You know its not true if it invokes the god of CAPSLOCK.

Yes, there was more than enough evidence to fry Speer, but the Allies did not have the time or the manpower to go through all the documents they had and the most damning evidence against Speer was never presented at trial. It never made sense that Sauckel was hanged for following Speer's orders while Speer who gave the orders only got 20 years. The Nuremberg trials are a fascinating subjects.


Has anyone mentioned that the Nazis were handing out Crystal Meth like candy to their servicemen? That at least partly explains some of the atrocities.

Google "Pervitin".

It is also worth noting that many of those war criminals working under Speer received jobs from the allies instead of punishment for their crimes against humanity.

We do? :hmm2: Well, seems like I've heard that term--Nazi sub/Nazi U-boat-- from old WWII vets on many occasions, maybe they were mistaken. It could also be possible they did not refer to the Imperial Japanese Navy as "Japs"....

I've often seen the CSS Hunley referred to as a Confederate or "Rebel" submarine. That doesn't seem to offend anyone. Not even the PC crowd which usually whines at the sight of a Confederate flag.

The sunken British pre-dreadnought HMS Camperdown is often referred to as a Victorian battleship. The sunken Mary Rose is remembered as a Tudor warship as much as an English one. I don't see many anti-royalist noses out of joint.

The sunken Russian submarine K-219 is still referred to as a Soviet submarine or a "Soviet-era" submarine. Maybe that's the answer. Call the U-168 an sunken Nazi-era sub and maybe that settles the matter. 12 years is a short era though.

12 years may be a short era, but it was an era that was 12 years too long.

I felt it deserved a title. That was the title.

That's my story and I'm stickin' to it.

What do those WW2 vets know anyways?

Well said.

The problem is that we aren't discussing what we've 'heard' (bcoz I already said that indeed this substitution is quite common) but what is correct and accurate in terms of historical discourse.
Besides - let's not mix two things. Japs serves as an abbreviation of Japanese. (but it carries a negative load at the same time).
Nazi carries an idealogical load - why did the German government enforce the changing of the name 'German concentration camps' into 'Nazi-German c.camps'?
If someone keeps repeating 'Nazi sub' because he thinks that Nazi can be used interchangeably with German (like it was implied in this thread) he needs a serious revision.
Yeah - I know - vets say 'Krauts' so they must be right.

funny.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
not

Actually both terms are correct. The u-boat is German, designed, built and crewed by Germans. On the other hand it was the Nazis who created the need in the first place. They created the war, and waged it. The tools were built at their behest and used to attack the enemies of the Reich. Since it was they who started the war you can either say the Nazis waged war on the world, or you can say the Germans did. While it was indeed Germans who did the fighting it was the Nazis who made it happen. It was the Germans who built the boat and manned it, but it was the Nazis who commanded that it be used to sink the ships of the enemies they created.

So yes, in the sense of who created the war, it was indeed a Nazi submarine.

I'd say that if anyone the men who defeated that scourge on humanity can use whatever words they want.

RMS Titanic was a Royal mail ship, but crewed by common men.

You missed the point: vets say Nazi subs because that's what they were called when vets were fighting them. "Nazi subs", just like Nazi soldiers as in "we are fighting the Nazis" was always a common--and accurate--expression.

I'm not saying that "German submarine" is inaccurate. But "Nazi submarine" was just as accurate. It was Nazi Germany.

http://www.oocities.org/pentagon/bar...1041/eric6.jpg

.
http://sifco100.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/1269.jpg