Allied Executions, Post-1945?

Question

Hey Fans

This question is one of opinion. After just watching a documentary on the end of World War Two, i've been thinking about its last point.

After the Nurembourg Trials, the Hague held trials against several British and American commanders accused of war crimes.
Most of the criminals were men who had liberated the Death Camps and having seen the horrors of industrial extermination, snapped, and executed the Waffen-SS guards on the spot.

My question is:
Was it right, in your opinion, that the officers were shot for killing their German Captives. Was this the right thing to do to prove our Libertarian credentials?

ANSWERMAN 63
Thank you for that, thats a great answer, especially of a relative from a 'military family' such as yourself.

The 'Libertarian' part was to basically say that as the Democratic, Liberal West, was is right to try these men under law or to order their killing without trial

Answer 1

The correct answer is that it was the correct thing to do according to the UCMJ (uniform code of military justice), but not in the court of public opinion.

In my opinion, it was definitely the wrong thing to do, as their response, though rashly done, was justified and understandable....but the law is the law, whether you are on the winning side or not. That having been said....it has been noted by many historians that the people who were "officially" executed for their actions against the Nazi captives were merely chosen as scapegoats.

I'm a bit confused by the "libertarian credentials" part of your question; for starters, I don't know that the US or allies ever claimed to be Libertarian. This punishment in fact runs counter to most Libertarian tenets I'm aware of, as these officers simply exacted retribution for a far greater evil...which in the strict Libertarian view is perfectly acceptable.

The reality is that far more on-the-spot executions of Nazi captives were done than the official records acknowledge, and this type of instant justice was common throughout the war, as well as during other wars in history. On the other side, many US and Allied captives were executed as well...in many cases for doing anything more than being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

In short, they were right for taking out the scum that perpetrated the horrific abuse, but were wrong for not following proper POW protocol...and unfortunately paid the ultimate price for their rash decision.

If you like WW2 documentaries, particularly ones with a lot of original footage, check out "The World At War".

Hope this helped.

Answer 2

Tough one. But if the Allied commanders had an excuse for killing German POWs, then the Germans also had a potential excuse for killing civilians in the camps -- potentially undermining the judgments of the Nurembourg Trials.

That aside, the military HAS to maintain disciple in the ranks. Otherwise people will simply do whatever they want under the stress of battle, and the commander loses control. Once you lose control, who knows what will happen? You don't want to set a precedent in the minds of future soldiers that disobeying orders and killing prisoners will be pardoned if the provocation is great enough.

Answer 3

I think they should've been tried in court, personally. But I visited the camps last year, and from how awful they are 60 years after their use, I can't say I blame the soldiers for snapping.