I’ve strung together an argument.
I think anyone who makes a statement that the Nazis would have tried Churchill for a war crime for a collective strategy from all the western allies without seeing the irony of that statement is clearly someone who is more interested in the logic of German analysts and not British ones - especially when he then suggests the Nuremberg trials were rigged and therefore illegitimate.
I also constantly asked what question was asked on question time and why as no one can answer it. The why is significant. There was no defending of internment camps (they were not camps where a single race were moved for extermination) but a sensible historic perspective. The point again is the question initially raised in its correct context was nothing to do with concentration camps. It was made because of a comment made by a certain shadow chancellor regarding a uk incident - so it’s not ironic to see someone who sees fit to criticise a national hero while standing proudly by an organisation which ritually slaughtered innocent women and children? That’s the real point
Then we have post war Germany and when it’s greatest chancellor was exposed via hidden papers to have been a “very enthusiastic National Socialist” the German view was it should not be debated as its long in the past.
Strange contrast to what we see here. I wonder why,
I said what the Nazis said. Are you saying that they didn’t do show trials? They did. Are you claiming they didn’t see acts of the allies as war crimes against them? They did. Are you claiming they weren’t going to give a reparations bill? They were.
That is not my opinion. It was their intent.
I haven’t said the Nürnberg trials were rigged. They didn’t meet modern day peacetime standards, but were a good attempt to bring people to justice under the circumstances. A remarkable feat and praiseworthy.
The Nazis would have had show trials, and based on past show trials, they would not have met the standards of the Nürnberg trials.
Well I cannot comment on your Kanzler thing as I don’t know which one you mean. Yes, things were hushed up after the war and there are still things coming out now. But that is not what we were talking about and nothing to do with theUK debate on Churchill.
Which murderous organisation am I standing by?
And where did I criticise Churchill? A question was asked as how the Nazis would have dealt with and why? I answered how they would and why quoting their criticism.
Yes, he was a great wartime leader. No, he wasn’t perfect and was involved in big mistakes which cost lives, and in suppressing workers. So, you should take a balanced view and accept both sides. Or, at least that’s what I do.