The Top 40

I dunn’o, I find it comforting that some scum suckers who was responsible for taking part in the merciless slaughter of millions of human beings can NEVER rest, no matter their age.

Should the ISIS whack jobs who burn dudes in cages or slice heads off get a break when they get “old”.

And by the way, at what age do they get a pass? What about if they get a terminal disease? Let ‘em live in peace? Unlike those he killed?

Sorry, no much pity in my heart. Old scum is still scum.

tim

Z Man writes, at the linked site:

"I think there was a strong case for hanging the Nazi leadership after the war. That’s an easy one. Similarly, hanging the really nasty officers who committed atrocities was a good idea. After that I just don’t see the sense in these trials in the aftermath of the war. Hanging people who took orders strikes me as contrary to western tradition. You hang the man giving the orders, not the man following them."

Herr Groening is not being charged for following orders, but for being an accessory to 300,000 murders. That's quite a tally.

He was an SS-Mann and he doesn't deny his complicity.

What does it mean to say it would be OK to hang the Nazi leadership "after the war?" When does "after the war" end? What is the golden period in which it is OK to carry out justice on mass murderers, and after how long does it become improper to do so? What is the statute of limitations on 300,000 murders?

After 70 years of clean living, I think that Herr Groening can make a plausible argument that he is no longer a threat to anyone. However, I think that a plausible argument can also be made that trying him, and imprisoning or even executing him now might serve the purpose of demonstrating to prospective mass murderers that they will never live beyond the reach of justice.

What is unfortunate is that I think the authorities have known about him for decades, and he is only being tried now.

As far as "following orders" goes, that's not been accepted as an excuse for a long time. US soldiers, at any rate, are expected - required - to disobey an illegal order.

Moreover, the Wehrmacht trained, as described in John Boyd's briefings, during the interwar years, in war games and exercises that required officers to disobey direct and explicit orders, in order to survive. Obedience is a choice.

Actually, no, they are not expected or required to disobey any orders, they are expected and required to do as they are told, or else. The *else* is usually tragic. If you have a grievance you might seek justice at a later time, but most likely not.

American GIs are expected to disobey or decline illegal orders, as exampled by the aftermath of the My Lai massacre.

Unless I'm mistaken, in WW II a German of any Heer who declined an order was toast. This complicates the judicial process, however that die was cast at Nuremberg and is where we now stand. He's toast if the judge rules.

As a disincentive to massacre or promote genocide, this type of judgement must continue.

Article 92; UCMJ -

".(c) A general order or regulation is lawful unless it is contrary to the Constitution, the laws of the United States, or lawful superior orders or for some other reason is beyond the authority of the official issuing it."

".I, (NAME), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice."

Not confusing.

tim

As long as anyone wants more than their fair share, we'll have Nazis, Stalinists, Maoists, Islamists, megalomaniacs, ... to deal with.

I don't think you can get any more Prussian than Ludwig Beck. He said: "Now at stake are final decisions regarding the fate of the nation. History will burden those leaders with blood guilt if they do not act according to their professional and statesmanly principles and knowledge. Their soldierly loyalty must end at the boundary where their knowledge, conscience, and sense of responsibility forbid the execution of an order. In case their advice and warnings fall on deaf ears in such circumstances, then they have the right and the duty, before the people and history, to resign their offices. If they all act together, then it will be impossible to carry out military action. They will thereby save the Fatherland from the worst, from total ruin. If a soldier in a position of highest authority in such times sees his duties and tasks only within the limits of his military responsibilities, without consciousness of his higher responsibility to the whole people, then he shows a lack of greatness, a lack of comprehension of responsibility. Extraordinary times demand extraordinary actions!"

What's most uncomfortable-making about this column is that "Z", whoever he is, doesn't even recognize that he's now advocating relativism while casting himself as conservative. This is the precise equivalent of forgiving all those little cocksuckers who killed innocent bystanders in the '60s For The Revolution, just because they've managed to evade justice til now and have "lived good lives."

Wrong is wrong. "Unless it's 70 years later" is unmitigated Cultural Marxist bullshit. Basically what he's saying is that it's inconvenient for him right at the moment to continue to contemplate the nature of evil. Maybe his mommy will give him a treat while the adults in the room clean up some long-overdue business.

In any event, the Germans seem to see the issue for what it truly is: not the punishment of an aging criminal, but the opportunity for the world at long last to see one of the vermin admit it, and expose the horror of his soul to the light.

There are those that do it, and those that read about it.

Reality, and fiction.

Exposing that old SOB to open ridicule and hostility is probably a fitting end for the nazi.

I'd get a lot more enjoyment if those in power went after crooked american politicians like obama and that clinton bitch and her whore mongering husband who are complicit, if not directly responsible for modern day tragedies, than to worry about some old nazi accountant.

There are too many people, even in this thread, who feel that this trial is about getting even, and punishment for this one old man.

Even if "those in power" were to prosecute the Clintons and Obamas and all the rest, the outcome of court actions would have MUUUUUCH less effect on the culture than the open admission of any of those creatures that they had lied, and cheated, and gamed the system. Imagine "low-information voters" watching that crowd express their sociopathy on prime-time television.

That's what the prosecutors are now doing in Germany, and if you'll read the German press you'll find that they are altogether aware of the unprecedented and stunning effect this is having. The German people, and Europeans in general, are being shown in a way impossible to ignore the horror of the Nazi mind - and that is of incalculable value.

That value is entirely calculable as everyone involved is drawing a paycheck that is paid by someone else "against their will".

Do you see the irony?

People are being forced to pay against their will for the gov't version of justice against a man that forced others against their will.

"We will pay the price, but we will not count the cost."
--np

You know, the Nazis are evil MFers and they deserve punishment so I understand the "get them all no matter how old" attitude. But at a certain point... they're going to face their well-earned reward soon enough anyway at that age. I am not sure there really is anyone alive in the world today that is ignorant of what the Nazis did, even if they think (like many in Southeast Asia) that its largely British propaganda.