While sections of the Allgemeine-SS (General-SS) are guilty of crimes of the Holocaust, the Waffen-SS being the separate, military branch fought on all fronts as a separate branch of the Wehrmacht which is not recognized by most historians due to political affiliations with the National Socialist Party. Most fought with the same patriotism and honor as other German units in the war. While the Waffen-SS are largely considered war criminals by many people and historians, the officers and men of the Wehrmacht were also tried as criminals and considered to be the same to a lesser extent.
We state the Nuremberg Trials and other such trials were illegally conducted by the Allied Nations due to many of same crimes committed by Allied units, and these nations have no legal right or jurisdiction to conduct trials of German nationals. This is considered victors justice. While the Allies might have felt their trials were fair, they were illegal due to jurisdiction should have fallen under the German Government once it was restored. The German government of the Third Reich had numerous officers punished for violations of conduct in which many Allied Historians choose to ignore when discussing this matter. This responsibility was now the responsibility of the West German government once it was restored. Many of the sentences given were reduced or exonerated by the German government due to the nature of victors justice.
With 1945, the World decided it was going to enter a new era of justice. The United States, United Kingdom of Great Britain, France, Russia were going to ignore the numerous war crimes their heroes and countrymen committed against the North American Indians, Africa, India, Vietnam, etc in their past. They created the United Nations to stand for justice. We, of course, would like to know why they have not punished their numerous war criminals or denounced them from their history? Instead, they decide in 1945 it was time to punish all nations going forward starting with the former Third Reich of Germany, the Japanese Empire, and Italy.
Then all we have to do is cite the My Lai Massacre – 1968 by soldiers of the United States against the civilians of former South Vietnam in which one officer was convicted then having his sentence reduced to three and half years:
The Mỹ Lai Massacre was the Vietnam War mass murder of unarmed South Vietnamese civilians by U.S. troops in Sơn Tịnh District, South Vietnam, on 16 March 1968. Between 347 and 504 unarmed people were killed by U.S. Army soldiers from Company C, 1st Battalion, 20th Infantry Regiment, 11th Brigade, 23rd Infantry Division. Victims included men, women, children, and infants. Some of the women were gang-raped and their bodies mutilated as were children as young as 12. Twenty-six soldiers were charged with criminal offenses, but only Lieutenant William Calley Jr., a platoon leader in C Company, was convicted. Found guilty of killing 22 villagers, he was originally given a life sentence but served only three and a half years under house arrest. Howard Callaway, Secretary of the Army, was quoted in The New York Times in 1976 as stating that Calley’s sentence was reduced because Calley honestly believed that what he did was a part of his orders—a rationale that contradicts the standards set at Nuremberg and Tokyo, where following orders was not a defense for committing war crimes. In a separate trial, Captain Medina denied giving the orders that led to the massacre, and was acquitted of all charges, effectively negating the prosecution’s theory of ‘command responsibility’, now referred to as the ‘Medina standard’. Several months after his acquittal, however, Medina admitted he had suppressed evidence and had lied to Colonel Henderson about the number of civilian deaths.
There was no United Nations intervention. There was no justice for the 504 murdered civilians. One person served a meager sentence. There is no war criminal written after his description in history books. But, we see war criminal written after many German officers and soldiers in many historical resources written in the United States, United Kingdom, etc. And lastly, war crimes, as written and defined by the Allies in 1945, continues to this day by these nations and many more around the world.
With both of these points high lighted in red, this alone overturns many illegal convictions of German nationals by Allied Courts.
- None of the higher commanders should have been convicted of crimes of the soldiers they led as in the case of Medina.
- Nor should have any soldiers following orders from the lower ranks to the Field Marshall’s under Hitler. Hitler would have been the sole guilty person in this situation.
The alleged crimes should have been handled, in which many cases were, by the German military. Once the military had surrendered then the German courts, once restored, would have handled the matters.
We have respect for the United States since this organization serves many American-Germans, the United Kingdom, France, Russia, etc. We are now friends. But these historians need to consider ALL points of view before they write their disgusting books, and share their narrow-minded opinions on others.
We do want to include as we did in the introductory sentence, we do not support the sections of the General-SS who committed the crimes of the Holocaust. We do recognize the crimes of the Holocaust and the criminals from this. There are soldiers who carried out orders from the Waffen-SS and the Wehrmacht against civilians in the Holocaust. We do not support these men nor support their actions. This is a minor amount of individuals, unlike the whole who fought an honorable war. We do not support the indictments of war crimes not related to the Holocaust.
Historians will denounce us as apologists or revisionists. We are not revising anything nor making apologies. We are speaking the truth and from the German point of view. This is Our position of the Historical Society. ~ HSOGMH