rockmom Posted February 26, 2007 Posted February 26, 2007 Watched this on 60 Minutes last night as well. :lol: I had known about this for a long time, but it brought to mind that some people still don't believe the Holocaust happened. I wondered, if you (the reader) had seen the propoganda film the Nazi's produced at the time the Holocaust was happening, would you have believed the Nazi's or the Jews? Also, the Red Cross inspectors apparantly bought the whole schtick hook line and sinker. Why? In WWII, were the Red Cross inspectors as naive as all that? Or were they blindly turning their eyes and avoiding a probe into the unpleasant truth?
HHSDad Posted February 26, 2007 Posted February 26, 2007 Also, the Red Cross inspectors apparantly bought the whole schtick hook line and sinker. Why? In WWII, were the Red Cross inspectors as naive as all that? Or were they blindly turning their eyes and avoiding a probe into the unpleasant truth?I think it was typical of what happened with prison camps. The Red Cross was allowed to see what the Germans wanted them to see. Happy, well fed workers.
rockmom Posted February 26, 2007 Author Posted February 26, 2007 I think it was typical of what happened with prison camps. The Red Cross was allowed to see what the Germans wanted them to see. Happy, well fed workers. But obviously it was in drastic contradiction to what they were being told. Why not push for inspections at other camps? Why not express skepticism and cynicism at what was being presented as the "truth"? Their reports after the visit indicate that they bought the whole charade! They'd heard otherwise, why not push it?
HHSDad Posted February 26, 2007 Posted February 26, 2007 But obviously it was in drastic contradiction to what they were being told. Why not push for inspections at other camps? Why not express skepticism and cynicism at what was being presented as the "truth"? Their reports after the visit indicate that they bought the whole charade! They'd heard otherwise, why not push it?Exactly what power did the Red Cross have over the Third Reich to make any demands?
Fastbreak Posted February 26, 2007 Posted February 26, 2007 Exactly what power did the Red Cross have over the Third Reich to make any demands?I'm sorry but... :lol: :lol: :lol: That one just got me... :lol:
02Ram54 Posted February 26, 2007 Posted February 26, 2007 I think RM's point is that even if they couldn't force the Nazi's hand to see other camps, they could have published a report that said that Germany wouldn't let them see any other camps or prisoners and that their presentation had to be viewed skeptically.
Birdsfan Posted February 26, 2007 Posted February 26, 2007 I think the Red Cross bought into it because they had no frame of reference to believe otherwise. Looking back, it's easy to see the deception. But back then, they could only see what they could see, and know what they could know. Remember, at that time, no one really knew how evil the Nazi regime really was, and what terrible things they had been doing.
HHSDad Posted February 26, 2007 Posted February 26, 2007 I think RM's point is that even if they couldn't force the Nazi's hand to see other camps, they could have published a report that said that Germany wouldn't let them see any other camps or prisoners and that their presentation had to be viewed skeptically.Again, so what? What were the Allies to do? Write a strongly worded letter to Adolph Hitler? I'm not trying to belittle your point rockmom, and I know that 02Ram54 knows better. At the time, Germany and Japan were the two most powerful countries in the world. There was nothing we could do about it at the time, even had we known. Japan's treatment of prisoners was every bit as bad. An estimated 300,000 civilians were klled during the first two weeks of Japan's occupation of Nanking. It's estimated that 2.7 million Chinese civilians died in 1942-1945 from Japan's scorched earth policies. Kind of makes America's "war crimes" sound more like misdemeanors by comparison doesn't it?
02Ram54 Posted February 26, 2007 Posted February 26, 2007 Again, so what? What were the Allies to do? Write a strongly worded letter to Adolph Hitler? I'm not trying to belittle your point rockmom, and I know that 02Ram54 knows better. At the time, Germany and Japan were the two most powerful countries in the world. There was nothing we could do about it at the time, even had we known. Japan's treatment of prisoners was every bit as bad. An estimated 300,000 civilians were klled during the first two weeks of Japan's occupation of Nanking. It's estimated that 2.7 million Chinese civilians died in 1942-1945 from Japan's scorched earth policies. Kind of makes America's "war crimes" sound more like misdemeanors by comparison doesn't it? I didn't think you were trying to belittle RM's point, NOR was I trying to fan any flames like you appear to imply. I was trying to step in and solve some misunderstanding, because (no offense) while I know you're not trying to belittle anyone it was coming off that way. But hey, you showed me.
Birdsfan Posted February 26, 2007 Posted February 26, 2007 Again, so what? What were the Allies to do? Write a strongly worded letter to Adolph Hitler?I think you're still missing the point a little bit. I think (and she can say for herself much better) that she felt that they could have made a statement...a formal protest...something. Their protesting would -- if nothing else -- cast the light of day on what was happening. Much like MLK had no power to fight the political machine in the South, they could still (had they known) have stood up for, and championed the cause of human rights. "A journey of a thousand miles..."
Fastbreak Posted February 26, 2007 Posted February 26, 2007 Forget it.I hope you weren't upset with me for laughing at Dad's comment. I meant no discredit to your previous post, at all. The idea of the disparity of the Red Cross vs the Third Reich just caught me the right/wrong way... :lol:
HHSDad Posted February 26, 2007 Posted February 26, 2007 I didn't think you were trying to belittle RM's point, NOR was I trying to fan any flames like you appear to imply. I was trying to step in and solve some misunderstanding, because (no offense) while I know you're not trying to belittle anyone it was coming off that way. But hey, you showed me. Sorry. I think you're still missing the point a little bit. I think (and she can say for herself much better) that she felt that they could have made a statement...a formal protest...something. Their protesting would -- if nothing else -- cast the light of day on what was happening. Much like MLK had no power to fight the political machine in the South, they could still (had they known) have stood up for, and championed the cause of human rights. "A journey of a thousand miles..." I understand that, but I would continue tor refute that the Red Cross could have done anymore than they did. It's surprising that the Germans even allowed them to see Brundibar. And even had they reported the truth, it would have changed nothing. If anything, it would have only sped up the ovens. Hindsight is a wonderful thing to have, but I just see this as a way to spread the blame to others.
Birdsfan Posted February 26, 2007 Posted February 26, 2007 Hindsight is a wonderful thing to have, but I just see this as a way to spread the blame to others.I don't sense anybody blaming anyone.
.png.ffa34568722b20f38e3c3ecfcb9a2cd2.png)
.thumb.jpeg.8d2472ffe992a9c5c22b4582f4881eab.jpeg)
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.