Reading about Ferencz made me realize something. This affidavit of someone whom he prosecuted made me realize what it was.
'I had subdivided my Kommando into three platoons; each platoon consisted of about 50 men. The persons to be executed were transported by trucks to the place of execution. At each time there was about 18 to 22 persons.
The first platoon was placed face to face with the persons about to be executed, and about three men each aimed at each person to be shot. I myself was present at the first volley of the execution, with my face turned away. When the first volley had been fired, I turned around and saw that all persons were lying on the ground. I then left the place of execution and approached the place where the second and third platoons were gathered. The first platoon which had carried out the shootings was recalled, I inspected the men, and then returned to my quarters.
I noticed there that the detainees who were in the stadium next to the quarters, some of whom were still to be executed, were driven across the stadium by members of the armed forces and tortured. I did not succeed in apprehending those responsible for the tortures. In order to terminate this spectacle, I had the rear door of the stadium opened and the detainees could march out through it.
The members of the armed forces who had participated in this affair disappeared as well. As the remainder of the persons to be executed had also escaped, I informed my Kommando by means of a driver that the executions were terminated.
About 6 and 7 days after the executions we started to march towards Dubno.'
Do you know what this German Einsatzgruppen officer confessed to doing?
After supervising the executions of 90 to 100 men, which he'd turned his head away from, he saw the Wehrmacht torturing of the 2000 other men whom he was supposed to execute. So, he abruptly opened the rear door of the stadium, let them leave, and called off their executions.
A month later, he resigned immediately after being ordered to kill women and children. Decades later, he was interviewed about what he did done during the war. During the interview, he didn't make any excuses for what he did before he stopped.
None of this made him a good person. That's not my point. It's about the others. That incident with the detainees happened during the Lviv pogrom, when Ukrainian nationalists raped and murdered thousands of Jews.
Both that German and those nationalists would get off very lightly for their crimes. But that's the difference. That’s where my realization came.
Only one person could even give reasons to be shown mercy.
At least that one German could say he stopped. At least he could say he released those 2000 detainees. That said, we don't know how many of them survived. When you think about it, all he did was give them a non-zero chance of survival, since he felt sorry for them.
But do you know who didn't have a non-zero chance of survival?
This woman: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lviv_pogroms_(1941)#/media/File:Lviv_pogrom_(June_-_July_1941).jpg
These nationalists never would’ve stopped:
The day after the German invasion of the Soviet Union and even before the Germans arrived at the major Jewish settlements, murderous riots perpetrated by the Lithuanians broke out against the Jews.
Those nationalists did absolutely nothing to deserve mercy, but Stalin showed them mercy anyway. He was extremely merciful when he made them perform hard labor. In the years since, that German and those nationalists have shown how they feel about the mercy they received.
Stalin made a mistake.
Because those nationalists did not get on their knees and beg for forgiveness. They didn’t even show a degree of understanding, like that one German.
"I never knew of any cases where members or heads of the Einsatzkommandos acted in the same way as I did. I believe that things in Russia would never have turned out as they did had a few heads of the Einsatzkommandos and Einsatzgruppen declared that they could not carry out these liquidations."
Do you know how those nationalists felt about Stalin’s mercy?
This is how they felt: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stepan_Bandera_monument_in_Lviv
Rather than telling the truth, they lied about how they were the real victims.
The pogroms were ignored or obfuscated in Ukrainian historical memory, starting with OUN's actions to purge or whitewash its own record of anti-Jewish violence.
Stalin's worst mistake was showing those Ukrainian and Baltic nationalists any mercy.
If Bandera was not a journalist, a defector, or a simple critic, what possible reason would there be for the KGB to put effort into killing him after the war? This guy did not simply pass out fliers with “slava ukraini” on it. There must’ve been something more serious happening if he is this much of a target.
unfortunately if you try this on libs they pull out the "akshually the kgb hunted everyone everywhere for no reason, dissident was just a term used to justify random terror"
I was going to argue against this, but it's basically an economic question of if they should be held for life or executed, assuming that "slaughtering" takes place after a trial (excluding any violence necessary for liberating captive populations).
But you definitely need to identify lynch mob leaders, squeeze them for information, and then kill them about as quickly as you can. Those people are unlikely to do anything but harm in the long term unless you have material security and a genuinely sophisticated program for rehabilitating people.
But you definitely need to identify lynch mob leaders, squeeze them for information, and then kill them about as quickly as you can. Those people are unlikely to do anything but harm in the long term unless you have material security and a genuinely sophisticated program for rehabilitating people.
You need more than that. These people would become warriors in a new gladio. Every single one of them that you release would need to be monitored for the remainder of their lives, you can not trust rehabilitation alone.
Sure, I guess it could be viewed as indefinite parole. I'm sure some of these bastards were recruited into Operation Bloodstone or some equivalent.
My point was just that you generally don't need to kill people if conditions are stable enough that you can hold a trial for them. Short of wiping iut humanity, you can't kill your way into not having an "at risk of counterrevolutionary activity" population because that killing itself provides a motive to those that survive to become counterrevolutionaries, whether in siblings, children, friends, neighbors, fellow churchgoers, or people not personally connected but watching from afar and going "that sure is a lot of killing," or "how do I know that this many people are beyond saving?" or "how many more rounds until I am next?" It's a very common response.
There are many valid reasons to kill people, but then stick to those reasons and not this, which is not a valid reason.
A post I stole from r/shitliberalssay:
Pogrom-talk, holocaust stuff, etc.
Reading about Ferencz made me realize something. This affidavit of someone whom he prosecuted made me realize what it was.
Do you know what this German Einsatzgruppen officer confessed to doing?
After supervising the executions of 90 to 100 men, which he'd turned his head away from, he saw the Wehrmacht torturing of the 2000 other men whom he was supposed to execute. So, he abruptly opened the rear door of the stadium, let them leave, and called off their executions.
A month later, he resigned immediately after being ordered to kill women and children. Decades later, he was interviewed about what he did done during the war. During the interview, he didn't make any excuses for what he did before he stopped.
None of this made him a good person. That's not my point. It's about the others. That incident with the detainees happened during the Lviv pogrom, when Ukrainian nationalists raped and murdered thousands of Jews.
Both that German and those nationalists would get off very lightly for their crimes. But that's the difference. That’s where my realization came.
Only one person could even give reasons to be shown mercy.
At least that one German could say he stopped. At least he could say he released those 2000 detainees. That said, we don't know how many of them survived. When you think about it, all he did was give them a non-zero chance of survival, since he felt sorry for them.
But do you know who didn't have a non-zero chance of survival?
This woman: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lviv_pogroms_(1941)#/media/File:Lviv_pogrom_(June_-_July_1941).jpg
These nationalists never would’ve stopped:
The day after the German invasion of the Soviet Union and even before the Germans arrived at the major Jewish settlements, murderous riots perpetrated by the Lithuanians broke out against the Jews.
Those nationalists did absolutely nothing to deserve mercy, but Stalin showed them mercy anyway. He was extremely merciful when he made them perform hard labor. In the years since, that German and those nationalists have shown how they feel about the mercy they received.
Stalin made a mistake.
Because those nationalists did not get on their knees and beg for forgiveness. They didn’t even show a degree of understanding, like that one German.
"I never knew of any cases where members or heads of the Einsatzkommandos acted in the same way as I did. I believe that things in Russia would never have turned out as they did had a few heads of the Einsatzkommandos and Einsatzgruppen declared that they could not carry out these liquidations."
Do you know how those nationalists felt about Stalin’s mercy?
This is how they felt: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stepan_Bandera_monument_in_Lviv
Rather than telling the truth, they lied about how they were the real victims.
The pogroms were ignored or obfuscated in Ukrainian historical memory, starting with OUN's actions to purge or whitewash its own record of anti-Jewish violence.
Stalin's worst mistake was showing those Ukrainian and Baltic nationalists any mercy.
He should've slaughtered these people
when our time comes we must make Stalin look like Kerensky
Rare Stalin L.
Anyone with a brain should ask at least this:
If Bandera was not a journalist, a defector, or a simple critic, what possible reason would there be for the KGB to put effort into killing him after the war? This guy did not simply pass out fliers with “slava ukraini” on it. There must’ve been something more serious happening if he is this much of a target.
unfortunately if you try this on libs they pull out the "akshually the kgb hunted everyone everywhere for no reason, dissident was just a term used to justify random terror"
ask me how i know
I was going to argue against this, but it's basically an economic question of if they should be held for life or executed, assuming that "slaughtering" takes place after a trial (excluding any violence necessary for liberating captive populations).
But you definitely need to identify lynch mob leaders, squeeze them for information, and then kill them about as quickly as you can. Those people are unlikely to do anything but harm in the long term unless you have material security and a genuinely sophisticated program for rehabilitating people.
You need more than that. These people would become warriors in a new gladio. Every single one of them that you release would need to be monitored for the remainder of their lives, you can not trust rehabilitation alone.
Sure, I guess it could be viewed as indefinite parole. I'm sure some of these bastards were recruited into Operation Bloodstone or some equivalent.
My point was just that you generally don't need to kill people if conditions are stable enough that you can hold a trial for them. Short of wiping iut humanity, you can't kill your way into not having an "at risk of counterrevolutionary activity" population because that killing itself provides a motive to those that survive to become counterrevolutionaries, whether in siblings, children, friends, neighbors, fellow churchgoers, or people not personally connected but watching from afar and going "that sure is a lot of killing," or "how do I know that this many people are beyond saving?" or "how many more rounds until I am next?" It's a very common response.
There are many valid reasons to kill people, but then stick to those reasons and not this, which is not a valid reason.