Hitler trial, 1946

Hitler is captured in Berlin by the Russians, 1945; surprisingly, they don't immediately shoot him (or Eva Braun) because Joseph Stalin has ordered that if Hitler is found he is to be taken alive at all costs, so he can be put on trial. So Hitler's trial begins in Moscow, 1946; Stalin's intention is to embarrass the West by pointing out that there were a lot of people in the West who were sympathetic to the fascist ideology because of their fear of Communism.

In exchange for his life, Hitler agrees to testify about links between the Nazi Party and fascist parties in every other country in Europe--including the Soviet Union and its satellites, the members of which groups Stalin wants to track down and annihilate.

Hitler, OTOH, wants to use the trial as a chance for a rant for Fascism/against Communism; although his attempts to do so are blocked at the trial, he does manage by various means to write a book in prison, and to get it smuggled out of the USSR. It reveals the full extent of the Nazi/Soviet agreements in 1939, and paints Stalin in such a bad light that he is immediately deposed and executed.
 

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
Hitler would not have been given that sort of a platform, not of the Red Army captured him. Even if there wasn't a danger of his making statement to embarrass Stalin, a trial would have been too public, too much of a rallying opprotunity.

Hitler would have wound up in Stalin's private cages at the tender mercies of Beria's jailers.
 
This scenario's stupid.

1) Why would Stalin have a separate trial in the ifrst place?

2) Hitler would never cooperate with the Soviets

3) His conditions in a Soviet prison would be presumably horrible whether he'd have a toilet is up for debate let alone enough paper and stationary to write a book.

4) The most common Soviet soldier despised Hitler and even then the ones guarding his cell would likely be the loyalest of the loyal and be strictly forbidden from even insulting him. Thus the idea that a guard would sympathise with him and then manage to get it out is absurd.

5) Even if his book was released the West would likely consider it a chear forgery and even if they didn't are they liable to believe anyhting Hitler says?

6) Even if the west do believe it, all the people who could have realistically deposed Stalin already knew about the full extent of the pact so it's unlikely they'd suddenyl be overcome with rage.
 
Er, even if Hitler somehow wrote this book in the depths of the Lubyanka, how would it have Stalin deposed? The Sovs wouldn't even take one look at the thing, much less believe it. Furthermore, Stalin would likely settle for a grand public exeuction in Red Square or something over a trial. What's there to trial him about? His mustache?
 
Er, even if Hitler somehow wrote this book in the depths of the Lubyanka, how would it have Stalin deposed? The Sovs wouldn't even take one look at the thing, much less believe it. Furthermore, Stalin would likely settle for a grand public exeuction in Red Square or something over a trial. What's there to trial him about? His mustache?

Actually, I think it was Churchill who wanted just to shoot Hitler and Stalin who wants to put him on Trial.

And the reasoning is pretty simple: Discredit Fascism as a political movement--a goal that makes huge sense to Stalin (having been invaded by a Fascist Alliance) and probably supports the aims of the West as well. Hitler's trial would be held at Nuremburg, and he would be the strongest star there. It is an interesting question, and one that would almost certainly lead to Hitler taking the stand himself, as well as facing the hangman.

Stalin would NOT deviate from this course of action, nor would "The Hitlerite Menace" have any public sway over the people he was attempting to exterminate. That said, the worst case scenario of Hitler making a very strong showing at Nuremburg and National Socialism refusing to quietly fade away might well throw a monkey wrench into the Cold War-it might even lead to CIA/KGB Co-operation to take down whatever emerges from the wreckage of that movement.
 
Why would stalin tuck Hitler away from the west for a seperate trial? Doing so would take credence away from the trial as people all over would ask what the Soviets were afraid of allowing all of the allies to try him. Besides Stalin knows that all the allies want Hitler to face the hangman almost as much as he does, they're not about to let hitler go free, and there was enough evidence of Hitlers involvement in atrocities to convict him five times over, not to mention the fact that Hitler has little to offer the west that would prevent them from throwing the book at him in trial. He would go to trial in Nuremburg just like the rest.
 
Top