|
On May 13 2011 03:47 zatic wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2011 03:45 VIB wrote:On May 12 2011 21:16 zatic wrote:
Update: Demnjanjuk has been sentenced to 5 years of prison on accessory of murder. He was sentenced to prison only because he was holding the accessory today? Nothing because of what he did in the past? If that's true, then why is it relevant discussing about what he have done in the past in court? If that's false, then are laws in germany retroactive? (I'm assume what he did back then, was not illegal back then) Murder and accessory to murder was illegal in the 3rd Reich. It really doesn't matter anyway. Arguing otherwise is even more ridiculous that the "was only following orders" line. Murder was illegal? Now I'm even more confused  Well, a quick look at wikipedia makes it seems ex post facto law has been a problem before in similar trials:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex_post_facto_law#Germany
I can only conclude that I have no idea what's going on ^^
|
On May 12 2009 10:12 iNcontroL wrote:
I know people like to fall back on the "just obeying orders" argument especially in regard to Nazi veterans but I am sorry.. that just doesn't fly with me.
And save me the "you weren't there, you don't know" argument as well. None of us were there, we are all speculating. That is a huge part of the forum. After all, very few of us are professional bw players yet here we are mostly discussing just that!
He didn't decide to be a guard at an internment camp but he was. On some level that is incredibly unfair but that is life. Sometimes you accidentally hit someone with your car, that doesn't mean justice simply turns away. The penalty might be less severe.. and in this case he probably won't be put to death. But the fact remains, he participated in something that was heinous and atrocious. Whether he decided to do it willfully or not he was an active participant in acts against humanity.
Guess who else didn't choose this fate? The 29k jews that were slaughtered in the camp he guarded.
This doesn't make any sense to me at all. So should all soldiers be prosecuted for murder for every combatant they kill? He was a soldier in a time of war obeying orders. The concept of war time atrocities was ratified AFTER WWII.
You say that 'none of us were there,' so why are we punishing him assuming he had a hand in the deaths of all 29k people then? What happened to 'innocent until proven guilty?' I don't see this as seeking justice for the Holocaust: it's just a political witch trial in Germany's never ending quest to distance themselves from Hitler and the Nazi regime.
User was temp banned for this post.
|
Zurich15302 Posts
Well again, murder as well as accessory to murder was already illegal in the 3rd Reich, so this is not even a question here.
The Nuremberg trial case refers to "Crimes against humanity", a concept that was specifically introduced after WW2 for cases where "War Crimes" could not be applied (ie the Holocaust).
|
|
|
|
|
Wow, today in my Euro class we were assigned parts in a trial in which we are trying a prison guards from Nazi Germany (not very legal, more focusing on how responsible) I basically have to defend this guy. Weird that I see this bumped today.
EDIT: we also read an article about a battalion of soldiers and for everyone saying his family's life was at risk, the German soldiers we read about were given the option to opt out, even their commander did, I know that probably wasn't true for everyone but just remember that it wasn't like every guard in Nazi Germany's family was being held at gunpoint.
|
Zurich15302 Posts
On May 13 2011 04:00 hemipepsis5p wrote:
Too many of you assume he could get out, just go AWOL, that he could've just hopped on a train.
As said in my update to the thread, many guard successfully fled. The judge had to weigh the gravity of the crime against the risk of an attempt to flee. They decided the crime was so grave that he should have taken the risk.
Also I don't know why everyone is so quick to bring their families into this. The 3rd Reich wasn't North Korea where you family gets pushed for you deserting.
|
On May 13 2011 04:00 hemipepsis5p wrote:
Everybody thinks they're hardcore, and of noble stock, until they're placed in a situation like that. .
Your post would be a lot more credible except for the fact that there was a very active resistance to the Nazi regime. Taking the easy way out just because the alternative involves suffering is not an excuse, especially when you consider the suffering of the millions who lost their lives in the camps and as a result of the evil actions of the Nazi regime.
|
Zurich15302 Posts
Jesus fuck how clear does a mod warning have to be? Everyone read the thread before you post, seriously what is this shit. It's so fucking annoying to have you idiots posting the same uninformed shit on every of those 20 pages over and over again.
|
|
|
Zurich15302 Posts
What the fuck are you even talking about? What does the Gestapo that have to do with anything in this thread?
|
On May 13 2011 04:12 zatic wrote:
Jesus fuck how clear does a mod warning have to be? Everyone read the thread before you post, seriously what is this shit. It's so fucking annoying to have you idiots posting the same uninformed shit on every of those 20 pages over and over again. Welcome to every other thread?
Maybe post a link to your update on the warning would help a bit.
|
|
|
Ok. If he is guilty i would agree Bring him to court and ETC. But did he have a choice? IF so then ya go after him. However Under Hitler He would die and as any of us would fallow are government Rules and laws. If you were in the position the same as Him what would you do? If its true he did this..... I don't know. What could a man do in Germany at that time? Hitler had so many followers that even if someone tried to get away it would be his life. Yes illegal. But idk how to feel on this one....
|
On May 13 2011 04:12 zatic wrote:
Jesus fuck how clear does a mod warning have to be? Everyone read the thread before you post, seriously what is this shit. It's so fucking annoying to have you idiots posting the same uninformed shit on every of those 20 pages over and over again.
I mean, I'm a lowly poster, you're a mod, but maybe you need to get a lot less mad about this, or just close the thread. "Jesus fuck" doesn't really seem... Appropriate language for a moderator talking about a thread.
On topic, something I'd like to have answered is "are all these old men that were death camp guards the same people now that they were back then? Have they put all that behind them?" I just get the image of some old dude trying to hide his past being drug to jail for a half-century old crime. Probably an inaccurate view, but still.
|
On May 13 2011 04:05 zatic wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2011 04:00 hemipepsis5p wrote:
Too many of you assume he could get out, just go AWOL, that he could've just hopped on a train. As said in my update to the thread, many guard successfully fled. The judge had to weigh the gravity of the crime against the risk of an attempt to flee. They decided the crime was so grave that he should have taken the risk. Also I don't know why everyone is so quick to bring their families into this. The 3rd Reich wasn't North Korea where you family gets pushed for you deserting.
The problem I have with trying this guy and the reasoning given for his conviction is that this is a really, really slippery slope with only arbitrary distinctions. On one hand, you can say that yes he could have fled and in fact many people did successfully flee. But I don't see how anyone can definitively say that he ever considered that a possibility or saw a clear risk-free opportunity AT THE TIME. This leads to the argument that "well, he should have found a way or made the sacrifice." But by that argument, what about those who were aware of the existence of concentration camps but did nothing? They should have found a way of knowing what was happening and/or done something about it.
Someone already wrote in this thread that this trial is only reasonable if they try all Germans not part of the resistance. While I think that's ridiculous, that's basically where we end up.
I guess all I am really saying here is that there is a moral continuum and while you or the German legal system or whoever can draw a line and say that everyone on one end is a criminal, that line is inherently arbitrary and ultimately disputable. Well, regardless of whether he deserves to be tried/convicted or not he probably won't be alive long enough to see the end of the litigation or to serve his sentence.
|
Zurich15302 Posts
Kaonis: I get seldom mad about something like this, but when it says "The guy was not a soldier" in the top and every page one or more people start with "He was just a soldier..." I snap at some point. Sorry about the language though.
Pyo: I agree. Please see this for a more detailed explanation what was new about this ruling: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=9226590
|
|
|
Zurich15302 Posts
On May 13 2011 04:51 hemipepsis5p wrote:
All I'm saying is he wasn't about to walk out the front gate smoking a stoag, "Later Freidrich!" "Later Gunther!" and just head on his merry way. If he was denounced by someone who put him up for shelter, or food, or whatever, he was facing death.
Nobody is questioning that he was facing death should he be caught deserting. That said, yes he could have walked out the gate with a Cya later Hans. The guards were allowed to move freely and even live outside of the camp, as I posted in my update to this thread.
And regarding the Gestapo, it didn't even exist anymore at that time and even if it had its jurisdiction was national Germany, not the occupied Soviet Union where the camp was located.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
