Nazi Germany’s Greatest Crime
It Wasn’t the Holocaust
If you asked most people what Nazi Germany under Adolf Hitler, greatest crime was I think most would say the holocaust. And for good reason – for that was a horror that supposedly shocked the western world when it was “uncovered.”
Images such as the one above really make one wonder about how and why human beings do such things to others.
However for all the shock and shame and tragedy of the holocaust, it was not considered Adolf Hitler’s worst crime.
What could be worse than killing 6 million innocent civilians?
The Nuremberg Trials were created by the victorious allies after World War 2 in order to bring the perpetraitors of war crimes to justice.
Opening the prosecution, US attorney Robert H. Jackson said Nuremberg was “the first trial in history for crimes against the peace of the world”, adding that aggressive war was “the greatest menace of our times”.
The surviving Nazi leaders were all charged with and on trial for, some or all of the following,
- “Participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of a crime against peace,”
- “Planning, initiating and waging wars of aggression and other crimes against peace,”
- “Participating in war crimes,”
- “Crimes against humanity”
American Supreme Court Justice and US Chief of Counsel, Justice Robert H. Jackson’s opening statement, over 3 hours long, hit on a fundamental truth,
“The wrongs which we seek to condemn and punish have been so calculated, so malignant, and so devastating, that civilization cannot tolerate their being ignored, because it cannot survive their being repeated.”
In delivering their sentences, after the guilty verdicts were reached, the tribunal judges concurred, saying that “war is essentially an evil thing… to initiate a war of aggression therefore, is not only an international crime, it is the supreme international crime, differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole”.
So, the trials at Nuremberg Germany after World War 2 established an important principle in International Law – that aggressive wars of invasion are “the supreme international crime….(as they) contain the accumulated evil of the whole.”
The surviving Nazi leaders were tried and convicted and many went to their deaths for their crimes.
However, fast forward 55 years and this important legal principal established at Nuremberg seems to have taken a hit, when the United States launched an invasion of Afghanistan, ostensibly to “get” Osama bin laden. The US did get their man eventually, in Pakistan, after wrecking much of the already poorly maintained infrastructure in Afghanistan in the process.
Other nations had launched wars of aggression against Afghanistan such as the Soviet Union in 1979. However, that invasion, according to former US National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski, was a carefully trap laid by Washington. The Americans pretended to be invading Afghanistan themselves, building up their forces to imitate an invasion. This US military buildup, some say the Americans actually crossed into Afghanistan in small numbers, precipitated the Soviets to promptly launch their own real invasion in order to keep the Americans out of their nearby neighbours. The trap worked but a high cost was paid by the Afghan people. And at any rate, we know the Soviet communists were “bad” people. Shouldn’t the self proclaimed occupants of the moral high ground, the USA and UK, be setting a better example ?
It was only 2 years later in 2003 that we got the answer when America ditched the Nuremberg principal altogether and launched a phoney and pre-meditated, deadly war of aggression on Iraq. Without credible evidence or justification and without legal precedent. The invasion was not widely supported by many nations or populations for the naked aggression of the operation was clearly obvious. Leaders of many nations including France, Germany, Malaysia and Russia spoke out publicly against it. All to no avail. The aggressors simply didn’t care.
By 2003, America and the UK wanted their war of aggression and they started it. They launched an unprovoked attack on Iraq – just like the Nazis did on Poland. The Nazis were charged and found guilty.
But what happened to the warmongers from Washington and London whose western predecessor’s had established the international conventions, if not laws, at Nuremberg?
Nothing happened. As usual.
George W Bush, Tony Blair and their cohorts were most certainly found guilty in the court of public opinion and some organizations have tried to persue these people in real courts of justice. But aggressive warmongers today know they are safe.
In fact, so emboldened were these western elites after the “success” of Iraq, their successors in the Whitehouse and Downing St themselves had a go in committing the ultimate international crime. And the successors got away with it as well !
Of course, nothing will ever happen to all of these perpetraitors of multiple wars of aggression.
Only the people of Syria, Libya, Somalia, Venezeula, Yemen, Chile, Iran etc will suffer.
History is soon forgotten, the mainstream media and their friends in Public Relations see to that. In today’s world, Donald Trump was correct about one thing at least – the mainstream media really are enemies of the public. Much of the tragedy that occurs globally would not be possible if the mainstream media were doing their job, even poorly.
But the media doesn’t do their job poorly, they are in fact, active promoters of wars of aggression, because these wars help their profits. We must abandon the giant global media corporations and turn to each other to share with and learn from.
Thanks for sharing this today.
President Eisenhower’s Greatest Deed (out of many)
World War 2 General and American President Dwight D Eisenhower’s greatest deed as a public servant occurred on January 17, 1961, shortly before stepping down after 8 years in the Whitehouse.https://www.youtube.com/embed/Gg-jvHynP9Y?version=3&rel=1&showsearch=0&showinfo=1&iv_load_policy=1&fs=1&hl=en&autohide=2&wmode=transparent
President Eisenhower delivered a farewell address to the nation, which is still talked about 60 years later, in 2021. The public response to the speech, particularly in more recent times, has perhaps successfully captured the warning that President Eisenhower was attempting to give. The speech is remarkable given who is making it – a retiring President, one of the few Generals to be awarded 5 stars and a hero of WW2 D-Day landings in France.
Eisenhower was a life long career military man. He knew no other job, apart from golf.
Which makes his message, broadcast live on TV even more memorable, even though it did not get much attention at the time.
Simply put, Eisenhower’s message in 1961 was, “Watch out for a ‘Military – Corporate’ take over of this country, the USA.”
We now realise that this speech was definitely not just an egotistical attempt to grab some last gasp publicity as President, as a modern politician might do, but contained a message that Eisenhower felt deeply about and had wanted for some time to share with his country. Much work went into the speech, it reportedly going through more than 20 drafts. The redrafting went on for more than a year.
How prescient Eisenhower’s message was, as he saw his young sucessor in the Whitehouse, President John F Kennedy assassinated in office in 1963, by parties unknown, however it is certain that Lee Harvey Oswald was not one of them. What a chilling and brutal demonstration of the power of this emerging power complex.
American governments had long been involved in regime change and assassination of world leaders, even their own. But John Kennedy’s killing was carried out in the modern era of live TV, in broad daylight in front of millions of viewers. He was the fourth American president to be assassinated and many attempts on other Presidents had been made, but John F Kennedy’s successful publicly broadcast murder in 1963 would be the start of a bloody and murderous decade in America.
Some key moments from President Eisenhower’s warning about abuse of government and corporate power,
“We have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions. Added to this, three and a half million men and women are directly engaged in the defense establishment. We annually spend on military security alone more than the net income of all United States corporations.”
“Now this conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence—economic, political, even spiritual—is felt in every city, every Statehouse, every office of the Federal government…. we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources, and livelihood are all involved. So is the very structure of our society.
In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals.”
“As we peer into society’s future, we – you and I, and our government – must avoid the impulse to live only for today, plundering for our own ease and convenience the precious resources of tomorrow.”
Well, it is a great message huh?
Some say even back in 1961, drafts of his speech included references to the political wing of today’s elite’s that have a stranglehold of power. That is, Eisenhower had at one point referred to the “Military – Industrial – Congressional Complex”. How close he was in predicting the future if that is correct. In the 1960’s banks and the financial industry in America had nothing like the power and influence they have today and so the President may be forgiven for not seeing the rise of the FINANCIALIZATION and its strangulation of America, which took off rapidly after the election of Ronald Reagan in 1980.
But essentially President Eisenhower was on the correct path in his speech – he was could see the beginnings of today’s Military – Corporate – Political – Financial – Media autocracy as far back as the 1950s and he tried to warn us about it.
Mainstream Media play a pivotal role in the complex and it is perhaps the most powerful component of all, for they have the power and are tasked with responsibility to ask questions. If the media were doing their job, even poorly, citizens everywhere would know enough to understand the problems surrounding “the very structure of our society” as Eisenhower put it. But the mainstream media are not doing their job – even poorly.
The global media are not even abandoning their role in society. They doing worse than even that. The mainstream media are actively aiding and abetting the other components of this stranglehold of society by they themselves promoting immoral wars, financial thievery and illegal regime changes. There is no serious questioning of government anymore. The media are deliberately staying silent on the clear and irrefutable abuses carried out by their governments in the name of us, its citizens.
President Eisenhower’s warning that, “Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery” of the nation was well understood by these elites at the time of his speech.
Using the media and huge global public relations companies to create spiteful, hypocritical propaganda, tied together with trivial diversions and lies, the Military-Industrial-Media-Financial-Political complex has totally dulled the senses of its citizenry. They have created nations of smiling zombies, lifeless creatures with little brain function, able to walk in an undignified fashion towards a ballot box, and just capable of making an irrelevent “tick” every 4 years, as they mindlessly participate in the farce we still call freedom and democracy.
It must be true then, that people get the government they deserve.
Who is really to blame then for this sad state of affairs?
ATOM BOMBS WERE NOT NECESSARY TO END THE PACIFIC WAR in 1945
Six months prior to the 1945 use of their nuclear weapons on the civilian cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the American military under General Curtis LeMay had completed a major strategic incendiary bombing campaign, where as many as 346 giant B29 bombers flew at a time, destroying 67 Japanese cities and killing an estimated 350,000 civilians – almost DOUBLE the combined civilian death tolls of Hiroshima and Nagasaki nuclear weapons attacks. The campaign left millions of people sick and homeless.
Incendiary bombs are also known as Fire Bombs, for that is what they create. Massive, fierce, raging, fires. The bombs are filled with a sticky and highly flammable petroleum jelly and are designed to cling to everything they land on and burn it. By burning everything on the ground, the mostly wooden construction of all of Japan’s major cities in 1945 was the perfect environment to use the fire bombs. Much of Japan’s cities burnt to the ground within hours. As did hundreds of thousands of people.
In addition to destroying life and property, the massive fires also remove the oxygen from the air creating highly toxic, oxygen starved conditions for the survivors.
(These types of “burning” bombs were modified and enhanced, and later used extensively by America in Vietnam and Cambodia as “Napalm”).
The 1945 fire bombing campaign of Japan was devastatingly effective.
By 1945 Japan had been under a strict international trade embargo for many years and struggled to find adequate resources. This was a second major concern for Japan which would have caused them to consider surrendering.
But perhaps the most significant concern for Japan was the sudden entry of a nearby giant into the Pacific war in 1945.
After remaining neutral throughout the Pacific war, the Soviet Union (Russians) declared war on Japan at midnight on 8 August and invaded Japanese occupied northern China 1 hour later, making rapid progress towards Tokyo;
Likely as a result of all three of these considerations, and more, Japan surrendered 6 days after the Russians first entered Japanese occupied territory.
A few months later in 1946, the United States Strategic Bombing Survey in Japan, confirmed what some in the west thought at the time. That the atomic bombs had not been necessary to win the war. Japan was about to surrender anyway – before the American attack with nuclear weapons.
The American military’s report stated:
“It seems clear that, even without the atomic bombing attacks, our air supremacy over Japan could have exerted sufficient pressure to bring about unconditional surrender, removing the need for an invasion. Bаsеd on our dеtаilеd invеstigаtion, it is thе Survеy’s opinion thаt cеrtаinly prior to 31 Dеcеmbеr 1945, аnd in аll probаbility prior to 1 Novеmbеr 1945, Jаpаn would hаvе surrеndеrеd еvеn if thе аtomic bombs hаd not bееn droppеd, they would have surrendered еvеn if Russiа hаd not еntеrеd thе Pacific wаr, аnd еvеn if no allied invаsion hаd bееn plаnnеd or contеmplаtеd.”
It is also little known today that there was significant opposition to the use of nuclear weapons on Japan in 1945 inside the American government.
Military General, and soon to be US President, Dwight D. Eisenhower wrote in his memoir “The White House Years”,
“In 1945 Secretary of War Stimson informed me that our government was preparing to drop an atomic bomb on Japan. I was one of those who felt that there were a number of cogent reasons to question the wisdom of such an act. During his recitation of the relevant facts, I had been conscious of a feeling of depression and so I voiced to him my grave misgivings, first on the basis of my belief that Japan was already defeated and that dropping the bomb was completely unnecessary, and secondly because I thought that our country should avoid shocking world opinion by the use of a weapon whose employment was no longer mandatory as a measure to save American lives.”
Other top U.S. military officers who disagreed with the atomic bombings included some highly conservative, and very senior military figures,
- General Douglas MacArthur,
- Fleet Admiral William D. Leahy (the Chief of Staff to President Truman),
- Brigadier General Carter Clarke (the military intelligence officer who prepared intercepted Japanese cables for U.S. officials),
- Fleet Admiral Chester W. Nimitz (Commander in Chief of the Pacific Fleet),
- Fleet Admiral William Halsey Jr. (Commander of the US Third Fleet),
“The Japanese had, in fact, already sued for peace (surrendered). The atomic bomb played no decisive part, from a military point of view, in the defeat of Japan.”
Fleet Admiral Chester Nimitz, Commander US Pacific Fleet
“The use of the atomic bombs at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender because of the effective sea blockade and the successful bombing with conventional and chemical weapons … The lethal possibilities of atomic warfare in the future are frightening. My feeling was that in being the first to use it, America had adopted an ethical standard common to the barbarians of the Dark Ages. I was not taught to make war in that fashion, and wars cannot be won by destroying women and children.”
— Fleet Admiral William D. Leahy, Chief of Staff to Presidents Roosevelt and Truman. First Head of the Military Joint Chiefs of Staff.
“The atomic bombs had nothing to do with the end of the war at all.” – Major General Curtis LeMay, Bomber Command, September 1945.
“The first atomic bomb was an unnecessary experiment … It was a mistake to ever drop it … they had this toy and they wanted to try it out, so they dropped it.” — Fleet Admiral William Halsey Jr., 1946.
Japanese historian Tsuyoshi Hasegawa says when the Soviet Union declared war on 8 August, 1945, it crushed all hope that the Soviets could be kept out of the war. Central to the Japanese terror of having to surrender to the Russians first, was their fear that their most revered royal family, headed by the God-like figure of the Emperor, would suffer the same fate as had the Russian Czar (Emperor) 27 years earlier, when the Czar and his family were assassinated by Russian leaders.
Hasegawa wrote: “On the basis of available evidence it is clear that the two nuclear bombs were not decisive in inducing Japan to surrender. Despite their destructive power, the atomic bombs were not sufficient to change the direction of Japanese diplomacy. The Soviet invasion was.”
US/UK Nuclear historian Ward Wilson wrote, “after Nagasaki was bombed, only four major Japanese cities remained which could have been hit with atomic weapons (due to the recent fire bombing campaign). The Japanese Supreme Council did not even bother to convene after the two atomic bombings because the destruction was barely more than all previous conventional bombings.
Attributing Japan’s surrender to a ‘miracle nuclear weapon’, instead of the Soviet invasion, previous bombing campaigns and the trade embargo of the country, saved face for Japan and simultaneously enhanced the United States’ world standing.”
Some say the United States was simply sending a message to the world, by dropping nuclear weapons on Japan, who they knew were going to surrender anyway,
“We have this nuclear weapon and WE WILL use it.”
Maybe the most concerning thing of all is how this history has been falsified. That actually happens each and every day, even now.
The US Military Uses More Fuel per day Than Most Countries.
What Does the Military Do with 48 million litres of Fuel burnt each day?
How much does this huge fuel burning contribute to Climate Change?
Who pays THAT fuel bill… ?
I guess when you have got over 700 military bases around the world, that means there is alot of jets, tanks, jeeps, fighters, transport planes, aircraft carriers etc… to move around and shoot at stuff…. 48 millions litres worth every day !
More than most countries !
Not many whole countries use more than that. This provides a little perspective on the global domination of the United States’s military power.
American Govt knew No Progress was being Made in Afghanistan, but kept killing people anyway.
2001 – 2021
A confidential trove of government documents obtained by The Washington Post reveals that senior U.S. officials failed to tell the truth about the war in Afghanistan throughout the 18-year campaign, making rosy pronouncements they knew to be false and hiding unmistakable evidence the war had become unwinnable.
Click the above link to read full article
WHAT THEY SAID IN PUBLIC
April 17, 2002
“The history of military conflict in Afghanistan [has] been one of initial success, followed by long years of floundering and ultimate failure. We’re not going to repeat that mistake.”
— President George W. Bush, in a speech at the Virginia Military Institute
WHAT THEY SAID IN PUBLIC, 7 years later
Dec. 1, 2009
“The days of providing a blank check are over. . . . It must be clear that Afghans will have to take responsibility for their security and that America has no interest in fighting an endless war in Afghanistan.”
— President Barack Obama, speech at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, N.Y.