo-Saxon justice condemned German leadership and many military figures to harsh prison terms or to death. Those who carried out the proceedings were the governments that carried out the Dresden, Trier, Hamburg and Tokyo firebombings, the sinking of the Wilhelm Gustloff and the Goya. These are the same culprits who forced the return of Russian refugees and POW's to almost certain death. They carried out the murder's in the Katyn forest and the mass rape of well over a million German women. And let us not forget the very unnecessary atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. This is the same bunch who allowed DD Eisenhower to murder about one and a half German prisoners of war after the hostilities by changing their status from POW to unarmed enemy combatants. This is the same bunch who locked up the peacemaker Rudolf Hess and finally strangled him in a final act of anti-German barbarity.
The Nuremberg trials were one lie after another just to get that extra pound of flesh from a completely defeated people. 99% of the charges made at Nuremberg were complete drivel, astounding preposterous nonsense dreamed up by sick minds. Hitler's only real crime as far as the elitists were concerned was his audacity to take Germany out of international central banking. That was the real reason for the world war along with his anti-Jewish legislation. Britain and France wouldn't have pulled a hair over Poland otherwise. It was just the excuse and nothing else. 40 to 50 million people die horribly over a German/Polish border incident. Doesn't make a lot of sense to me.
The Nuremberg show trial which is still a horrible black mark on the idea of Anglo-Saxon justice condemned German leadership and many military figures to harsh prison terms or to death. Those who carried out the proceedings were the governments that carried out the Dresden, Trier, Hamburg and Tokyo firebombings, the sinking of the Wilhelm Gustloff and the Goya. These are the same culprits who forced the return of Russian refugees and POW's to almost certain death. They carried out the murder's in the Katyn forest and the mass rape of well over a million German women. And let us not forget the very unnecessary atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. This is the same bunch who allowed DD Eisenhower to murder about one and a half German prisoners of war after the hostilities by changing their status from POW to unarmed enemy combatants. This is the same bunch who locked up the peacemaker Rudolf Hess and finally strangled him in a final act of anti-German barbarity.
The Nuremberg trials were one lie after another just to get that extra pound of flesh from a completely defeated people. 99% of the charges made at Nuremberg were complete drivel, astounding preposterous nonsense dreamed up by sick minds. Hitler's only real crime as far as the elitists were concerned was his audacity to take Germany out of international central banking. That was the real reason for the world war along with his anti-Jewish legislation. Britain and France wouldn't have pulled a hair over Poland otherwise. It was just the excuse and nothing else. 40 to 50 million people die horribly over a German/Polish border incident. Doesn't make a lot of sense to me.
Can you elaborate about why you think the 99% of charges were nonsense and drivel? So instead of using the two nukes, should the US had invaded Japan instead?
There is a lot of contentiousness in the Nuremberg trials as they had very little basis in law prior to WW2, in essence, they were laws made up post event and retrospectively applied.
I also tend to find the charges somewhat staged, for example, "crimes against peace—defined as participation in the planning and waging of a war of aggression in violation of numerous international treaties" can only have a guilty verdict as it is impossible to wage a non-aggressive war.
In the end, I guess you have to ask yourself whether Himmler, Goering and the team deserved their fate (in my opinion they did) and if so how do we reconcile that fate with view we have of Churchill, Roosevelt and Stalin who carried out the same actions, the only answer available is that it was purely victors justice.
WW2 was not a conflict of Demons vs Angels it was a war of Demons vs moderate Demons.
There were two treaties prior the dual world wars, the Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907. The treaties stipulate the behavior during wars. There was even a fragment of a legislation even before the Hague convention, the Leiber Code, which originates from the American Civil War. The Hague Convention stipulate the acts of declaration of war, so there was an International Law prior the Second World War in the regards "crimes against peace". If you remember that was very important for the Japanese when they attacked Pearl Harbor, but the timing didn't work for them when the deceleration of war arrived to the US the day after.
Even the legal advice obtained prior to the trials was mixed on the issue, some believed that the Second World War was an exceptional event requiring special legal remedies, and commended the tribunals for advancing international law. Others condemned them for their legal shortcomings and maintained that some of the charges were retroactive and selectively applied. The charge that most found contentious was "Crimes against peace" who's validity was questioned by both French and British officials even before the wars end (1944) and academics as the trials were being conducted.No document better conveys the roughness and expediency of the negotiations leading up to the postwar tribunal at Nuremberg than the transcript of the four-power London Conference held from late June to early August 1945. At this gathering, which was book-ended by the signing of the UN Charter and the bombing of Hiroshima, the Allies formally discussed the proposal to set up a court to try the captured German leaders. In the event, the conference very nearly broke down. The American delegate threatened to walk out over the question of the court's location, the French delegate objected to plans to bring charges of crimes against peace, the British fretted over the risk of German countercharges, and the Soviets refused to countenance a definition of aggression. The debates were in turn acrimonious, meandering, portentous, repetitive and disjointed. There were frequent misunderstandings between common and civil law delegates, and all were compelled to advance their respective nation’s interests. Until the final day, none of them could be sure that a tribunal would be established at all, let alone that their discussions would provide the conceptual framework for two great assizes, one in Nuremberg, the other in Tokyo. This was history in the making, and its making was a messy and unedifying business.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.