The British Gestapo

Acrylic-bob · 12-11-2005, 05:11

And there we were thinking that we had attained the moral high ground during WW2.

I suppose there is some justification in thinking that whatever means used to fight the Nazi's were acceptable, but you'd think the MOD and the War Office which preceded it could at least be open and honest about it.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/secondworl...640957,00.html

Or are we still not grown up enough to be told the whole story?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/secondworl...640942,00.html

garinda · 12-11-2005, 09:28

It always seems strange to me that in war we have rules, especially ones named after the city where they were drawn up, in a neutral country.

If I was in a fight against an evil enemy, I would use everthing in my power to win. If that included the use of a red hot poker, so be it.

The alledged abuses of the the Geneva convention are nowhere near as bad as the atrocoties that the Nazis used, not just on soldiers, but on civilians as well.

garinda · 12-11-2005, 09:31

It is also a bit unpleasant to make these allegations by the Guardian, and to start this thread, so near to Rememberance day.

Wynonie Harris · 12-11-2005, 10:32

So what are we supposed to do, A-B, tie ourselves up in agonies of liberal guilt?

We were fighting for our very existence against a powerful, totally ruthless enemy, so we had to use any means available. And, as Garinda rightly points out, any misdemeanours of ours were nothing, compared to the overwhelming evil of the Nazi state.

On this of all weekends, we would do better to think of the bravery and self-sacrifice of those who fought to defend our freedom.

mez · 12-11-2005, 12:35

totally agree with you wynonie

Acrylic-bob · 12-11-2005, 13:32

Before you all get carried away, please read what I wrote

"I suppose there is some justification in thinking that whatever means used to fight the Nazi's were acceptable"

My main argument is against the faceless bureaucrats who still try to conceal whatever is going on from the general populace. Just as they tried to conceal the awfullnes of the first days of the Battle of the Somme. Why do we need this oppressive regime of secrecy. Why does Whitehall insist on treating us as though we were idiot children, too immature to understand the reasons behind actions that might be viewed, in other lights, as reprehensible or morally indefensible?

As for the timing of my post and the Guardian article, I don't think it could be better! After all the government has yet to come clean on the real reasons why it went to war, first with Imperial Germany and then with the Third Reich. The real reasons may have been teased out by historians over the intervening years but to my knowledge the HM Government has never yet said "OK. Yes, you are right we cocked up there. Millions died because we could not admit that we made serious errors of judgement - sorry!."

And correct me if I am wrong but isn't the whole Iraq/Weapons of Mass Destruction thing just another example of Whitehall being unwilling to tell the truth? Just take a look at the reaction to the recent revelations by Sir Christopher Meyer.

chav1 · 12-11-2005, 14:25

what cracks me up is that when the papers are eventualy released after 50 years i think it is regarding what poloticians have done there is often a lot of crossing out with black marker so it still stays a secret despite it been law that things should be made public

i forget the name of the particular law but ime preety sure AB will know what ime refering to lol

garinda · 12-11-2005, 14:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Acrylic-bob

After all the government has yet to come clean on the real reasons why it went to war, first with Imperial Germany and then with the Third Reich.

The First World War may have been the last great game between various Empires, but the second World War was definetly a war against fascism. If we hadn't have won we may have seen Edward VIII and Queen Wallace installed as puppet monarchs in Nazi Britain, well some of you would have seen them, some of us would be in concentration camps.

SPUGGIE J · 12-11-2005, 17:07

The 2 govenments of royal cousins couldnt see eye to eye. Throw in some ship and army building and the gloves come off. To think 3 members of old Queen Vics family ended up in war and the result one dead one exiled and the other changed his name. Silly things start wars always have done always will. When ideology is at logerheads with another ideology the cloves come of. WWII was fought for freedom and luckely we were on the winning side because most of us wouldnt be here talking about it.

Wynonie Harris · 12-11-2005, 18:42

I always thought that we fought in the second world war to defeat nazi Germany and thus preserve our freedom. What's your theory on the "real reasons" A-B?

Doug · 12-11-2005, 19:07

We are too quick to point the finger at someone and say that’s wrong or that a war crime. Those that have been in battle in any war will tell you it’s not that easy to be moralistic when things hot up. British troops under go training to resist most acceptable tortures but when you dealing with sadistic societies or if the enemy holds the upper hand and your forces or your people face defeat you will do all you have too in order to ensure that you have all the intelligence you need to turn things round, They do it, we do it and we always have done. The difference is you don’t publicise it. It might not be right, are the done thing. But if my people live as a result of intelligence gained through torture then so be it.

SPUGGIE J · 12-11-2005, 22:39

There is no such thing as a clean war. If there was there would be no war. The squaddies who had charges dropped for the incedent they were allegedly involved in shows that. Officially the Iraq war is over but it still goes on. Whatever the reasons for war someone will always be out of line and if caught will be punished. Dosent matter if its 5 days 5 years or 50 it stillhas to be done,the guilty will be punished.

WillowTheWhisp · 12-11-2005, 22:39

I suppose it shatters the dream somewhat when we've been led to believe that our side were the angelic goodies and the other guys were the baddies,the war criminals who tortured and abused prisoners.

Am I alone in finding this statement ironic?

Quote:

a German prisoner was convicted of war crimes and hanged on the basis of a confession which he had signed after he was, at the very least, "worked on psychologically".

I'm curious as to why the place was still going 3 years after the war ended too.

garinda · 12-11-2005, 22:49

The Geneva convention wasn't signed until 1949, so even three years after the war had ended in Europe, we apparently didn't break the 'rules' of war.

As a country all our great battles on land and sea were fought with all our might. I'm sure if we caught a Spaniard when the Armada was going on, he would have been 'encoraged' to divulge any relevant information, by fair means or foul.

SPUGGIE J · 12-11-2005, 22:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by WillowTheWhisp

I suppose it shatters the dream somewhat when we've been led to believe that our side were the angelic goodies and the other guys were the baddies,the war criminals who tortured and abused prisoners.

Am I alone in finding this statement ironic?

I'm curious as to why the place was still going 3 years after the war ended too.

No you are not alone. As the USA sat in on the Nurenberg trials its an irony that they have the Guantanimo Bay set up and carry on preaching against war crimes.