General Discussions
This is the place to discuss general issues related to the U-boat war or the war at sea in WWII.
Re: The story
Posted by:
oliver
()
Date: November 14, 2001 10:26AM
<HTML>Rainer Bruns wrote:
>
> Hi Oliver,
> Well, if you call it wisdom - I shall be flattered. One aims
> to please. :-)) I did not refer to "youngish age" but "ill
> considered youthfull expressions".
i consider this a such one.or as a tool to disqualfiy you opponent.either way foolish.
And yes, I can read.
> Back to Eck:
> The argument of trying to sink the wreckage, but not harm the
> survivors in the process, is well known and has been
> commented on ad nauseam.
and because you as source of wisdom think this way it will be written in stone?
The thought of trying to shoot the
> life raft out from underneath the survivor's bottom without
> harming the person, is totally ludicrous.
again: read! he wanted to shoot at the raft,not the hmasn being.admitting that he saw hmans inside the rafts was another one of those language tricks of the prosecutor.
I suppose, if
> successfully done, the survivor is now free to drown or be a
> tasty meal for the sharks.
well-but then you will have to look for mr. shark to be facing a shooting squad.
> Without doubt it was premeditated murder of non-combattants
> witrh the act cloaked under the umbrella of "operational
> neccessety".
cloaked? law is subject to changes.sometimes by new legislation via a parliament (like in germany,poland,france etc.), sometimes because of new thoughts coming into consideration like in those countrys mentioned above or in the anglosaxon law area.so what?
those jurisdictions would be inoperative without that tool.
It harmed the honor of the German Uboat Waffe
to some degree i agree,but i consider his actions as i see them covered by standing operatig procedured and orders (see briefing before the mission by schnee)
> and he atoned for it by paying the highest price.
> Your reference to like atrocities on a larger scale by
> Americans and other Allies is not germane to the Eck case,
> since one wrong does not justify another.
didn`t say that.so there is no necissity for that ill
considered youthfull expression:-)
Ofc, their actions
> are at least equally repulsive as the SS murders of POWs at
> the 'battle of the bulge'.
hum...as far as i know this thing, its not a 100% sure with hindsight that it was "SS".think there were some SS and some others in this affair.sort of a bunch of soldiers of all branches found themselves together.
> Ofc, such atrocities are rarely called to account by the side
> committing same.
why not? how do the us is calling itself? Gods own country?
And arent they fighting against tyranny and for freedom and just causes?
so if the write those slogans on their panties,why shouldnt they be judged accordingly? or do they have some kind of free ticket here?
Considerations of fog of war and troop
> morale causes them to be swept under the rug.
> Ofc, the loser in a conflict is rarely in the position to
> exert his rights - if he has any left.
so humans have no right to live when they loose? they have no right for a fair trial? they have no right to be judged according to EQUAL standards?
> That leaves us with the winner in the Lueneburg Heather, and
> the rest is history. For my part, those guys executed after
> the trial, had it coming.
i am glad,that you are not in the justice business....
how about swallowing one of your own pills?
A couple of deaths of WW2, which I
> do not mourn. Yes, others deserved the same fate, but what
> else is new?
> Rgds, RB
rainer,the source of wisdom made its verdict....</HTML>
>
> Hi Oliver,
> Well, if you call it wisdom - I shall be flattered. One aims
> to please. :-)) I did not refer to "youngish age" but "ill
> considered youthfull expressions".
i consider this a such one.or as a tool to disqualfiy you opponent.either way foolish.
And yes, I can read.
> Back to Eck:
> The argument of trying to sink the wreckage, but not harm the
> survivors in the process, is well known and has been
> commented on ad nauseam.
and because you as source of wisdom think this way it will be written in stone?
The thought of trying to shoot the
> life raft out from underneath the survivor's bottom without
> harming the person, is totally ludicrous.
again: read! he wanted to shoot at the raft,not the hmasn being.admitting that he saw hmans inside the rafts was another one of those language tricks of the prosecutor.
I suppose, if
> successfully done, the survivor is now free to drown or be a
> tasty meal for the sharks.
well-but then you will have to look for mr. shark to be facing a shooting squad.
> Without doubt it was premeditated murder of non-combattants
> witrh the act cloaked under the umbrella of "operational
> neccessety".
cloaked? law is subject to changes.sometimes by new legislation via a parliament (like in germany,poland,france etc.), sometimes because of new thoughts coming into consideration like in those countrys mentioned above or in the anglosaxon law area.so what?
those jurisdictions would be inoperative without that tool.
It harmed the honor of the German Uboat Waffe
to some degree i agree,but i consider his actions as i see them covered by standing operatig procedured and orders (see briefing before the mission by schnee)
> and he atoned for it by paying the highest price.
> Your reference to like atrocities on a larger scale by
> Americans and other Allies is not germane to the Eck case,
> since one wrong does not justify another.
didn`t say that.so there is no necissity for that ill
considered youthfull expression:-)
Ofc, their actions
> are at least equally repulsive as the SS murders of POWs at
> the 'battle of the bulge'.
hum...as far as i know this thing, its not a 100% sure with hindsight that it was "SS".think there were some SS and some others in this affair.sort of a bunch of soldiers of all branches found themselves together.
> Ofc, such atrocities are rarely called to account by the side
> committing same.
why not? how do the us is calling itself? Gods own country?
And arent they fighting against tyranny and for freedom and just causes?
so if the write those slogans on their panties,why shouldnt they be judged accordingly? or do they have some kind of free ticket here?
Considerations of fog of war and troop
> morale causes them to be swept under the rug.
> Ofc, the loser in a conflict is rarely in the position to
> exert his rights - if he has any left.
so humans have no right to live when they loose? they have no right for a fair trial? they have no right to be judged according to EQUAL standards?
> That leaves us with the winner in the Lueneburg Heather, and
> the rest is history. For my part, those guys executed after
> the trial, had it coming.
i am glad,that you are not in the justice business....
how about swallowing one of your own pills?
A couple of deaths of WW2, which I
> do not mourn. Yes, others deserved the same fate, but what
> else is new?
> Rgds, RB
rainer,the source of wisdom made its verdict....</HTML>
