Yes, because in that situation killing him would do no one any good, and since he was just another guard even if he didn't exist it would have still happened.
Poll: Would you harbor a nazi?
- Thread starter Drake_Dercon
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I love threads like this. It's just so funny to see what people say they would do. It's also funny to see how they condemn one man for what in my eyes, isn't so much a crime as it is the way life is lived. Let's take a look at some statistics, shall we?
Stalin: Killed off 20 million.
Abortion: 42 Million worldwide, each year.
Crusades: 9 Million died in total.
Hell, in the bible God flooded the whole damn world. Mass humanicide. And he's STILL got several cult followings.
And we ***** about Hitler killing a measly 6 million people? Far as I can see, he's only been demonized because he specialized. Apparently Genocide is worse than indiscriminate slaughter, despite the fact that said slaughter totals up to more than three times that amount in Stalin's case.
What Hitler did wasn't even that impressive in the grand scale of things. He looked at people and decided he didn't like them, so he set about getting rid of them. Since nobody ELSE wanted the Jews, he just said hell with it and started killing them.
If you really want to demonize someone, go ***** at Stalin. ***** at the Catholics. ***** at the government. Just get over the nazis already.
OT: Yes, I'd "harbor" the guy. More like I'd let him sleep over, then ship him off to a hotel until he could find a way to change his identity and support himself. It's really not my problem. Dude should have been expecting this day and preparing for it, not just dreading it.
Stalin: Killed off 20 million.
Abortion: 42 Million worldwide, each year.
Crusades: 9 Million died in total.
Hell, in the bible God flooded the whole damn world. Mass humanicide. And he's STILL got several cult followings.
And we ***** about Hitler killing a measly 6 million people? Far as I can see, he's only been demonized because he specialized. Apparently Genocide is worse than indiscriminate slaughter, despite the fact that said slaughter totals up to more than three times that amount in Stalin's case.
What Hitler did wasn't even that impressive in the grand scale of things. He looked at people and decided he didn't like them, so he set about getting rid of them. Since nobody ELSE wanted the Jews, he just said hell with it and started killing them.
If you really want to demonize someone, go ***** at Stalin. ***** at the Catholics. ***** at the government. Just get over the nazis already.
OT: Yes, I'd "harbor" the guy. More like I'd let him sleep over, then ship him off to a hotel until he could find a way to change his identity and support himself. It's really not my problem. Dude should have been expecting this day and preparing for it, not just dreading it.
Would I gain karma for hiding him? As long as he's done more good than bad (and that has to be a LOT of good), then he's fine.
Of course I'd turn him in.
You aren't absolved of your crimes, especially something as serious as war crimes, simply because you're sorry.
You aren't absolved of your crimes, especially something as serious as war crimes, simply because you're sorry.
Sorry, man. You can try to make amends with money all you want, but you gotta face the music for what you've done.
Perhaps. That's a volatile situation and frankly, I can't say just how I might react. So...I guess I dunno.
He or one of his fellows committed horrific crimes against my family in the name of a sick and twisted ideology. He's either lying about having changed or just wants to shirk responsibility for what he did.
I wouldn't call the cops, I'd call Mossad.
I wouldn't call the cops, I'd call Mossad.
Reading the comments, I think this would work better with something more recent since I have seen a few people saying that he doesn't have much time left. I would tell him to turn himself in, and that I would turn him in because he is an officer and was therefore is accountable for any orders he gave. It would not be my place to judge whether he was sorry or not for his past.
First thing first: I'm not a fan of "criminals never change" or "get the 'bad guy' at any cost". But when it comes to crimes against humanity, we need to be consistent in brining these criminals to international courts.
I don't really care how it goes, and i would fight for making sure the punishment (if they are found guilty) is as humane and fair as possible. But we need to bring these kind of people to everyone's attention, to show that no-one gets away when they are part of that level of genocide and abuse of human rights.
I'm all for supporting criminals who wish to change their ways, and i wouldn't be above looking the other way when it comes to petty crimes (possibly even harbor convicted criminals, if i believe that they are willing and able to change their ways). But when it comes to crimes against humanity, i'm ready to partake in the hunt myself, because we can never pretend that such actions are forgivable.
I don't really care how it goes, and i would fight for making sure the punishment (if they are found guilty) is as humane and fair as possible. But we need to bring these kind of people to everyone's attention, to show that no-one gets away when they are part of that level of genocide and abuse of human rights.
I'm all for supporting criminals who wish to change their ways, and i wouldn't be above looking the other way when it comes to petty crimes (possibly even harbor convicted criminals, if i believe that they are willing and able to change their ways). But when it comes to crimes against humanity, i'm ready to partake in the hunt myself, because we can never pretend that such actions are forgivable.
Honestly speaking I would'nt turn him in.
even if he personally ruined/destroyed the lives of others him in his running, hiding, forced introversion would make a differant man of him.
And we must also remember that the SS wasnt just all about murder. there were some genuine war heros in the Waffen SS that history has "forgot" becuase they were on the losing side.
even if he personally ruined/destroyed the lives of others him in his running, hiding, forced introversion would make a differant man of him.
And we must also remember that the SS wasnt just all about murder. there were some genuine war heros in the Waffen SS that history has "forgot" becuase they were on the losing side.
"You just murdered 30 people in a row in incredibly sadistic ways!"skywalkerlion said:
"But I'm REAALLLLY sorry!"
"Oh, ok then. You're free to go."
if he's an officer, he'll most likely face either time in a prison for life or just straight up death.Longshot said:That really depends on what you believe the role of the judical system is. Is it to punish criminals, rehabilitate criminals, or give victims satisfaction? That is a very serious decission you have to think about, if you want to pass judgement.emeraldrafael said:
I myself believe in rehabilitation. And therefor, it would make no sense whatsoever to incarcerate a man that is probably in his 80'es or 90'es, has lived in repentance for about 70 years, and who it is pretty clear is doing all he can to give back to the world. A prison would not be fitting for any man that old, for a, though very very terrible, crime he committed so many years ago. He would die within the month.
He HAS rehabilitated, and there's just not much point so prison.
Noone would get much satisfaction either, and I doubt he would actually feel much punished. At least not compared to how much he probably punishes himself.
Of course, that is just my oppinion, and you have yours
But therefore, I would harbor him. Any number of factors may cause me to change that, for an example, if he ever showed signs of non-repentance.
No, it still doesnt excuse the fact that he's stealing. And actually our funds rose since we got it back (not all, but most), and then people wanted to make up for what we lost. We pulled in more the we ever had in 18 years.erto101 said:If the raisings fell alot after his "depature", would it not have been the lesser of two evils to keep him? Or even for the greater good? Not saying you were in the wrong at all, just wonderingemeraldrafael said:
To be honest, i'd probably harbor a nazi if it were ww2 era and he was fleeing from a battle that he'd lost, in the heart of every manipulated nazi is still a person, i'd treat them how i wish they'd treated others, cus as ghandi says, you must change yourself before you can change the world, and that revenge is bad.
I'd let him run, I'd tell the police that I haven't seen him but I wouldn't risk myself for him. As nice as he is, he did do bad things, his punishment will be that he can never settle down. I'd let him choose his path but urge him to turn himself in for his own good because maybe they'd go easy on him, I hardly think he's dangerous though and as he isn't a threat why not let him go if he wishes to carry on running.
How dare you sir! It is NOT A HELL OF A LOT BETTER than the alternatives! The holocaust of my people is the greatest crime in human history. Representing the Jewish people on this forum, and everywhere, let me set your facts straight.Ultratwinkie said:
I would've changed the holocaust, that would NOT affect the research or the results of WWII, as I would be killing the soldiers stationed at the concentration camps, not researching weapons or fighting the wars, and even if I were to be killing every and any Nazi indiscriminately (extremely hypothetical scenario) all it would've done, if it were after pearl harbour, would be to end the war sooner and save more lives.
Now to tell you how all your points are wrong. (the quoted text is above; I'm not going to re-quote each line).
- America is no longer a superpower.
- Russia unchallenged.
- European governments never learned humility. Nazis took every atrocity European powers ever committed, including religious genocide which was common to Europe, and turned it on them.
- Moon landing never happened.
- Stealth Fighters never invented.
- UN never established.
- Wars more likely.
- etc.
-No impact would result on America being a super power
-Russia would still be challenged
-HUMILITY! How dare you! The holocaust has nothing to do with 'Europe' learning humility, it's about the near genocide of the Jewish people! The Nazi's may I remind you were IN EUROPE!
-Moon landing would've still happened
-Stealth would've still been invented had I not killed the scientists working on experimental jets at the end of WWII
-League of Nations was established well BEFORE WWII, in fact, 1919, the year after WWI was it's founding year (its on wiki, go check).
-Wars more likely? No.
My points stand to say, if the holocaust never happened, but WWII still did, we'd likely be in the same place we are today.
The only history 'what if' you could draw from this, was without the Nazi's pursuit of purity, and if they weren't such an evil nation to begin with, their efficiency combined with their greater resources (i.e. the German Jews that would not have been killed), this might have lead them to defeat the allies. But if they did that, then they wouldn't be the evil Nazis, now would they?
Now, if you could please apologize to myself and my fellow Jews, and restate that you meant 'if world war two didn't happen' instead of your currently perceived statement of 'if the holocaust didn't happen' that would be well received, and frankly, expected.