Nazis - great bunch of lads

[Unremarkable]

Sabra & Shatila

Sabrah is a cactus pear

Also (spelt Sabra) my favourite brand of ready prepared humous and baba ghanouzh.

 

[MOzanne]

Browning Automatic Rifle.

You know that thing only ever excelled when used by gangsters....

https://www.americanrifleman.org/Webcontent/pdf/2009-7/200971484228-dillinger.pdf

 

[LeoRoverman]

Indeed.

In a very short space of time, Onkel Adolf and his gang (having first of all pretty much made the Rule Of Law illegal) had suborned and corrupted all of Germany into behaviours that basically said "as long as I come out doing OK, all's right with the world"

I think the only thing I’d say about that is it was a similar state of play in the soviet bloc. The real problem I have is the interpretation of Hitlers 33 edict in terms of legality in the strict sense And that’s because we were in the position of being able to declare it illegal. But these kinds of things still go on and their “illegality” is moot because we can’t change the structure.
Nor is what you said strictly right. Basically it meant the state could use any means it saw fit for it’s own ends and that was legal at the time. Now if one has to accept that Germans are a regimented lot who obey orders unquestioningly, they would obey the law. But they’re not. They’re like anyone else. For some it suits, for others it doesn’t and the vast majority did as the law required and kept their heads down.

Pretty much on the money Ravers.
It was a combination of factors which included the nascent Cold War which was taken full advantage of by the then Chancellor Konrad Adenhauer.
Adenhauer was keen to reintegrate former Nazi functionaries into the postwar FRG ostensibly as a matter of reconciliation but in reality because of pragmatism.
I think he went a bit far but he did rebuild his country in quite a miraculous way.
Postwar Germany is a pet subject of mine and I find it absolutely fascinating.

Adenauer was as much a pragmatist as anything else. Also things moved quickly, in fact the creation of West Germany wasn’t envisaged in 1945. It was a political necessity by 1948 when it was founded.

 

[Stonker]

the vast majority did as the law required and kept their heads

. . . and thus became complicit in the total crime.

We don't disagree on that fundamental point.

IF we differ, it would be (in my mind) on either:

(a) If this is excusable, or;
(b) is it merely comprehensible.

I'm confident I understand it. Hence I'm confident it's inexcusable, but I can see how it came to be the way.

 

[LeoRoverman]

. . . and thus became complicit in the total crime.

We don't disagree on that fundamental point.

IF we differ, it would be (in my mind) on either:

(a) If this is excusable, or;
(b) is it merely comprehensible.

I'm confident I understand it. Hence I'm confident it's inexcusable, but I can see how it came to be the way.

And there we disagree. The current way of viewing is from our perspective and the now. Not the then. I still fail to understand this business of complicity in. Legally that requires a trial. Ok so we’ve had the trial. But that would imply that China’s people are complicit in theirs, Russians in theirs and so forth.
But we don’t prosecute them, we don’t even talk about it. All this has ever boiled down to for me, is since Germany could be defeated and was then they can be criminalised. I am not talking of excusable, which it isn’t anywhere, whether they have been beaten or not. Comprehensible? Millions of people were lied to by Stalin, Lenin et al, they have all committed crimes sanctioned by the state. I won’t even go in to the ME issues. The question is wether one would get the same reaction on behalf of other countries not “prosecuted.”
Lastly where is the mitigation for the part of the German populace that were killed for not playing. I mean they would have had to have been complicit by virtue of their country, so that’s alright then?
Of course we can see how it came to be. But for me, both wars were started by us on points of principle, not how Germany treated it’s people, that’s a red herring. Nor did we fight on a principle of democracy as we know it. We did so with france to ensure that Germany did not become the principle power in Europe. That was not in our or France’s interest. 75 years after we find ourselves facing down French policy in relation to Europe. People view French hegemony as benign 200 years ago. It wasn’t!

 

[Maple]

And there we disagree. The current way of viewing is from our perspective and the now. Not the then. I still fail to understand this business of complicity in. Legally that requires a trial. Ok so we’ve had the trial. But that would imply that China’s people are complicit in theirs, Russians in theirs and so forth.
But we don’t prosecute them, we don’t even talk about it. All this has ever boiled down to for me, is since Germany could be defeated and was then they can be criminalised. I am not talking of excusable, which it isn’t anywhere, whether they have been beaten or not. Comprehensible? Millions of people were lied to by Stalin, Lenin et al, they have all committed crimes sanctioned by the state. I won’t even go in to the ME issues. The question is wether one would get the same reaction on behalf of other countries not “prosecuted.”
Lastly where is the mitigation for the part of the German populace that were killed for not playing. I mean they would have had to have been complicit by virtue of their country, so that’s alright then?
Of course we can see how it came to be. But for me, both wars were started by us on points of principle, not how Germany treated it’s people, that’s a red herring. Nor did we fight on a principle of democracy as we know it. We did so with france to ensure that Germany did not become the principle power in Europe. That was not in our or France’s interest. 75 years after we find ourselves facing down French policy in relation to Europe. People view French hegemony as benign 200 years ago. It wasn’t!

As I've pointed out, my uncle was a German speaker Int Corps attached 21st Army Group. Sent in to Bergen-Belsen. He was no fan of the Germans, he said they knew, and many were only too happy to profit from the mass murders and deportations. Many Heer and Luftwaffe actually took part in "actions" as a bit of R&R. All this was glossed-over post-war and the SS became the alibi of a Nation.

My uncle hated Germans with a passion, he said that generation were guilty, he also said they deserved all they got - the joke of it? His father was German. A reminder that when he was doing prisoner interrogations the average soldier had three photos in his wallet, girlfriend, porn and some atrocity he's witnessed or been involved in. Common sense would suggest dumping incriminating evidence before capture, but most didn't bother - just SOP for them.

 

[Simmerit]

Pretty much on the money Ravers.
It was a combination of factors which included the nascent Cold War which was taken full advantage of by the then Chancellor Konrad Adenhauer.
Adenhauer was keen to reintegrate former Nazi functionaries into the postwar FRG ostensibly as a matter of reconciliation but in reality because of pragmatism.
I think he went a bit far but he did rebuild his country in quite a miraculous way.
Postwar Germany is a pet subject of mine and I find it absolutely fascinating.

I'd be quite interested in reading up on events - any recommendations on reading matter?