You're just asking more questions here. Supply some substance to support your previous statements.

:know:

Enough already! it was a NAZI u-boot! One of the simple joys of argument, rhetoric and logic is to hang the OP with his own petard...so to speak. Both world wars were fought under the auspices of the intellectual philosophy of Von Clausewitz in his post-mortemly published opus ON WAR, now required reading at all US military academies. "War is not an independent phenomenon, but the continuation of politics by other means. Consequently, the main lines of every major strategic plan are largely political in nature, and their poitical character increases the more the plan applies to the entire campaign and to the whole state." The uboot course de guerre of both world wars was the only strategy worthy of the name for Germany in both of its world wars in terms of theory, materiel and global strategy. As such, any strategic implementation of the politics of the German state in WWII especially of the Kriegsmarine would have been indisputably NAZI to der führer, his principle miñion and successor Donitz, and every one of the all-volunteer, highly propagandized 'itchy necked' UBootwaffen, happily avoiding the consequences of the Eastern front and eating sumptuously off of suitably decorated NAZI crockery,- compared to rest of the shortchanged Third Reich. All parties understood they were vital and primary functionaries of the most productive (operation Monsun)offensives into the Pacific as an extension of Nazi and Axis might. Of the good brave Nazis on the U-boot in question, 23 survived as did the Kapitänleutnant Pich, who was a POW until 1947 and died at age 82 in 1997.:smug::salute:

Oh, I accept it, all right. And when news outlets refer to a U-boat as a "Nazi sub", that's how we will post it. Because that's what they have been called since the '40s. Deal with it.

Oh dear oh dear, you are not very good at this are you:nope:
The substance is in the questions:know:
Do you perhaps understand the legal concept set in Leipzig way back in '21?
It applies to that nice german who made peace at the end of the war, for all the time that he was a raving Nazi doing exactly the same job throughout the war that he held at the end of the war.:yep:

Especially the part that quotes the man on the spot as saying it was solely about slave labor. Nice of you to ignore that part.

Was Speer charged with murder and mistreatment. If murder, he would have been executed. No, he was charged with transporting and using slave labor.

I thought we weren't talking about slave labor. Was Speer charged with anything else?

Was Speer involved with any of that? Was he charged with any of that?

Did you miss the part where I said "I don't know"? You do like to have your little game, don't you? And you accuse other people of trolling.

Sorry, but your word for anything is no longer acceptable. Citation needed.

I don't know. Why don't you tell me? And while your at it, reread what the man said about it being only about slave labor. That was all I said. You turned it into a major production. It seems to me that what you really like is kicking people whenever possible.

I ignored nothing, yet you seem to be.
the Nazis were rather methodical bastards, since it was entirely about slave labour could you run through all their wonderful categories of slave labour?
Come back and reply when you understand why I used an example like mittlewerk, it is very simple.

Yes, its under the principle set in Leipzig.

Would he?
Lots of very nasty Nazi war criminals received very light jail terms, or even no jail at all.

Who said that?

Entirely:yep:

I missed nothing, and you appear to be having one of your moments again, strange definitions you use.

Now you are trolling and attempting to be insulting:nope:
Please keep your emotions under control
The citation is in the link you provided, Avalon does contain a wealth of information.
So what plunder would be stolen under the "competent authority" of his particular ministry?

You mean where he said "entirely"?
Which of the nastier aspects of the rather nasty slave labour program are you unsure of?

Yet you say exactly nothing about the statement I showed.

No, I can't. Why don't you tell me. And while you're at it, explain what Speer was charged with for each type.

Again you stoop to condescension. Why don't you explain it to me?

That sounds very general. Was Speer specifically charged with murder? If he was convicted, why wasn't he executed?

I don't know. It seems to me that he would be.

Your emphasis has been on "other counts". I've tried to show that, even according to someone in the know Slave Labor was the only real charge.

Can you show specifically where? I've shown that his charges were quite limited. You've said a lot and shown nothing.

My charge is specific. You invariably do your best to condescend to your targets. You never provide facts, but tell people they should know what you claim to, and treat them like recalcitrant children.

I said I didn't know. You tried to test me with more questions. That is indeed a game, and you play it very well.

More condescension. My emotions are fine at the moment. I've just grown tired of your games.

So show it. Quote it. Don't just say it's there. If you're going to use it, it's your job to show it and explain it.

Again you ask a question as of teacher to pupil. I don't know, and I don't see how it relates to what Speer was charged with.

Yes. He did indeed say "entirely".

Speer was not charged with murder. He was not charged with anything else. Whatever the "aspects" you're talking about may be, they don't seem to have much to do with the question of the charges against him. According to the man on the scene the charges against him were relatively minor. I'm sure you're right about how bad things were, and Speer may indeed have been more involved than I think.

I made a simple statement to the other guy, partly in your support. You seem to take that as a cue to launch a full-on debate. I fail to understand why, unless you just like to feel superior to people by running them down. No, I'm not emotional about it, but I am very tired of it. You still persist in never showing facts, just wrestling with people, and you seem to enjoy doing it. It does look very much to me like a game.

Tribesman, when you get some downtime I'm gonna need you to fax over the evidence I requested. Um, yeah...

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.switched....ce-boss6-1.jpg

You might not want to be accusing other people of trolling when you post things like this.

Your statement was dealt with, unfortunately you didn't understand what you was quoting.
As Speer was being tried entirely on the work of his ministry then you need the evidence presented not just that line you quoted, all the evidence is on that website.
Including as an on topic bonus a nice little quarterly statistic on how many slaves were worked to death in the camps supplying slaves to the shipyard where the Nazi U-boat in question was constructed.

Why not read it?
After all if Speer personally requests in writing that Himmler sends him 100,000 Hungarian jews as slaves for the underground arms and aircraft factories that Hitler wanted built then Speer is personally guilty both in their deportation and eventual deaths.
Vernichten durch arbeit is the particular category of slave labour Speer facilitated there.


Its a well known example, does it need explaination?



Actually its very specific, Leipzig is responsibility of command.

The charges were general, not all the crimes.
As for execution, most of judgements made little sense and had no bearing on the severity of the crimes.

It seems to me that all of the doctors who murdered prisoners in medical experiments at the concentration camps would be deserving of the highest penalty the courts could impose...it didn't happen though.

Slave labour covered such a wide range of crimes against humanity and war crimes, its the whole scope of the industry which he ran.

Sorry, but you havn't, you need to view the evidence presented at the trial to understand the extent of what he was charged with in the "entirely" of the slave labour program he ran.

Sorry but there have been plenty of facts presented, feel free to check them.

Yes questions, the economic plunder policy was first implemented in Austria, then improved for the Sudetanland before being polished for Czechoslovakia, by the time of Poland it was well worked out and by Russia it was a well oiled official operation of looting and plunder worked in co-operation by the Nazi ministries covering industry, agriculture, finance and all three branches of the Nazi military.
Its all on your link.


So entirely it is then.
I suppose that must also include his boasting to the Gauliters about personally sending 10,000 POWs as slave labour to the arms factories.


The charges against him?:hmmm:
I wouldn't call crimes against humanity and war crimes minor.

Mr. Steve,

I've looked at all of my posts and cannot find any post that indicates that I called someone a troll, or said they were trolling. It's been the other way around, in all cases. I've been called the troll.

Well.... I don't have to, actually.

Please delete my account. I've seen all I've needed to see.

we both know that it isn't true.
this thread has already suffered from quite a few hilariously bad attempts to justify it - yet each and every failed.
if the substitution was true in every case, the distribution between 'German' and 'Nazi' would be like 50-50. But it's not. (at least in historical books - popular science magazines which seek for 'drama' are excluded)
If you check in the books, you won't learn about Nazi MG-42, Nazi Tiger, Nazi soldiers, Nazi uboats.
Nazi is a correct term in a specific context and it does appear either in this ideological context or might appear anywhere in a newspaper article - and this was explained by HB in post 3/4 or 5.
However, this is very unusual usage of this substitution - done for a purpose.
Same goes with 'communist' and 'soviet'.

Sure the OP overreacted to the title but then again some of the posters here went berserk teaching him false history.

A PUBLIC APOLOGY TO TRIBESMAN

Tribesman PMed me with some information about himself - how long he has been studying the subject of the Nuremburg trials, and how there is so much information that he could tie up an entire page with links if he so chose. While I still hold some of opinions about the side-discussion we started, I feel it's only fair to acknowledge his scholarship on this, and to say I'm sorry if I was going on having read a tiny fraction of the available material.

'Sailor Steve' Bradfield

Fair enough. It looks like I owe you an apology too.