Poll: Would you harbor a nazi?
- Thread starter Drake_Dercon
- Start date
I'd turn him in, as other people have said, it sounds like he was in a postion of power and therefore wasn't just 'following orders'. I also trust that in this day and age and in this country (UK) that he will be given a fair trial and won't just be excecuted.
Although if the case was that the police would kill him straight away then I would probably shelter him.
Although if the case was that the police would kill him straight away then I would probably shelter him.
Yes. He has "paid" for his crimes with internal torture and fear.
Hell, I chose "other" because if it came down to it, I'd get into a gunfight with police while he escapes if need be. You come under my wing, the talons are not just for show. >.>
<.<
The police are watching me type this, aren't they? >.>
BRB, hiding in bunker. (-_-)
Hell, I chose "other" because if it came down to it, I'd get into a gunfight with police while he escapes if need be. You come under my wing, the talons are not just for show. >.>
<.<
The police are watching me type this, aren't they? >.>
BRB, hiding in bunker. (-_-)
Regular grunts, especially those who were on the Nazi side, aren't exactly given much choice in following orders. If a Nazi soldier was to speak out against what had happened in these camps to his commanding officer at the time, it is quite likely the commanding officer would have put a bullet between the guys eyes without so much as batting his eyes.duncants said:
Commanding officers, meanwhile, have much more authority and are basically the people calling the shots: In other words, they MAKE the orders.
I guess what I'm saying is that in these situations a regular soldier or grunt doesn't have much choice in these matters normally, while a commanding officer does: That is why you normally only see generals or commanding officers tried for war-crimes and rarely individual corporals.
I've studied history. The Nazi party was to many, just a successful political body that was reclaiming Germanys lost glory, and forging a future for the betterment of its citizens. A large portion of their personel were unaware of concentration camps, and the crimes on humanity being committed. It wasn't until the last few years of the war where racial propaganda began to become intensely powerful. By that time, all the other propaganda had permeated into a strong enough subliminal force that they really could say "jews are thieves" and the designers knew that it would carry the desired effect.
The people put into posts in concentration camps... these are a unique case. They knew of the horrors, but could they do anything about it? Short of sacrafacing their own lives and commiting treason of the state (refusing to carry out their duty, desertion, releasing the prisoners), they were in a corner. They were given orders to operate these death factories. They were orders. They were trained to carry out orders. Where were they to do?
[sub] There is no easy answer. Even after years of study, reading accounts, and writing about these topics, there is NO "correct" answer. We may not realize it, but the same dilema exists in modern military; if your CO orders you to commit a morally questionable act in the name of your nation (shoot a child because someone thought he might maybe be carrying an explosive device), you the soldier can either carry out your orders, or put everyone at risk by disobeying them. Who is the criminal in either situation? There is no morally right answer. There never is. The only "right" answer comes from victors.[/sub]
If I knew this man, this reformed ex-nazi, and [em]I believed[/em] he was a good man, and he regretted his actions, yes, I would hide him.
The people put into posts in concentration camps... these are a unique case. They knew of the horrors, but could they do anything about it? Short of sacrafacing their own lives and commiting treason of the state (refusing to carry out their duty, desertion, releasing the prisoners), they were in a corner. They were given orders to operate these death factories. They were orders. They were trained to carry out orders. Where were they to do?
[sub] There is no easy answer. Even after years of study, reading accounts, and writing about these topics, there is NO "correct" answer. We may not realize it, but the same dilema exists in modern military; if your CO orders you to commit a morally questionable act in the name of your nation (shoot a child because someone thought he might maybe be carrying an explosive device), you the soldier can either carry out your orders, or put everyone at risk by disobeying them. Who is the criminal in either situation? There is no morally right answer. There never is. The only "right" answer comes from victors.[/sub]
If I knew this man, this reformed ex-nazi, and [em]I believed[/em] he was a good man, and he regretted his actions, yes, I would hide him.
Fair enough, though to me this guy sound like a camp leader or something, not someone actually involved with the planning of genocide. For me it's like this, if the guy is 80 years old, unless he was actually planning with Hitler how to most effectively 'cleanse' the Reich I see no point in destroying his last few years..Infernai said:
I think this is a good answer and the one I would pick for myself as well. Even though he feels bad for what he did, he has still comitted crimes against humanity. But I would still testify on that he has always treated the neighborhood well.madwarper said:
And it was just announced two days ago that someone in my country has founded a new nazi party... Why won't these people learn from the past?
Being a German soldier during WW2 kind of defaulted to being a Nazi...jamesworkshop said:
Every soldier swore allegiance to the party and to Hitler and any dissidence was dealt with harshly.
You can argue that swearing allegiance as a mandatory condition doesn't reflect the individual, but when all is said and done, what is the difference between a man who supports an ideology and a man who doesn't oppose it?
Other: I'd punch him in the face and stomach a bunch of times and send him out of the house when the cops are gone.
Nazis did bad things but so did every other major organisation you can name. I'm pretty sure you can't call them an organisation but whatever MOVING ON. I'd hide him. If he's sorry about what he has done that just means while he was doing it something was bottling up his natural instincts of being a good person, say, fear of punishment. Even if he was an officer if he didn't get his troops to kill what Hitler told him to kill then he was going to be jammed through a woodchipper. Which isn't to say Hitler was bad either. There have been worse people, and if you want to get technical he was really just the face of the whole operation. His second in command decided that scapegoating the jews would be a good way of pulling the country together. Not to mention that fact that Hitler was an excellent leader.
Honestly I think the difference is quite big, I for one have done a lot of things only because everybody else does it and i'm sure almost everyone else has too. The second one makes you a coward or ignorant, or both. The first one makes you truly accountable for the results of the ideology in question and even then, if it was up to me, everyone should get at least a second chance.Custard_Angel said: