Ah, now I will admit to there having been a potential nuance. I certainly would want a trial before an execution, for instance. But I also think it would be wrong to assume these scientists were completely morally innocent. Maybe I could be persuaded from my earlier opinion of “You always shoot a Nazi” but there needs to be something to show. A diary entry saying “I’m not sure about this Hitler fella.” Something.
What you’re suggesting is stooping to the level of the nazi cruelty by a complete breach of agreement even after the other party has fulfilled their terms. Also what was that pathetic attempt at baiting the other guy by saying: “aRe yOu SuGgEsTiNg iT iS wRoNg tO sHoOt NaZiS?!!”. Like that wasn’t even the point of the other guy.
I think many of the scientists weren’t Nazis, but rather forced to work for the Nazis, fearing for their and their family’s lives. I could be wrong though, it has been a while since I’ve investigated that matter.
To be frank, it would be hard to siphon out truth from fiction at this point from personal accounts. That said, of course I distinguish between a forced Nazi accomplice and a sympathizer. I am not suggesting that they should be treated the same. I am suggesting that the U.S. was so zealous in its efforts to defeat the Russians that it wasn’t making distinctions.
I apologize if I’m misreading. Are you suggesting that it would be wrong to shoot a Nazi?
After promising safety in exchange for cooperation, and presumably without having convicted them of anything besides their former party affiliation?
Ah, now I will admit to there having been a potential nuance. I certainly would want a trial before an execution, for instance. But I also think it would be wrong to assume these scientists were completely morally innocent. Maybe I could be persuaded from my earlier opinion of “You always shoot a Nazi” but there needs to be something to show. A diary entry saying “I’m not sure about this Hitler fella.” Something.
Either trial him OR make a deal. You cant make a deal and after getting what you want proceed to trial him.
What you’re suggesting is stooping to the level of the nazi cruelty by a complete breach of agreement even after the other party has fulfilled their terms. Also what was that pathetic attempt at baiting the other guy by saying: “aRe yOu SuGgEsTiNg iT iS wRoNg tO sHoOt NaZiS?!!”. Like that wasn’t even the point of the other guy.
I think many of the scientists weren’t Nazis, but rather forced to work for the Nazis, fearing for their and their family’s lives. I could be wrong though, it has been a while since I’ve investigated that matter.
To be frank, it would be hard to siphon out truth from fiction at this point from personal accounts. That said, of course I distinguish between a forced Nazi accomplice and a sympathizer. I am not suggesting that they should be treated the same. I am suggesting that the U.S. was so zealous in its efforts to defeat the Russians that it wasn’t making distinctions.
didn’t Hitler get the idea of concentration camps from the US?
I think you are idolizing US in this a bit too much, they weren’t exactly much better than the nazis.
I mean I know for sure Eugenics were a popular idea in the US during that time, PoC were treated terribly etc.