Unseen photos of Europe after World War II




 
--
 
May 18th, 2016  
MontyB
 
 

Topic: Unseen photos of Europe after World War II


Some interesting post war photos.

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/05/12/wo...-world-war-ii/
September 25th, 2016  
papasha408
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MontyB
The Allied terror bombings of well over a hundred German cities and towns was truly one of the great war crimes of the twentieth century. These bombings actually roasted hundreds of thousands if not millions of women, children, the elderly and babies. And the majority of the targets were not even remotely military or industrial.
September 25th, 2016  
MontyB
 
 
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.
--
September 25th, 2016  
papasha408
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MontyB
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.
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.
September 25th, 2016  
George
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by papasha408
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.
Well, your credibility certainly has nose dived........
September 26th, 2016  
MontyB
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by papasha408
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.
While I can see merit in your argument you can not overlook the fact that the Germans that were on trial should have been on trial and their punishment was just, after all at least half those 40 million deaths were caused by that German leadership but the fact that allied leadership was just as guilty of the same acts puts rather a large stain on the over aim and reason behind the trials though.

In the end, it was victor's justice but sadly we haven't learned a whole lot from it.
September 26th, 2016  
I3BrigPvSk
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by papasha408
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?
September 27th, 2016  
MontyB
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by I3BrigPvSk
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 peaceódefined 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.
September 27th, 2016  
I3BrigPvSk
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MontyB
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 peaceódefined 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.
September 27th, 2016  
MontyB
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by I3BrigPvSk
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 those setting up the trials were not entirely happy about them, though...

From the book: Perspectives on the Nuremberg Trial. by GuťnaŽl Mettraux (ed).
Quote:
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.
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.

Another criticism of the charges, and particularly crimes against peace, related to the Charter's selective focus on ‘the major war criminals of the European Axis’. Shortly after the Judgment was handed down, the British alternate judge, Norman Birkett, while noting that the Charter did not apply to the Soviet Union, the United States or Britain, declared that, ‘If it continues to apply only to the enemy, then I think the verdict of history may be against Nuremberg.’ While the Germans were being tried, the Charter formalised the Allies’ refusal to relinquish immunity for themselves for similar crimes.

What it boils down to is that the Allies knew they were as guilty of the same crimes as those on trial and they chose to fudge their way around this simply by making the rules only apply to the "Axis" which in my opinion is what severely weakens the validity of the trials, they ceased to be about justice and became about victors justice under the guise of a show trial.
 


Similar Topics
Russian World War II heroes now in color...
Japanese brutal killed and torture European POWS during the world war 2.
World War II - Color Photos
War at the Top of the World
The Real World War One