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
NSDAP
Posts: 2530
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 9:38 pm

Nessie wrote:
Tue May 01, 2018 7:18 pm
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.
Nessie the occupying army decree the laws: where on earth do you think laws come from? God? There is no international police, no real international law: the law is the occupying power which obviously over rides the previous law of the land. If the occupying power decree it is illegal to form resistance and a capital offence that is the law.
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: 2085
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 » Wed May 02, 2018 12:59 am

NSDAP wrote:
Tue May 01, 2018 9:38 pm
Nessie wrote:
Tue May 01, 2018 7:18 pm

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.


Nessie the occupying army decree the laws: where on earth do you think laws come from? God? There is no international police, no real international law: the law is the occupying power which obviously over rides the previous law of the land. If the occupying power decree it is illegal to form resistance and a capital offence that is the law.


But Nessie, in the Ambrose Bierce story, Mr. Peyton Farquhar learned otherwise, didn't he.

And if we are specific to France, is it before or after the 1940 Armistice--or does it even matter to your argument, Nessie?

:)

“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
Scott
Site Admin
Posts: 2085
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 » Wed May 02, 2018 4:54 am

papasha wrote:
Tue May 01, 2018 6:30 pm

thread de[r]ailed 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


It could be argued that Dirlewanger or (more on point) Kaminski were themselves brigands or freebooters like the Blackwater company, so that is probably not relevant to an overall question about whether anti-Partisan warfare is inherently illegitimate, let alone Genocidal.

The Einsatzgruppen were basically operating under OKW authority and are another complicated subject, but even outright preemptive assassination of enemy cadre like the Commissar Order, drone strikes, or the Phoenix Project during in the Vietnam War can be justified on legitimate military grounds.

And Omer Bartov might think otherwise, but Not everything about World War II was just Hitler and the Joos.

This debate was very short notice and it got very personal and weird, I suppose. Mr. Hunt seems to have skedaddled now and I don't recall anyone ever asking me to close the thread.

:)

“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: 25019
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: DEBATE between Eric Hunt & Friedrich Paul Berg

Post by Nessie » Wed May 02, 2018 4:57 pm

Scott wrote:
Wed May 02, 2018 12:59 am
NSDAP wrote:
Tue May 01, 2018 9:38 pm
Nessie wrote:
Tue May 01, 2018 7:18 pm

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.


Nessie the occupying army decree the laws: where on earth do you think laws come from? God? There is no international police, no real international law: the law is the occupying power which obviously over rides the previous law of the land. If the occupying power decree it is illegal to form resistance and a capital offence that is the law.


But Nessie, in the Ambrose Bierce story, Mr. Peyton Farquhar learned otherwise, didn't he.

And if we are specific to France, is it before or after the 1940 Armistice--or does it even matter to your argument, Nessie?

:)
The goalposts are being shifted, since there is no international law as you previously suggested. But, lets go with Nazi laws. Link to and quote the laws the Nazis introduced which made civilians fighting back 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
Nessie
Posts: 25019
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: DEBATE between Eric Hunt & Friedrich Paul Berg

Post by Nessie » Wed May 02, 2018 5:10 pm

Scott wrote:
Wed May 02, 2018 4:54 am
papasha wrote:
Tue May 01, 2018 6:30 pm

thread de[r]ailed 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


It could be argued that Dirlewanger or (more on point) Kaminski were themselves brigands or freebooters like the Blackwater company, so that is probably not relevant to an overall question about whether anti-Partisan warfare is inherently illegitimate, let alone Genocidal.

The Einsatzgruppen were basically operating under OKW authority and are another complicated subject, but even outright preemptive assassination of enemy cadre like the Commissar Order, drone strikes, or the Phoenix Project during in the Vietnam War can be justified on legitimate military grounds.

And Omer Bartov might think otherwise, but Not everything about World War II was just Hitler and the Joos.

This debate was very short notice and it got very personal and weird, I suppose. Mr. Hunt seems to have skedaddled now and I don't recall anyone ever asking me to close the thread.

:)
The OSRs are interesting in the way they differentiate between the groups they were dealing with;

http://www.holocaustresearchproject.org ... port8.html

"During the night, exchange of heavy fire between Lithuanian insurgents, Jews, and irregulars. Very difficult to secure the prisons, which are totally overcrowded. During the last 3 days Lithuanian partisan groups have already killed several thousand Jews."

http://www.holocaustresearchproject.org ... ort91.html

"In the period August 25 to September 9, 1941, 595 persons were executed. This number is composed of Jews, Communists officials, members of the JBV, and dangerous mentally ill persons."

and why people were shot;

http://www.holocaustresearchproject.org ... ort73.html

"In Minsk, another 21 persons, who spread anti-German agitation by whispering propaganda among the population, were liquidated"

http://www.holocaustresearchproject.org ... rt175.html

"A Jew was shot in public in the Baranovichi Ghetto because he refused to work"
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
Scott
Site Admin
Posts: 2085
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 » Wed May 02, 2018 6:31 pm

Nessie,

I realize that in Western countries they tend to romanticize and glorify francs-tireurs, but in other countries this is not the case.

Try being in a French colonial country like Viet-Nam or Algeria after World War II and being a local who just got caught taking a pot-shot at French Foreign Legion troops. You would be lucky if they treated you better than the Germans would have or the Americans would today.

You keep wanting an International Law citation but "International Law" is somewhat unclear at best and is not based on "LAW" in any sense but upon treaty interpretations, as I said.

And I stand by what I said that shooting or hanging "unlawful combatants" has a long precedent of justification by Hague/Geneva precedents, among other notions, as this article on Francs-Tireurs shows:


Prisoner status

Before the two world wars, the term franc-tireur was sometimes used for an armed fighter who, if captured, was not necessarily entitled to prisoner of war status. An issue of disagreement at the 1899 Hague Conference, the controversy generated the Martens Clause. The Martens Clause was introduced as a compromise between the Great Powers, who considered francs-tireurs to be unlawful combatants subject to execution on capture, and smaller states, who maintained that they should be considered lawful combatants. [7][8]

After World War II, during the Hostages Trial,[9] the seventh of the Nuremberg Trials, the tribunal found that, on the question of partisans, according to the then-current laws of war, the partisan fighters in southeast Europe could not be considered lawful belligerents under Article 1 of the Hague Convention. [10] In relation to Wilhelm List, the tribunal stated:

We are obliged to hold that such guerrillas were francs tireurs who, upon capture, could be subjected to the death penalty. Consequently, no criminal responsibility attaches to the defendant List because of the execution of captured partisans... [10]

The post-war Geneva Convention established new protocols; according to Article 4 of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949, francs-tireurs are entitled to prisoner-of-war status provided that they are commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates, have a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance, carry arms openly, and conduct their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war. [Emphases added.]

/wiki/Francs-tireurs


I am not sure if you are trolling or genuinely struggling with the concept.

I guess that Westerners are so used to seeing the Krauts depicted as the Bad Guys that you can do anything you want to their soldiers and be considering a fücking hero of some kind. That is a cringe-worthy way of thinking at best.

The new requirements on PoW status were beefed up a bit after WWII (Geneva, 1949, etc.) -- not that it really matters, however, unless you are not a Superpower state that also loses a war unconditionally.

:roll:

“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
NSDAP
Posts: 2530
Joined: Wed Dec 13, 2017 5:33 am
Location: München, Deutschland

Re: DEBATE between Eric Hunt & Friedrich Paul Berg

Post by NSDAP » Wed May 02, 2018 6:55 pm

Scott wrote:
Wed May 02, 2018 6:31 pm

Try being in a French colonial country like Viet-Nam or Algeria after World War II and being a local who just got caught taking a pot-shot at French Foreign Legion troops. You would be lucky if they treated you better than the Germans would have or the Americans would today.
The French in their Colonies did not have firing squads but continued to use the Judicial beheading device. The machine below was used extensively in Vietnam Saigon against partisans. Over 1,000 accused revolutionaries stood trial for the Yen Bai mutiny, and the top leadership paid the top penalty this date — but as quietly as the French could manage. They were whisked out of their cells on the preceding evening and taken by secret convoy on a four-hour ride to the Yen Bai execution grounds, where a guillotine had been covertly erected.

We are going to go to pay our debt for the country. The flag of independence must be dyed with blood. The flower of freedom must be sown with blood. The country needs more and more sacrifices of its people. The revolution would meet success finally. We want to say goodbye to all of you with our respects.

-Nguyen Thai Hoc, taking his final leave of imprisoned VNQDD comrades

From 4:55 a.m. at Yen Bai, the thirteen men one by one were each lashed to the plank. One by one, each of their necks were fixed by the lunette under the blade. One by one, each cried out “Vietnam!” as the blade fell.

Bui Tu Toan
Bui Van Chuan
Nguyen An
Ha Van Lao
Dao Van Nhit
Ngo Van Du
Nguyen Duc Thinh
Nguyen Van Tiem
Do Van Su
Bui Van Cuu
Nguyen Nhu Lien
Pho Duc Chinh, who allegedly asked (it’s unclear to me whether it was granted) to be guillotined face-up — perhaps a show of bravado
The founder of the VNQDD Nguyen Thai Hoc, whose name now graces a major street in the heart of Hanoi
Image
Image
That Guillotine took a thousand heads in that single mass execution alone. America supported South Vietnam when the regime guillotined prisoners from 1956 to 1960 and the gruesome contraption is now still on display, its heavy metal blade locked in position, ready to drop.
Rusting in Ho Chi Minh City's humid, tropical air, the guillotine was imported to Vietnam by French colonialists in the early 20th century. Another guillotine, also abandoned by the defeated French, is in Vietnam's capital, Hanoi.
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
been-there
Propositions Moderator
Posts: 7804
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:59 am
Contact:

Re: DEBATE between Eric Hunt & Friedrich Paul Berg

Post by been-there » Thu May 03, 2018 3:20 am

NSDAP wrote:
Wed May 02, 2018 6:55 pm
The French in their Colonies did not have firing squads but continued to use the Judicial beheading device. The machine below was used extensively in Vietnam Saigon against partisans. Over 1,000 accused revolutionaries stood trial for the Yen Bai mutiny, and the top leadership paid the top penalty this date — but as quietly as the French could manage. They were whisked out of their cells on the preceding evening and taken by secret convoy on a four-hour ride to the Yen Bai execution grounds, where a guillotine had been covertly erected.
“We are going to go to pay our debt for the country. The flag of independence must be dyed with blood. The flower of freedom must be sown with blood. The country needs more and more sacrifices of its people. The revolution would meet success finally. We want to say goodbye to all of you with our respects.”
-- Nguyen Thai Hoc, taking his final leave of imprisoned VNQDD comrades
From 4:55 a.m. at Yen Bai, the thirteen men one by one were each lashed to the plank. One by one, each of their necks were fixed by the lunette under the blade. One by one, each cried out “Vietnam!” as the blade fell.

Bui Tu Toan, Bui Van Chuan, Nguyen An, Ha Van Lao, Dao Van Nhit, Ngo Van Du, Nguyen Duc Thinh, Nguyen Van Tiem, Do Van Su, Bui Van Cuu, Nguyen Nhu Lien, Pho Duc Chinh —who allegedly asked (it’s unclear to me whether it was granted) to be guillotined face-up — perhaps a show of bravado, the founder of the VNQDD Nguyen Thai Hoc, whose name now graces a major street in the heart of Hanoi
Image
Image
That Guillotine took a thousand heads in that single mass execution alone. America supported South Vietnam when the regime guillotined prisoners from 1956 to 1960 and the gruesome contraption is now still on display, its heavy metal blade locked in position, ready to drop.
Rusting in Ho Chi Minh City's humid, tropical air, the guillotine was imported to Vietnam by French colonialists in the early 20th century. Another guillotine, also abandoned by the defeated French, is in Vietnam's capital, Hanoi.
Thanks for this. I had absolutely zero knowledge about France's headchopping activities in Vietnam during the 1950's, nor of America's tacit support of it.
"When people who are honestly mistaken learn the truth,
they either cease being mistaken
or they cease being honest"
-- Anonymous

User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 25019
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: DEBATE between Eric Hunt & Friedrich Paul Berg

Post by Nessie » Thu May 03, 2018 5:06 am

Scott wrote:
Wed May 02, 2018 6:31 pm
......

After World War II, during the Hostages Trial,[9] the seventh of the Nuremberg Trials, the tribunal found that, on the question of partisans, according to the then-current laws of war, the partisan fighters in southeast Europe could not be considered lawful belligerents under Article 1 of the Hague Convention. [10] In relation to Wilhelm List, the tribunal stated:

We are obliged to hold that such guerrillas were francs tireurs who, upon capture, could be subjected to the death penalty. Consequently, no criminal responsibility attaches to the defendant List because of the execution of captured partisans... [10]

The post-war Geneva Convention established new protocols; according to Article 4 of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949, francs-tireurs are entitled to prisoner-of-war status provided that they are commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates, have a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance, carry arms openly, and conduct their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war. [Emphases added.]

/wiki/Francs-tireurs


I am not sure if you are trolling or genuinely struggling with the concept.

It is not me who is struggling. You claimed "Whatever they are called, under the Hague and Geneva international agreements (treaties) they are Illegal Combatants...." when I referenced civilians who fight back. That was wrong.

You have since moved the goalposts to irregular military and partisans. I accept that where a defeated and occupied country is able to organise those with military training, soldiers who avoided capture etc, those have been defined as illegal combatants.
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
Nessie
Posts: 25019
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: DEBATE between Eric Hunt & Friedrich Paul Berg

Post by Nessie » Thu May 03, 2018 5:09 am

been-there wrote:
Thu May 03, 2018 3:20 am
NSDAP wrote:
Wed May 02, 2018 6:55 pm
The French in their Colonies did not have firing squads but continued to use the Judicial beheading device. The machine below was used extensively in Vietnam Saigon against partisans. Over 1,000 accused revolutionaries stood trial for the Yen Bai mutiny, and the top leadership paid the top penalty this date — but as quietly as the French could manage. They were whisked out of their cells on the preceding evening and taken by secret convoy on a four-hour ride to the Yen Bai execution grounds, where a guillotine had been covertly erected.
“We are going to go to pay our debt for the country. The flag of independence must be dyed with blood. The flower of freedom must be sown with blood. The country needs more and more sacrifices of its people. The revolution would meet success finally. We want to say goodbye to all of you with our respects.”
-- Nguyen Thai Hoc, taking his final leave of imprisoned VNQDD comrades
From 4:55 a.m. at Yen Bai, the thirteen men one by one were each lashed to the plank. One by one, each of their necks were fixed by the lunette under the blade. One by one, each cried out “Vietnam!” as the blade fell.

Bui Tu Toan, Bui Van Chuan, Nguyen An, Ha Van Lao, Dao Van Nhit, Ngo Van Du, Nguyen Duc Thinh, Nguyen Van Tiem, Do Van Su, Bui Van Cuu, Nguyen Nhu Lien, Pho Duc Chinh —who allegedly asked (it’s unclear to me whether it was granted) to be guillotined face-up — perhaps a show of bravado, the founder of the VNQDD Nguyen Thai Hoc, whose name now graces a major street in the heart of Hanoi
Image
Image
That Guillotine took a thousand heads in that single mass execution alone. America supported South Vietnam when the regime guillotined prisoners from 1956 to 1960 and the gruesome contraption is now still on display, its heavy metal blade locked in position, ready to drop.
Rusting in Ho Chi Minh City's humid, tropical air, the guillotine was imported to Vietnam by French colonialists in the early 20th century. Another guillotine, also abandoned by the defeated French, is in Vietnam's capital, Hanoi.
Thanks for this. I had absolutely zero knowledge about France's headchopping activities in Vietnam during the 1950's, nor of America's tacit support of it.
France was famous for use of the guillotine, its last use was 1977, in France and the death penalty was abolished in 1981.
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 8 guests