4 ms·

I know it's a stretch and I don't want to Godwin the discussion too much, but that is really not an excuse. The Nuremberg trials clearly rejected this "Nurember

by iSnow 5y ago

I know it's a stretch and I don't want to Godwin the discussion too much, but that is really not an excuse. The Nuremberg trials clearly rejected this "Nuremberg defense", but of course it was the beaten party standing before the court back then. But in principle, since 1945, no one can evade personal responsibility for a clearly unlawful act by pointing to superior orders.

slightwinder 5y ago
Yet, USA is doing similar for decades and goes through with it because they can. Just look at their bouts with ICC, as also the case of Guantanamo Bay. Whether a Soldier can evade personal responsibility is still just a matter on which side they serve.
- Ekaros 5y ago
  I hope we get to day when we can extend responsibility to even the voters. Vote for mass murder, get the ultimate penalty... Would make world much better place.
betterunix2 5y ago
"They did it too" was an acceptable defense at Nuremberg; Donitz was not sentenced for the specific crime of unrestricted submarine warfare because the Allies had done the same thing (the US in the Pacific). Iraq also lied to the UN many times. Really though, this is a stupid comparison. People generally remember the Nuremberg trials in the context of the Holocaust -- genocide, slave labor, and all the horror that accompanied it. Colin Powell did nothing remotely close to any of that, and while there is plenty of criticism to throw at the US for the invasion of Iraq there was no genocide, no ethnic cleansing, no slave labor camps, and a dozen US soldiers were thrown in prison by the US for having tortured and humiliated prisoners under their command.
- iSnow 5y ago
  No, Dönitz got away with his unrestricted sub warfare order because the allied powers committed a war crime and hushed it up: > Operating partly under the dictates of the old prize rules, the U-boat commander, Korvettenkapitän Werner Hartenstein, immediately commenced rescue operations. U-156 broadcast her position on open radio channels to all Allied powers nearby, and were joined by the crews of several other U-boats in the vicinity. >[...] En route, the U-boat was spotted by a B-24 Liberator bomber of the US Army Air Forces. The aircrew, having reported the U-boat's location, intentions and the presence of survivors, were then ordered to attack the sub. >[...] The commanders of the Kriegsmarine were quickly issued the Laconia Order by Grand Admiral Karl Dönitz, which specifically forbade any such attempt and ushered in unrestricted submarine warfare for the remainder of the war. >[...] During the later Nuremberg trials, a prosecutor attempted to cite the Laconia Order as proof of war crimes by Dönitz and his submariners. The ploy backfired and caused much embarrassment to the United States after the incident's full report had emerged. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laconia_incident https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laconia_incident It's also specifically not about genocide vs non-genocide but about legal vs. illegal orders. Just because you represent the US of A you cannot lie to the whole world to start a war. I mean, you can as evidenced by Powell, but a lot of people will spit on your grave for that.
- trasz 5y ago
  Indeed, in Iraq there were just one million dead, not six million. Entirely different thing, isn't it.

by iSnow 5y ago

slightwinder 5y ago

Yet, USA is doing similar for decades and goes through with it because they can. Just look at their bouts with ICC, as also the case of Guantanamo Bay. Whether a Soldier can evade personal responsibility is still just a matter on which side they serve.

Ekaros 5y ago
I hope we get to day when we can extend responsibility to even the voters. Vote for mass murder, get the ultimate penalty... Would make world much better place.

betterunix2 5y ago

"They did it too" was an acceptable defense at Nuremberg; Donitz was not sentenced for the specific crime of unrestricted submarine warfare because the Allies had done the same thing (the US in the Pacific). Iraq also lied to the UN many times. Really though, this is a stupid comparison. People generally remember the Nuremberg trials in the context of the Holocaust -- genocide, slave labor, and all the horror that accompanied it. Colin Powell did nothing remotely close to any of that, and while there is plenty of criticism to throw at the US for the invasion of Iraq there was no genocide, no ethnic cleansing, no slave labor camps, and a dozen US soldiers were thrown in prison by the US for having tortured and humiliated prisoners under their command.

iSnow 5y ago
No, Dönitz got away with his unrestricted sub warfare order because the allied powers committed a war crime and hushed it up: > Operating partly under the dictates of the old prize rules, the U-boat commander, Korvettenkapitän Werner Hartenstein, immediately commenced rescue operations. U-156 broadcast her position on open radio channels to all Allied powers nearby, and were joined by the crews of several other U-boats in the vicinity. >[...] En route, the U-boat was spotted by a B-24 Liberator bomber of the US Army Air Forces. The aircrew, having reported the U-boat's location, intentions and the presence of survivors, were then ordered to attack the sub. >[...] The commanders of the Kriegsmarine were quickly issued the Laconia Order by Grand Admiral Karl Dönitz, which specifically forbade any such attempt and ushered in unrestricted submarine warfare for the remainder of the war. >[...] During the later Nuremberg trials, a prosecutor attempted to cite the Laconia Order as proof of war crimes by Dönitz and his submariners. The ploy backfired and caused much embarrassment to the United States after the incident's full report had emerged. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laconia_incident https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laconia_incident It's also specifically not about genocide vs non-genocide but about legal vs. illegal orders. Just because you represent the US of A you cannot lie to the whole world to start a war. I mean, you can as evidenced by Powell, but a lot of people will spit on your grave for that.
trasz 5y ago
Indeed, in Iraq there were just one million dead, not six million. Entirely different thing, isn't it.