View Full Version : New Nuremberg Trials
Kabraloth
March 27th, 2006, 06:42 PM
1st January 2001, the ASBs have decided that humanity needs to overcome the bloody history of the 20th century, so they decide to put 7 "exemplary" humans (more or less randomly picked) on trial for: war crimes, crimes against peace, and crimes against humanity.
On trial are:
Hitler
Truman
Stalin
Hirohito
Pol Pot
Idi Amin
Che Guevara
What happens now?
Agentdark
March 27th, 2006, 07:33 PM
Hitler:Hung
Truman:I shoot the guy who tries to hang him
Stalin:Hung despite protest by alot of russians
Hirohito:Hung
Pol Pot:Hung
Idi Amin:Hung
Che Guevara:Hung, hopefully with all those annoying people who have him on a shirt.
if the trials are by the people
Hitler:Hung
Truman:Givin a metal
Stalin:Elected President
Hirohito:Hung
Pol Pot:Hung
Idi Amin:Hung
Che Guevara: No idea
Ward
March 27th, 2006, 08:12 PM
Why Truman what reason is he on trial . Why not FDR .
Xen
March 27th, 2006, 08:47 PM
Why Truman what reason is he on trial . Why not FDR .
Im assuming hes on trial because of Hiroshima and Nagasaki
CalBear
March 27th, 2006, 09:24 PM
I understand Truman being on the list (especially after some of the posts from one of the recent WW II/Japan threads in post-1900) based so the idea that the two atom bombs were not necessary. I think it's assine, but I understand that the ASB's sometimes do things for effect.
I don't get Che. Compared to the rest of these guys he is a non-entity. At least Amin was an admitted cannibal, but Che was a two-bit revolutionary with a good press agent. ASB's missed a lot of much more lethal tin pot dictators they could/should have added.
I have to agree arranging the Danny Deever for all those moron's with Che shirts that they bought for $40.00 would be a service to humanity.
Hyperion
March 27th, 2006, 09:26 PM
Im assuming hes on trial because of Hiroshima and Nagasaki
Hard to say. On the one hand, he is not only the only US President, but the only world leader anywhere, that has authorized the deployment of nuclear weapons. Also, these two events where probably the single deadliest attacks for the least amount of force used at any time during the war. One bomb. One plane. One city gone.
OTOH, the defense could use in the arguement.
A. The weapons where used during a time of war against an enemy combatant, Japan, that has provoked the nation of which the weapons where from.
B. Truman may have been trying to prevent having to invade, and exterminate the Japanese population as a whole, not simply of the cities in question.
C. Despite having some ideas about radiation and whatnot, in 1945, scientists and doctors simply didn't know the things about nuclear weapons and radiation poisioning and fallout that we do today. Back then, it was just a bigger bomb. Now we know that the after effects of a weapon going off could cause cancer over time.
Max Sinister
March 28th, 2006, 10:08 AM
Hitler: Hung (I'm against capital punishment, but here I'd make an exception)
Truman: You'd have to prove first that nuking was unnecessary. It's not that he or FDR started the war.
Stalin: Hung (don't know what the Russians would say - sure he's got fans around, but I won't say they'd elect him president. And if they could, I guess Putin would have to say a thing about it.)
Hirohito: Was he the head behind the war, and not Tojo or someone else? So or so, you'll get a LOT of trouble with the Japanese for killing their emperor.
Pol Pot: Hung
Idi Amin: Hung
Che Guevara: I'll skip that one.
Che Guevara:Hung, hopefully with all those annoying people who have him on a shirt.
Excuse me? He supported a questionable ideology, but I have to say in his defense that the people he fought f.e. Batista weren't much better. Che doesn't have the blood of thousands of innocents on his hands like the other ones. In fact, I have to say that you (advocating death for people who've done nothing but wearing a Che shirt) are more questionable. Why don't you learn what "an eye for an eye" really means?
Kabraloth
March 28th, 2006, 11:03 AM
Something I forgot: could you plead insanity in such a trial?
Dr. Strangelove
March 28th, 2006, 11:17 AM
If you have to include a South American moron, Peron, Castro, Pinochet, Videla or Trujillo fit much better than Che.
Imajin
March 28th, 2006, 01:50 PM
Wasn't Hirohito Emperor all the way up to the eighties?
Susano
March 28th, 2006, 06:26 PM
Hitler: Death
Truman: Lifelong imprisonment due to mildering factors.
Stalin: Death.
Hirohito: Minor imprisonment. He only went along with the martialist cabal, which is bad enough, but wasnt actively part of it:
Pol Pot: Death
Idi Amin: Death
Che Guevara: Oh cmon. Free.
Ward
March 28th, 2006, 06:59 PM
Hitler: Death
Truman: Lifelong imprisonment due to mildering factors.
Stalin: Death.
Hirohito: Minor imprisonment. He only went along with the martialist cabal, which is bad enough, but wasnt actively part of it:
Pol Pot: Death
Idi Amin: Death
Che Guevara: Oh cmon. Free.
why should Che go free he tried to over thow peoples goverments by voilince .
If Truman gets life so should Clition .
Max Sinister
March 28th, 2006, 07:24 PM
What is Clition? A minor Greek deity?
But if you happen to mean Clinton: *What* *the* *fuck*? For getting a BJ in the OO? If we wanted to punish Dubya equally unfair (if only for incompetence), he had to be drawn, quartered, hung, shot, poisoned, disembowelled, and then REALLY hurt.
Dr. Strangelove
March 28th, 2006, 07:45 PM
why should Che go free he tried to over thow peoples goverments by voilince .
If Truman gets life so should Clition .
The governments Che tried to overthorw deserved to be overthrown, although I agree with you that he should not go unpunished.
But it's a joke to include him in this list. He was a lovely treehugging hippie compared to Pinochet.
Kabraloth
March 28th, 2006, 07:50 PM
I'm pretty sure that those dastardly ASBs him because several people claim he's been a mass murderer in his own right (like, say, it states at Wikipedia), instead of a tree hugging hippy.
Dr. Strangelove
March 28th, 2006, 09:14 PM
:rolleyes:
I don't defend him. For contemporary standards, he was a terrorist. I'm not one of those morons who think he was a freedom fighter, or a valiant champion of democracy. I just point that, having so many latin-american bastards at disposal, it is a bit pointless to include him.
vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.