[RedMonqey]

It’s ridiculous to charged basically a kid at the time with no agency in the Nazi regime.
If he had a choice it was either being a guard or the Russian front.

Might as well charge any members of a B17 or B24 for committing war crimes.
Yes it’s is a crime according to the Geneva convention to make war on civilians miles away the front line.
But don’t hold your breath waiting for it.
It’s called “Victor’s Justice.

[Tell It Right]

Might as well charge any members of a B17 or B24 for committing war crimes. Yes it’s is a crime according to the Geneva convention to make war on civilians miles away the front line.

As far as Japan goes, Geneva conventions didn't exist. Once Japan used the fu-go balloon bombs to try to kill our citizens in 1942 (and killed one family), their citizens became fair game. And don't get me started on the fact that the Axis powers killed six times as many civilians as the Allied powers, yet 78 years later only Americans beat themselves up over it (the atom bombs).

[enraged]

There were no documented accounts of anyone facing punishment for refusing to kill. They were just assigned to a different unit. Unfortunately there were enough willing participants that would fill in. Read “The good old days”.

[cgbg]

“It’s ridiculous to charged basically a kid at the time with no agency in the Nazi regime.
If he had a choice it was either being a guard or the Russian front.”

Yup—the “holier than thou” attitude around here gets very irritating.

I would bet every poster here would have acted the same as that kid if put in the identical situation.

The guards were told “shoot or you will be shot”.

[larrytown]

It’s called “Victor’s Justice.

So, what's the problem with that?

If the war had gone the other way, do you think it would have changed one thing about post-conflict "Victor's Justice"?

Whose 'justice' is/was the valid one, against which all others must be measured by? None in this world.

[Glad2bnuts]

Exactly.