DEBATE between Eric Hunt & Friedrich Paul Berg

Discuss the alleged Nazi genocide or other wartime atrocities without fear of censorship. No bullying of fellow posters is allowed at RODOH. If you can't be civil, please address the argument and not the participants. Do not use disparaging alterations of the user-names of other RODOH posters or their family members. Failure to heed warnings from Moderators will result in a 24 hour ban (or longer if necessary).
User avatar
Scott
Site Admin
Posts: 2066
Joined: Tue May 15, 2012 2:43 am
Location: USA, West of the Pecos
Contact:

Re: DEBATE between Eric Hunt & Friedrich Paul Berg

Post by Scott » Tue May 01, 2018 1:40 am

Any combatants not under the * command * of a sovereign state are "illegal."

This is in part because sovereign states can and do negotiate their "terms" (i.e., for peace) and they typically extend recognition and "protections" to each other's combatants. These states then are not by custom, convention, or treaty obliged to extend to "terrorists" or "Illegal Combatants" that same recognition--nor to BRIGANDS (look it up) as they would to enemy PoWs.

ILLEGAL is a strong term that nobody really likes to use but it it what it is.

Remember the example I gave you of Peyton Farquhar, the Confederate sympathizer and plantation owner from the famous Ambrose Bierce story, An Occurrence at Owl Creek Bridge. If Mr. Farquhar had been wearing a Confederate uniform or simply identified himself as a Confederate soldier under color of law, then he would (or should) have been taken prisoner-of-war instead of hanged.


The ICRC provided commentary saying that "regular armed forces" satisfy four Hague Conventions (1899 and 1907) (Hague IV) conditions.[2] In other words, "regular forces" must satisfy the following criteria:

─ being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates to a party of conflict
─ having a fixed distinctive emblem recognizable at a distance
─ carrying arms openly
─ conducting operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war

/wiki/Irregular_military


PLEASE NOTE THAT "Illegal" and "Irregular" are not the same thing, and I am not saying that; they are related terms but you have to be very careful with the terminology if you are not clear about the concepts. Guerillas are probably Irregulars and they may or may not be legitimate or legal.

This should all be pretty clear from the two articles that I cited, especially the second one on Irregular Warfare.

I am more than willing to continue trying to explain this or to provide more authoritative evidence if you are are legitimately interested. I wish that Junior Bush had understood the concept better.

"Unconditional Surrender" is another War Crime--or at least another egregious atrocity--but that may be another separate issue than what we are addressing.

In my opinion, Churchill's plans to "Set Europe Ablaze" was a huge War Crime or egregious atrocity, but Winnie did not lose the war so was never held to account in that regard.

:)

“Now we have forced Hitler to war so he no longer can peacefully annihilate one piece of the Treaty of Versailles after the other.”
~ Major General J.F.C. Fuller,
historian – England

User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 24894
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: DEBATE between Eric Hunt & Friedrich Paul Berg

Post by Nessie » Tue May 01, 2018 9:12 am

Scott wrote:
Tue May 01, 2018 1:40 am
Any combatants not under the * command * of a sovereign state are "illegal."
Please list the laws that back that claim up. In particular, a law which makes civilians forming a resistance and fighting back against an occupation by a foreign enemy. Like when Nazi Germany occupied France.
Consistency and standards in evidencing viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2721#p87772
My actual argument viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2834

Scott - On a side note, this forum is turning into a joke with the vicious attacks--and completely unnecessary vitriol--that everybody is making upon each other.

User avatar
NSDAP
Posts: 2526
Joined: Wed Dec 13, 2017 5:33 am
Location: München, Deutschland

Re: DEBATE between Eric Hunt & Friedrich Paul Berg

Post by NSDAP » Tue May 01, 2018 9:17 am

Nessie wrote:
Tue May 01, 2018 9:12 am
Please list the laws that back that claim up. In particular, a law which makes civilians forming a resistance and fighting back against an occupation by a foreign enemy. Like when Nazi Germany occupied France.
You have intelligence, stop this constant asking for information. You said you were keen to find the truth, so instead of trolling do research and put input into here.
Wenn wir die Flagge, die wir aus dem Nichts gerissen haben, nicht halten können, müssen Sie, meine Söhne und Töchter, greifendie Fahne in deiner Faust...Führer der NSDAP Adolf Hitler
𝕹𝕾𝕯𝕬𝕻

User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 24894
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: DEBATE between Eric Hunt & Friedrich Paul Berg

Post by Nessie » Tue May 01, 2018 9:18 am

NSDAP wrote:
Tue May 01, 2018 9:17 am
Nessie wrote:
Tue May 01, 2018 9:12 am
Please list the laws that back that claim up. In particular, a law which makes civilians forming a resistance and fighting back against an occupation by a foreign enemy. Like when Nazi Germany occupied France.
You have intelligence, stop this constant asking for information. You said you were keen to find the truth, so instead of trolling do research and put input into here.
Scott made a claim. I would like to see his evidence. I want to see the law that makes fighting back against an occupying enemy illegal.
Consistency and standards in evidencing viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2721#p87772
My actual argument viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2834

Scott - On a side note, this forum is turning into a joke with the vicious attacks--and completely unnecessary vitriol--that everybody is making upon each other.

User avatar
NSDAP
Posts: 2526
Joined: Wed Dec 13, 2017 5:33 am
Location: München, Deutschland

Re: DEBATE between Eric Hunt & Friedrich Paul Berg

Post by NSDAP » Tue May 01, 2018 9:29 am

Nessie wrote:
Tue May 01, 2018 9:18 am
NSDAP wrote:
Tue May 01, 2018 9:17 am
Nessie wrote:
Tue May 01, 2018 9:12 am
Please list the laws that back that claim up. In particular, a law which makes civilians forming a resistance and fighting back against an occupation by a foreign enemy. Like when Nazi Germany occupied France.
You have intelligence, stop this constant asking for information. You said you were keen to find the truth, so instead of trolling do research and put input into here.
Scott made a claim. I would like to see his evidence. I want to see the law that makes fighting back against an occupying enemy illegal.
I am equivalent to the old Gestapo (SD) and I research and research and research. The only clarification is when there is an issue with clarification. Nessie your common tactic and it does appear strategic is to say "where is the evidence" or the equivalent. If you were totally honest and I believe you are, you would do your own research and give back your findings in a coherent manner. I have no issues with you disagreeing as I know we do not know the whole truth.
Wenn wir die Flagge, die wir aus dem Nichts gerissen haben, nicht halten können, müssen Sie, meine Söhne und Töchter, greifendie Fahne in deiner Faust...Führer der NSDAP Adolf Hitler
𝕹𝕾𝕯𝕬𝕻

User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 24894
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: DEBATE between Eric Hunt & Friedrich Paul Berg

Post by Nessie » Tue May 01, 2018 9:53 am

NSDAP wrote:
Tue May 01, 2018 9:29 am
Nessie wrote:
Tue May 01, 2018 9:18 am
NSDAP wrote:
Tue May 01, 2018 9:17 am
Nessie wrote:
Tue May 01, 2018 9:12 am
Please list the laws that back that claim up. In particular, a law which makes civilians forming a resistance and fighting back against an occupation by a foreign enemy. Like when Nazi Germany occupied France.
You have intelligence, stop this constant asking for information. You said you were keen to find the truth, so instead of trolling do research and put input into here.
Scott made a claim. I would like to see his evidence. I want to see the law that makes fighting back against an occupying enemy illegal.
I am equivalent to the old Gestapo and I research and research and research. The only clarification is when there is an issue with clarification. Nessie your common tactic and it does appear strategic is to say "where is the evidence" or the equivalent. If you were totally honest and I believe you are, you would do your own research and give back your findings in a coherent manner. I have no issues with you disagreeing as I know we do not know the whole truth.
That reads as a reversal of the burden of proof. But, in good faith, I did some research and I found this UN resolution from 1982;

http://www.un.org/documents/ga/res/37/a37r043.htm

"Reaffirms the legitimacy of the struggle of peoples for independence, territorial integrity, national unity and liberation from colonial and foreign domination and foreign occupation by all available means, including armed struggle;"

I cannot find any law that makes armed resistance by civilians when occupied by a foreign power, such as when France was occupied by Nazi Germany.

So, maybe Scott could show me the law which made such "illegal".
Consistency and standards in evidencing viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2721#p87772
My actual argument viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2834

Scott - On a side note, this forum is turning into a joke with the vicious attacks--and completely unnecessary vitriol--that everybody is making upon each other.

User avatar
NSDAP
Posts: 2526
Joined: Wed Dec 13, 2017 5:33 am
Location: München, Deutschland

Re: DEBATE between Eric Hunt & Friedrich Paul Berg

Post by NSDAP » Tue May 01, 2018 10:03 am

Which law are you talking about. Back then apart from a convention each country made there own law. Like now there are issues with the US breaking international law, but there is no world police or Judges to bring them to task. Can you suggest a way forward: what is happening now clearly does not work for multivariate reasons. If the integrity of this planet is at stake then surely another system. We obviously feel National Socialist ideals are the answer; your thoughts are appreciated. Thank you.
Wenn wir die Flagge, die wir aus dem Nichts gerissen haben, nicht halten können, müssen Sie, meine Söhne und Töchter, greifendie Fahne in deiner Faust...Führer der NSDAP Adolf Hitler
𝕹𝕾𝕯𝕬𝕻

User avatar
Scott
Site Admin
Posts: 2066
Joined: Tue May 15, 2012 2:43 am
Location: USA, West of the Pecos
Contact:

Re: DEBATE between Eric Hunt & Friedrich Paul Berg

Post by Scott » Tue May 01, 2018 11:13 am

I already stated that International Laws are not LAWS in a true sense. This is because they are derived not from sovereignty but from agreements between sovereigns--or longstanding customs and standard practices amongst sovereign states.

So if the Union troops hang Peyton Farquhar they can do so for whatever reasons they want--such as a supposed law against wearing silk underwear on Sunday.

In this case there is a credible case that the plantation owner and Confederate sympathizer Peyton Farquhar is an Outlaw and thus they treat him accordingly.

Do you understand how this works?

Nowadays if "Freedom Fighters" targeted American troops just strolling down the avenue and slurping snow cones while stationed in some Third World shithole, the likely response would be a missile attack on some village. And rightly so. Napalm in the morning really focuses the mind.

My only objection here would be that the attacked troops were there in the first place and carrying water for ZOG, not any undue concern over the measure of the retaliatory response.

Hitler probably never gave it much thought either as long as he had his boys' backs (i.e., looked out for his troops).

:)

“Now we have forced Hitler to war so he no longer can peacefully annihilate one piece of the Treaty of Versailles after the other.”
~ Major General J.F.C. Fuller,
historian – England

papasha
Posts: 90
Joined: Mon Jul 31, 2017 11:07 pm
Contact:

Re: DEBATE between Eric Hunt & Friedrich Paul Berg

Post by papasha » Tue May 01, 2018 6:30 pm

thread detailed by Scott's edgeposting :p tbh I'd rather eat a drone strike than get worked over by Dirlewanger's SS battalion of convicts who just indiscriminately raped and slaughtered whatever village or town they were let loose on

tldr EG massacred Jews in the East under orders from Himmler and Reich Main Security. Also FPBerg acted like a drama queen in his debate against Hunt

User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 24894
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: DEBATE between Eric Hunt & Friedrich Paul Berg

Post by Nessie » Tue May 01, 2018 7:18 pm

Scott wrote:
Tue May 01, 2018 11:13 am
I already stated that International Laws are not LAWS in a true sense. This is because they are derived not from sovereignty but from agreements between sovereigns--or longstanding customs and standard practices amongst sovereign states.

So if the Union troops hang Peyton Farquhar they can do so for whatever reasons they want--such as a supposed law against wearing silk underwear on Sunday.

In this case there is a credible case that the plantation owner and Confederate sympathizer Peyton Farquhar is an Outlaw and thus they treat him accordingly.

Do you understand how this works?

Nowadays if "Freedom Fighters" targeted American troops just strolling down the avenue and slurping snow cones while stationed in some Third World shithole, the likely response would be a missile attack on some village. And rightly so. Napalm in the morning really focuses the mind.

My only objection here would be that the attacked troops were there in the first place and carrying water for ZOG, not any undue concern over the measure of the retaliatory response.

Hitler probably never gave it much thought either as long as he had his boys' back.

:)
It is not illegal for civilians to fight back against an occupying army. It was not illegal for French, Greek etc people to form resistances and fight back against Nazi occupation.
Consistency and standards in evidencing viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2721#p87772
My actual argument viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2834

Scott - On a side note, this forum is turning into a joke with the vicious attacks--and completely unnecessary vitriol--that everybody is making upon each other.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 11 guests