Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ

Wars and ConflictsΒ  permalink

Karl Brandt

• Message 1.Β 

  Posted by Parti-NG-ton Blue (U13898629) on Wednesday, 24th June 2009

  I am currently reading a book called "Karl Brandt : The Nazi Doctor" by Ulf Schmidt.
  
  I was wondering what other peoples views are on the likes of Karl Brandt. He was without doubt guilty of the most appalling crimes in pursuit of his/their Euphanasia projects.
  
  In reading this book though I find Karl Brandt to be a man who was very gullible and suggestable. He was sentenced and executed at Nuremberg for said crimes.
  
  From what I have read so far the euphanasia laws were changed and so even though to us the morallity of what occured is undoubtably wrong. Can a man be executed and stand trial for what in his country wasn't illegal? From what I am aware Karl Brandt wasn't in the league of Mengele in terms of crimes and accountability but I may well be wrong.
  
  Peter

  Link to this forum: Karl Brandt

  Report message1

• Message 2

  , in reply to message 1.

  Posted by LairigGhru (U5452625) on Wednesday, 24th June 2009

  The word euthanasia is supposed to mean the same as "mercy killing". From what you say, Brandt's actions do not fall into that category and therefore his fate, by any standards, was justified.

  Link to this forum: Karl Brandt

  Report message2

• Message 3

  , in reply to message 1.

  Posted by slimdaddy (U14035560) on Wednesday, 24th June 2009

  Can a man be executed and stand trial for what in his country wasn't illegal? Β 
  
  Not being familiar with the Brandt story, I am reluctant to chip in my tuppenceworth, however, I suspect that like many Nazis of the 1940's their crimes were committed in the East and therefore they would certainly be guilty of as you say 'the most appalling of crimes' by the laws of Poland, Russia or wherever.
  It should also be mentioned that the Nazi party which took power in Germany were guilty of some of the most henious crimes the world has ever witnessed and they should not be allowed to sanitise oe justify their crimes by hiding behind the cloak of legality. The Nazi party of Hitlers Germany were morally and legally bankrupt. Hitler used the legal and political system to pursue his own individual ends and his corrupting of the German political and legal system of the Reich does not excuse the Nazi party's excesses, either collectively or individually.

  Link to this forum: Karl Brandt

  Report message3

• Message 4

  , in reply to message 3.

  Posted by Parti-NG-ton Blue (U13898629) on Wednesday, 24th June 2009

  Brandt was not working in the East. His work was on standard German citizens. It was deemed that anybody who cannot ever contribute to society has no place in society (mentally handicapped etc).
  
  He wasn't working on Poles, Jews etc

  Link to this forum: Karl Brandt

  Report message4

• Message 5

  , in reply to message 4.

  Posted by slimdaddy (U14035560) on Wednesday, 24th June 2009

  I stand corrected. However, I still hold true to my point that a corrupt and morally bankrupt regime has no recourse to hide behind a legal code.

  Link to this forum: Karl Brandt

  Report message5

• Message 6

  , in reply to message 5.

  Posted by Parti-NG-ton Blue (U13898629) on Wednesday, 24th June 2009

  I hear what your saying. In the case of Brandt there is no doubt that he held these views before the war and had the ear of Hitler to get them implemented. I wonder though that if the arguement is put forward that "only following orders" or "didn't have a choice" then can the person implementing the will of others be held responsible. I think (I could be wrong) that Adolf Eichmann tried this arguement and failed.
  
  I am not in the above saying that the euphanasia idea was entirely Brandts just that he held views in favour of such a scheme.

  Link to this forum: Karl Brandt

  Report message6

Back to top