I have been wondering what was the moral/ethical justification of the execution of criminals of war during the Nuremberg Trials and after? 

This brings up a question: what defines the line between execution and imprisionment? Lets expand this to for example, narcos, who also murder and hurt people, many innocent. Under the reasoning of Nuremberg would they be executed too?

Also, those who oppose death penalty, would they oppose the execution of criminals of war such as Nazis? Or would they argue that every life is valuable regardless of their actions? Where do we cross the line?

Just food for thought. Write your opinions.

(August 3, 2022 at 6:22 am)Macoleco Wrote: I have been wondering what was the moral/ethical justification of the execution of criminals of war during the Nuremberg Trials and after? 

This brings up a question: what defines the line between execution and imprisionment? Lets expand this to for example, narcos, who also murder and hurt people, many innocent. Under the reasoning of Nuremberg would they be executed too?

Also, those who oppose death penalty, would they oppose the execution of criminals of war such as Nazis? Or would they argue that every life is valuable regardless of their actions? Where do we cross the line?

Just food for thought. Write your opinions.

As a hard-line death penalty opponent, I do absolutely oppose the execution of war criminals (including Nazis). I do not believe ‘every life has value’. There is no conflict between these positions.

Boru

(August 3, 2022 at 6:35 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:

(August 3, 2022 at 6:22 am)Macoleco Wrote: I have been wondering what was the moral/ethical justification of the execution of criminals of war during the Nuremberg Trials and after? 

This brings up a question: what defines the line between execution and imprisionment? Lets expand this to for example, narcos, who also murder and hurt people, many innocent. Under the reasoning of Nuremberg would they be executed too?

Also, those who oppose death penalty, would they oppose the execution of criminals of war such as Nazis? Or would they argue that every life is valuable regardless of their actions? Where do we cross the line?

Just food for thought. Write your opinions.

As a hard-line death penalty opponent, I do absolutely oppose the execution of war criminals (including Nazis). I do not believe ‘every life has value’. There is no conflict between these positions.

Boru

Would you elaborate further? What is the reasoning behind Nazi criminals not being executed?

My biggest gripe about the death penalty?

It's boring as shit. A guy laying there gets a needle in his arm and he quits breathing? What' s the entertainment value in that??

Come on folks - we can do better...


Ever seen the TV show "Wipeout"? It' s an interesting concept - an obstacle course where the contestants get the shit knocked out of them for our entertainment - but - the worst that happens is they get knocked into a pool of water.....

See where I' m going here ??


Same show - but with death row inmates - deadlier obstacles, and a pool of hydrochloric acid. We tell the inmates that if they survive the flailing blades, flamethrowers and cages of hungry wild animals - that we will let them go free. Actually - we'll gut shoot them. But you have to give them hope or they won' t try very hard.

I' m sure we could sell lots of advertising...  Pay off the national debt... Everybody wins...


Except of course the convicts ...

(August 3, 2022 at 6:47 am)Macoleco Wrote:

(August 3, 2022 at 6:35 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: As a hard-line death penalty opponent, I do absolutely oppose the execution of war criminals (including Nazis). I do not believe ‘every life has value’. There is no conflict between these positions.

Boru

Would you elaborate further? What is the reasoning behind Nazi criminals not being executed?

Happy to.

As an atheist, I necessarily oppose infinite punishments for finite transgressions. Nazi war crimes, as horrific as they were, were finite.

Additionally, capital punishment does nothing to solve Nazism (Nazis are thriving even now). It’s not justice, it’s revenge.

Boru

(August 3, 2022 at 8:13 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:

(August 3, 2022 at 6:47 am)Macoleco Wrote: Would you elaborate further? What is the reasoning behind Nazi criminals not being executed?

Happy to.

As an atheist, I necessarily oppose infinite punishments for finite transgressions. Nazi war crimes, as horrific as they were, were finite.

Additionally, capital punishment does nothing to solve Nazism (Nazis are thriving even now). It’s not justice, it’s revenge.

Boru

The victims might have been finite, but did not they receive an infinite transgression?

I don't like the death penalty because it's far too easy on the recipient. Let 'em spend the rest of their days wondering why they're behind bars. And if they're unrepentant, oh well. They get the misery of lifetime confinement.

(August 3, 2022 at 8:37 am)Macoleco Wrote:

(August 3, 2022 at 8:13 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: Happy to.

As an atheist, I necessarily oppose infinite punishments for finite transgressions. Nazi war crimes, as horrific as they were, were finite.

Additionally, capital punishment does nothing to solve Nazism (Nazis are thriving even now). It’s not justice, it’s revenge.

Boru

The victims might have been finite, but did not they receive an infinite transgression?

All victims are innocent (that’s what the word means). 

One does not ‘receive’ a transgression.

But you’re proving my point - to kill a murderer because (and only because) they committed a murder is an act of revenge. We don’t steal property from thieves, we don’t burn down the homes of arsonists, and we don’t sexually assault rapists. Why should we kill murderers?

Boru

(August 3, 2022 at 12:00 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:

(August 3, 2022 at 8:37 am)Macoleco Wrote: The victims might have been finite, but did not they receive an infinite transgression?

All victims are innocent (that’s what the word means). 

One does not ‘receive’ a transgression.

But you’re proving my point - to kill a murderer because (and only because) they committed a murder is an act of revenge. We don’t steal property from thieves, we don’t burn down the homes of arsonists, and we don’t sexually assault rapists. Why should we kill murderers?

Boru

Because we can' t ship them off to Australia anymore??

(August 3, 2022 at 12:18 pm)onlinebiker Wrote:

(August 3, 2022 at 12:00 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: All victims are innocent (that’s what the word means). 

One does not ‘receive’ a transgression.

But you’re proving my point - to kill a murderer because (and only because) they committed a murder is an act of revenge. We don’t steal property from thieves, we don’t burn down the homes of arsonists, and we don’t sexually assault rapists. Why should we kill murderers?

Boru

Because we can' t ship them off to Australia anymore??

Funny stuff. You should get yourself a red nose and join the circus.

Boru