Russia was bad (and still is if you look into their zone of influence), but did not lose the war. You are right about that part. But there would be no need for Nuremberg trials without German crimes against humanity. What they did was just insane.
Not sure why you're being downvoted. Even the United States' chief prosecutor, Justice Robert Jackson, told Truman that the Allies were guilty of many of the crimes they were prosecuting German officers over during the Nuremberg Trials.
As if a Democrat who dropped Nukes without the advice of the military leaders would care about "war crimes". Also a lot of the "evidence" against the Nazi was only "found" by the Soviets. The US forces didn't have much, but everyone should just trust the Soviets, because they had nothing to gain from lying now did they? They were our "allies". Trust the Soviets (science)!
I mean, Patton wanted to keep marching all the way to Moscow. He was right. The Soviets had no way to stop us at that point. No navy, no air force, and a depleted and exhausted army.
There were plenty of people who were deserving of the noose or worse after what they did to the Jews. There were also plenty of people deserving, on both the western and eastern front, of the same after what they did to ethnic Germans in the aftermath of WW2, and WW1 for that matter, considering the latter atrocities is what lead to the rise of Hitler and the NAZIs in many ways.
The Nuremberg Tribunal was the first court to establish atrocity law. Atrocity is defined as widespread and systematic rape, torture, murder, and genocide. The war crimes tried in this court set the base line for atrocity law, not the ideal for perfection. Nobody knows what punishment will prevent people from committing atrocities (i.e. you can only execute a man once even though he may have murdered hundreds of thousands), but the study of knowledge gained during the investigations and trials begins to attempt to understand the process which leads to the truism that, "every person has the capacity to commit atrocity." It is that knowledge which may help us to understand that any given situation is getting ripe for atrocities and perhaps we can find a way to avoid the situation from escalating.
That was a Kangaroo court. They were prosecuted because they lost the war.
Nobody ever got prosecuted for the mass firebombing of civilians in Germany or Japan.
No, they were prosecuted because of horrible crimes.
did russia ever get prosecuted like that? they were just as bad...
And why did the USSR get a pass for invading Poland when that supposedly started the war?
Stop asking questions
Russia was bad (and still is if you look into their zone of influence), but did not lose the war. You are right about that part. But there would be no need for Nuremberg trials without German crimes against humanity. What they did was just insane.
Not sure why you're being downvoted. Even the United States' chief prosecutor, Justice Robert Jackson, told Truman that the Allies were guilty of many of the crimes they were prosecuting German officers over during the Nuremberg Trials.
As if a Democrat who dropped Nukes without the advice of the military leaders would care about "war crimes". Also a lot of the "evidence" against the Nazi was only "found" by the Soviets. The US forces didn't have much, but everyone should just trust the Soviets, because they had nothing to gain from lying now did they? They were our "allies". Trust the Soviets (science)!
I mean, Patton wanted to keep marching all the way to Moscow. He was right. The Soviets had no way to stop us at that point. No navy, no air force, and a depleted and exhausted army.
There were plenty of people who were deserving of the noose or worse after what they did to the Jews. There were also plenty of people deserving, on both the western and eastern front, of the same after what they did to ethnic Germans in the aftermath of WW2, and WW1 for that matter, considering the latter atrocities is what lead to the rise of Hitler and the NAZIs in many ways.
Shouldnt of lost then. Tough nuts.
Yeah fuck the truth
The Nuremberg Tribunal was the first court to establish atrocity law. Atrocity is defined as widespread and systematic rape, torture, murder, and genocide. The war crimes tried in this court set the base line for atrocity law, not the ideal for perfection. Nobody knows what punishment will prevent people from committing atrocities (i.e. you can only execute a man once even though he may have murdered hundreds of thousands), but the study of knowledge gained during the investigations and trials begins to attempt to understand the process which leads to the truism that, "every person has the capacity to commit atrocity." It is that knowledge which may help us to understand that any given situation is getting ripe for atrocities and perhaps we can find a way to avoid the situation from escalating.
They were guilty as hell. The winners getting free passes does not absolve the losers.