What does /his/ think about the Nuremberg Trials? Farce or appropriate application of justice?
>>353867
Not enough executions tbqh.
Complete and hypocritical farce
>>353867
If they had been run by an actual neutral party in a fair and equitable manner Churchill, Truman, (FDR if he had lived), and a large number of Allied generals would have swung from a gibbet.
>>353867
>prosecution of low level party members while the useful Nazis were bought up by U.S. and Russia.
>anything but a farce
Hypocritical farce.
>>353867
A complete farce designed to legally slaughter what remained of Nazi leadership to neutralise them as a threat. A practical move definitely but not really "justice".
IIRC some people were being accused of breaking laws that were written just months before the trials began.
Why not both ?
Well the film is pretty good
Farce.
I wonder why no "attention whore" tried to sue the Allied Commanders for the same crimes they attributed to the Axis leaders.
If they use the same standards they used against Tomoyuki Yamashita for the American leadership in the last few wars, they would probably arrest Bush, Obama and most military chiefs of the United States.
>>353867
>execute some people for propaganda purposes while letting others off the hook when they're useful to you
>punish people for stuff that wasn't even considered a crime at the time it was committed
>completely ignore your own criminals because tu quoque is Nazi logics
sounds pretty fair to me
>>353867
Farce by design. The point was to tape them trying a bunch of Nazis to show everyone that all the Nazis were gone from Germany and only nice Germans who dindu nuffin remained. Everyone who did bad things in public was executed. Everyone who did bad things in private or on the front was jailed for long enough to be forgotten about. Everyone who did bad things public or otherwise, but was useful to the new superpowers was quickly absolved of guilt.
The idea of justice is a farce tbqh.
Quite literally a kangaroo court and a farce.
Article 19 and article 21 of the trials prove that.
>>353867
Farce.
Take Ernst Kaltenbrunner for example. The leading SS man on trial. He suffered two brain aneurysms in the tender loving care of British interrogators. He was fragile mental state. When he went to Nuremberg he was a complete wreck. His American guards would taunt him and call him a coward.
The doctors who examined him found him to be medically unfit to stand trial for at least a year or so while he recuperated. The Judges refused and Kaltenbrunner had to conduct his defense in a mentally damaged state.
>>354167
If you're implying fucking Kaltenbrunner should have been taken off the hook for health reasons then I beg to differ. History would have never forgiven the Allies.
>>354176
I didn't say that. Kaltenbrunner deserved to be tried, but he also deserved a trial in which he was clear minded enough to conduct a fair defense. Otherwise the Nuremberg trials were no better then the People Courts conducted shortly after the July 20th plot. As victors we should have been better then the vanquished. Instead we allowed ourselves to go down the kangaroo court route in order to appease the Soviets.
War crimes trials for Germans have continued on to this day. They could have put him in any of the dozens upon dozens of trials which occurred in the aftermath of the war.
They were a farce in the way that 90% of the guys on trial were already dead, they just needed to do it so they seemed "civilized"
>>353867
A farce to whom? It was merely getting rid of political opposition and possible threats.
>>353904
This tbqh pham
>>353904
This pretty much to be completely honest with all you lads in this thread.
Didn't they just sentence a 90 year old who was a bookkeeper for the nazis?
