[Dr. Howard]

(09-17-2014 10:45 AM)berserk Wrote:  

(09-17-2014 10:41 AM)Dr. Howard Wrote:  

(09-17-2014 06:06 AM)berserk Wrote:  

It's about money. Germany still pay billions in reparations to jews.

I didn't know that? Do you have any links for further reading?

http://www.spiegel.de/international/germ...02528.html

Quote:

The German government has agreed to pay €772 million ($1 billion) for the homecare of Holocaust survivors throughout the world. The decision was reached by the German Finance Ministry together with the Claims Conference, a Jewish fund for victims of Nazi aggression, after negotiations in Jerusalem concluded on Tuesday.

How about some more?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...tract.html

Quote:

The French Foreign Ministry has been forced to begin negotiations with the U.S. State Department about making payments to Holocaust survivors or risk losing out on a billion dollar contract.

The state-owned Société Nationale des Chemins de Fer Français (SNCF) runs some of the fastest and most efficient lines in the world but has a dark history which saw it transport thousands of Jews to their deaths in German concentration camps.

The company transported some 76,000 French Jews to Nazi concentration camps during the wartime occupation – of which only about 3,000 survived

.

People really wonder why jews get a bad rep? They simply don't know when to stop.

Seems like a glimpse of what slave reparations would be like if they came to pass.

[The Beast1]

I have nothing against Judaism, but the Russians take the award for "Most Suffered" during WW2.

[scorpion]

The legitimate existence of Israel as the Jewish state is almost entirely predicated on the Holocaust narrative. This is the reason that Jews must continually play the Holocaust victim card and engage in stunts like this. If people start to forget the Holocaust story that casts the Jews as victims of a unique and unprecedented crime, the fact that Israel itself has an awful lot in common with Nazi Germany would become much more apparent. For example, the treatment of the Palestinians in Israel is very similar to how the Jews were treated in the Third Reich. Gaza is essentially nothing more than a gigantic, open air concentration camp. (This basic fact is why it's idiotic when people try to defend the Israeli side of the Palestinian issue. The sheer hypocrisy of crying anti-Semitism towards critics of Israeli while defending what are literally Nazi policies is breathtaking).

[Sp5]

(09-17-2014 11:40 AM)Bad Hussar Wrote:  

Also, who is and isn't prosecuted, and when they are prosecuted ,is random when you intentionally hold back. This means justice is not served. This 93 year old man has had a complete life without consequence. A trial now brings no justice at all. It only allows a few prosecutors to grandstand. Whereas an SS member prosecuted decades ago did experience consequences. And some SS people are never prosecuted, but even feted by the world. Werner von Braun, say. Also Herbert von Karajan. Not SS, but a strong Nazi supporter. Didn't really negatively affect his career.

There is an element of unfair capriciousness in these prosecutions of ancient guys. When I was in the U.S. Army in Germany in the late 1970s, the place was full of ex-Nazis. There were even regular SS reunion meetings in a gasthaus in the town I was in. The mayor of a nearby town was eventually prosecuted, but he was something like a camp commandant, high-ranking.

I'm sure a lot of guys who did horrible things skated just because there were so many of them and it would have been politically and practically impossible to prosecute them all.

Eventually, they will prosecute a 110 year old guy for being the kid who delivered bread to a camp - just because he'll be the last one alive who had anything to do with supporting the camps.

[Spectrumwalker]

After all of us are long dead, I wouldn't be surprised if there will be Nazi war criminals still being tried and sentenced posthumously. All so that we may never forget what happened of course.

[tomtud]

Got this off a site to see how this has gone too far...... Discussing the slavery and suffering the Africans suffered, none of this is getting any attention. The old wealth folks who benefitted from slavery aren't being held accountable like some simple guard at Auschwitz. If a 93 year old can be charged in this manner and situation, then why can't descendants of Slave owners be charged too? Since lawmakers like to override statutes and other laws. Where is al sharpton for petes sake.

Here's the article.

Many of you have seriously questioned the claims of some of our people regarding the African Holocaust. In your minds, it sounds like an exaggeration when it is said that 100 million Africans were murdered or just died due to slavery. You must remember to include all those who died because of slavery: people killed as a direct result of the wars that were caused by the slave trade, those who died or were murdered on the journey of up to 400+ miles to the coast, those killed by the miserable slave castles on the coast of Africa and of course, the people who died during the absolutely intolerable conditions of the "middle passage" on slave ships or in the "seasoning" process where your ancestors were taught to be slaves. To understand the enormity of the number you must first focus on a few facts that are not emphasized by the slavery "apologists" you usually read.

Here are a few facts:

1. Europeans took Africans away for about 450 years starting in 1441. The Arabs were in this business several hundred years before the Europeans (starting in circa 750 AD). In the US, we often start the discussion in 1619 but by then there were already millions of enslaved Africans in Cuba, Haiti, Brazil and elsewhere in the Americas. .

2. Africans were taken many places including the US, the West Indies, Central and South America, Europe, India, Arabia, virtually everywhere.

3. Warfare and village raiding were the primary sources of slave acquisition. Many people died. While it is true that some greedy African kings sold their own subjects to the Europeans this was not the only source of slaves. Slave raiding by foreigners was not uncommon.

Look on your bookshelf and pull out a copy of the World Almanac. Turn to the section where they have world population data. Here is what I find (1990 edition, page 539; in other editions just look up "world population"):

Continent









Millions:

1650

1750

1850

1950

Africa

100

95

95

200

Europe

100

140

265

530

[berserk]

^ Every people were slaves or subjected to injustice at some point. Whites were slaves by the hundreds of thousands to arabs. Slavs were slaves, from there the name. Irish were slaves or indentured servants. Same sh*t.

If you try to make people who had nothing to do with it pay decades or hundreds of years later, then you WILL create great animosity with new generations.

"The sins of the father is not the sins of the son".

There is no future in victim identity, doesn't matter if it's jewish victim identity or who else. Self improvement as a person means stopping viewing yourself as a victim - for your own sake - the same is true for a people.

[Faust]

I am... not a fan of concentration camp guards, to say the least. And I've argued with holocaust deniers on this very forum.

But charging a 93-year old man with 300,000 counts of accessory to murder is disgusting. Where the hell are they going to find witnesses? Or evidence? After 60 freaking years? How is he supposed to be able to mount a defense when most everybody who was there has been dead for decades? How reliable are the prosecution's witnesses going to be when these events occurred before anybody on this forum was even born?

You don't get to throw the law out the window because the person you're accusing is a very bad man. The right to a fair trial applies to everybody, even accused concentration camp guards.

[WalterBlack]

(09-17-2014 05:41 PM)tomtud Wrote:  

2. Africans were taken many places including the US, the West Indies, Central and South America, Europe, India, Arabia, virtually everywhere.

This is short BBC video about the descendants of African slaves in India. I’ve shown this video to a couple of black Americans and they had no idea that these people existed. Ignore the stupid title of the video.

[Sombro]

Some war crimes are so heinous that there is no statute of limitations for them.
I have no problem with this.

[Darius]

(09-17-2014 08:12 PM)Sombro Wrote:  

Some war crimes are so heinous that there is no statute of limitations for them.
I have no problem with this.

So I take it you believe that Americans should be prosecuted for the concentration camps they created for the Germans after the war. Do think the Americans should have to pay reparations to the Germans as well?

[Sombro]

(09-17-2014 08:20 PM)Darius Wrote:  

(09-17-2014 08:12 PM)Sombro Wrote:  

Some war crimes are so heinous that there is no statute of limitations for them.
I have no problem with this.

So I take it you believe that Americans should be prosecuted for the concentration camps they created for the Germans after the war. Do think the Americans should have to pay reparations to the Germans as well?

Were these death camps? "Concentration camps" is but a misnomer.
Are you equating internment camps, labor camps, concentration camps and death camps?
Nazis advanced mass death to a systematic, industrial scale. Is this what you equate Americans did post-war?
Please, school me, bro.

Regarding the original post, I was responding that any individual guilty of war crimes should be prosecuted.
We can't do Nürnberg all over. I've heard about random post-war atrocities, of which I of course do not condone.
But your lame retort trying to pin collective guilt is pulled out of thin air.

[Faust]

"Some war crimes are so heinous that there is no statute of limitations for them.
I have no problem with this."

Well, okay. But how likely is this guy to get a fair trial? To be able to gather evidence in his defense? When he's 93 and probably can't even get out of bed on his own?

[Darius]

(09-17-2014 08:27 PM)Sombro Wrote:  

Were these death camps? "Concentration camps" is but a misnomer.
Are you equating internment camps, labor camps, concentration camps and death camps?
Nazis advanced mass death to a systematic, industrial scale. Is this what you equate Americans did post-war?
Please, school me, bro.

Regarding the original post, I was responding that any individual guilty of war crimes should be prosecuted.
We can't do Nürnberg all over. I've heard about random post-war atrocities, of which I of course do not condone.
But your lame retort trying to pin collective guilt is pulled out of thin air.

Yes they were.

The Americans set up camps to keep Germans in after the war. In addition the Americans instituted food supply policies that led to the starvation of many Germans. These two policies combined caused the deaths of millions of Germans.

If you can still prosecute Germans for what happened during WW2, why not Americans for what happened during and after the war?

[Spectrumwalker]

Why is it we never hear about the atrocities committed against the Sudeten ethnic civilian Germans? Around 1 million ethnic Germans were slaughtered by the Czechs and communist sympathizers both pre and post war. Around 12 million had to flee their homes throughout central and Eastern Europe in the post war years for fear of being killed. All the Germans get is an obscure little plaque with a grossly deflated kill count in a little Czech village. Hell it wasn't long ago the Czech Prime Minister made reference to what happened to the Sudeten Germans a justifiable act. Where was the outroar? If a politician were to say that about the Jews the "Apology Podium" would be brought out immediately, placed all over international headlines, and most likely shamed into resigning. Why? Oh yes, Bolshevik ideology still dominates the media.

[Faust]

"Hell it wasn't long ago the Czech Prime Minister made reference to what happened to the Sudeten Germans a justifiable act."

That sounds like a disgusting thing to say. Where was this?

[Spectrumwalker]

(09-17-2014 10:18 PM)Faust Wrote:  

That sounds like a disgusting thing to say. Where was this?

Here, i found this. Though all the articles only talk about how the Sudetens were "driven out". No mention is ever made in any articles that a vast majority of them were slaughtered in 1945. Or as Prime Minister Zemen says should have been"given the death penalty" for being "traitors". Mr Zemen is of course of former member of the Communist Party.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2002/feb/26/johnhooper

[Fortitudinal]

A case of 'better late than never' if I ever heard of one . . .

[Bad Hussar]

(09-17-2014 08:27 PM)Sombro Wrote:  

...

Were these death camps? "Concentration camps" is but a misnomer.
Are you equating internment camps, labor camps, concentration camps and death camps?
Nazis advanced mass death to a systematic, industrial scale. Is this what you equate Americans did post-war?
Please, school me, bro.

...

The short answer is very often, yes, internment camps are equivalent to concentration camps. It depends on the conditions in the camps and the death rate in them. If the death rate is more or less the same for a similar population outside the internment camp then, no, they are not the same. But very often this is not the case.

Imagine that, during World War 2, the US and Canada, instead of interning their Japanese populations where they did, shipped them off to remote areas in Alaska and the Yukon respectively. In Winter they mostly provided the prisoners heating fuel, but would occasionally "forget" to supply this. As a result many Japanese died of hypothermia in these camps. i.e. Their death rate was much higher than it would have been had they remained in Vancouver, San Francisco or elsewhere. Even if there was no intention on the part of the authorities to kill Japanese civilians (i.e. They genuinely forgot, or just had terrible logistics planning) the fact is it was their actions that resulted in the Japanese being essentially imprisoned in the middle of nowhere. So they had a duty of care to make sure they were taken care of.

It's difficult to equate the intentional killing of people, especially in the fashion conducted by the Nazi's, with the killing of people by neglect, but the result is largely the same. Dead people. More specifically dead people of a certain type (e.g. race or religion) that results in a definition of genocide.

It may interest you that, so I'm told, the term "concentration camp" first came into use during the 2nd Boer War in South Africa (1899-1902) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Boer_War), and was a British invention. They used these camps to hold civilian populations of Boers (who they were fighting) in the belief that if they were allowed their freedom they would offer support to their enlisted men. In these camps the scenario I painted above played out, and a fairly large percentage of the civilian Boer population died as a result of the very poor conditions in the camps. The fact that this may not have been the intention of the British is almost meaningless. If you are dead, you're dead. And if one groups actions result the a significantly disproportional death rate in the civilian population of a people they are fighting, other than through direct action of war, it should be classed as genocide.


TL;DR
So anyway. Just a long way of saying that internment camps often result in disproportional death rates of civilians of the enemy group through non war related actions. Because of this these actions should be classified as genocide. This makes internment camps, in some cases, the equivalent of the concentration camps operated by the Nazi's.

[Frank Underwood]

I understand the desire for justice or even revenge. But I don't see what worthwhile thing is accomplished by dragging this 93 year old man into a courtroom. This is a man with very little time left on earth, who is likely not in full command of his mental or physical faculties to defend himself properly. It's not like he's going to open up a new concentration camp on his 96th birthday.

"We can't forget the Nazis!" rings very hollow when the Nazi in question is an elderly man who returned to his little German village and lived out another seventy odd years of his life before anyone began to care.

[puckerman]

Many of these old folks don't even go into regular prisons. They have special prisons just for people like this, as they generally require something like nursing-home care. You can bet this costs the German taxpayer quite a bit, probably a lot more than just incarcerating average able-bodied prisoners.

[Svoboda]

This is basically Germany going in SJW mode. Something that's happening almost everywhere in Europe.
It's interesting how no allied bomber pilots will ever be prosecuted for purposely bombing non military non industrial targets such as cities to bomb away the German people. They, the officers and politicians that ordered them to do so are considered heroes and will never be held accountable.

Edit: the Americans also bombed civilian targets outside Germany in German occupied France, the Netherlands and the Czech Republic.

Notice, I'm not German and happy the Germans lost WWII.

[LeeEnfield303]

What will the Germans do when the very last Nazi is dead?

[spokepoker]

"Literally" make more.

[ivansirko]

(09-18-2014 10:25 AM)Bad Hussar Wrote:  

It may interest you that, so I'm told, the term "concentration camp" first came into use during the 2nd Boer War in South Africa (1899-1902) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Boer_War), and was a British invention. They used these camps to hold civilian populations of Boers (who they were fighting) in the belief that if they were allowed their freedom they would offer support to their enlisted men. In these camps the scenario I painted above played out, and a fairly large percentage of the civilian Boer population died as a result of the very poor conditions in the camps. The fact that this may not have been the intention of the British is almost meaningless. If you are dead, you're dead. And if one groups actions result the a significantly disproportional death rate in the civilian population of a people they are fighting, other than through direct action of war, it should be classed as genocide

The Phillipine-American War (1899-1902) had Concentration Camps as well.

I have no issue with prosecuting war crimes. But define what it is..."Its what we say it is" isnt enough. A lot of those SS guards were forced under pressure of arrest of their families to join and serve the Nazis. I am familiar with one who was Polish and ended up almost starving to death in Crete though he didn't serve in a Concentration Camp and ended up joining the Polish Army on the British side.

Also, people are pissed those 90+ year old ex-Nazi guards are subject to 5 year prison terms saying its not enough. What would be enough?