Death to all collaborators?

[Pasi Nurminen]

The scenario is simple: your nation is invaded and occupied, and a la 1940s France, you are in the resistance. Some people choose to collaborate with the occupation. Do you kill them? And I don't mean give them due process, convict them, and then send them to sit on death row for the next 30 years. I mean do you take them out back and put a bullet in their head once you find them?

 

[Tee Kay]

It's against all my ethics and beliefs, but if it means kill or be killed, so be it. The traitors will have to die.

 

[FriendlyFire]

TRUE story: some "spies" managed to get very very close to the germans by collaberating and provided useful intell as well as assisting the resistence. With the liberation of France they were singled out and shot by resistance members as collaberators accidently in the chaotic aftermath.

 

[aneeshm]

An unequivocal affirmative.

 

[ComradeDavo]

If they were obviously collaborating and were obviously not a spy, then yeah, bullet in the head it is.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

I guess I suffer the Arab mentality as well.

 

[Bozo Erectus]

The scenario is simple: your nation is invaded and occupied, and a la 1940s France, you are in the resistance. Some people choose to collaborate with the occupation. Do you kill them? And I don't mean give them due process, convict them, and then send them to sit on death row for the next 30 years.

If your regime is going to do away with due process and shoot people in the head without a trial, then what good is it? Might as well stick with the occupiers.

I mean do you take them out back and put a bullet in their head once you find them?

Have you ever noticed how whenever someobody says something like this, they almost invariably say "Take them out back" ? Why is that? If what youre doing is justice, why not to do it 'out front'?

 

[Winner]

If we had killed everyone who collaborated with Germans during WW2, there would have been nobody left in this country. The same applies to France and any other nation which experienced a real occupation, I suppose.

You can't kill people just because they tried to survive.

We executed the most guilty collaborators, people who actually helped Nazis to carry out their crimes. The other "collaborators" were left unharmed.

I am just sad we didn't do the same in 1989/1990 - top-level Communists should have been executed for their crimes against the whole nation. Others should have been put to their own labour camps for the rest of their miserable lives.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

There might be a little uncertainty about what collaboration is during wartime.

The definition I used is: "to cooperate treasonably, as with an enemy occupation force in one's country".

During wartime, these people are a part of the enemy, and thus regarded as such.

 

[Bozo Erectus]

Whats wrong with due process though?

 

[Winner]

If they were obviously collaborating and were obviously not a spy, then yeah, bullet in the head it is.

What's an obvious collaboration?

Example: Germans came to my grandmother and said "we need you to grow some tobacco (it's a strategic resource in any war ) for us on your field."

What should she do? Should she say "no, screw you, I am not a collaborator" and risk death? I am sure all you heroes who are so quick to tell what's wrong would have refused and died honourably.

In the real world, she did what they said. After few months, two German officers came to her house. She had radio turned on and "Free Europe" or something like that - an Allied radio station tuned on. Listening to this was punishable by death. Moreover, her uncle left a map next to the radio with German positions marked with red pins. Another reason to execute her and the entire family. They just looked at it, said something like "my friend serves in that unit", they listened to some German music for a while, and then they said thanks and they left. Nobody came later to kill her.

I don't know what I would do in that time, but I know world isn't black and white. You do what you have to do in order to survive.

 

[Pasi Nurminen]

Whats wrong with due process though?

You don't have it when your country is occupied. The occupiers control the courts, legislation, et al.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

@Bozo. Well, it's wartime, without a court to hold such a trial because of the occupation. I doubt the occupiers would allow a trial against the people who are working with them.

That's why you need to go 'out back'

Nothing wrong with a process when it's possible.

edit: Is it a good thing that the assasination on Hitler failed, because he would have had no trial?

 

[Pasi Nurminen]

Being forced to cooperate in some way under duress is not collaboration. Collaboration is actively working with the occupation to harm those working against it in any way. Therefore, Winner is, as usual, wrong and viewing the question from the completely wrong angle.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Example: Germans came to my grandmother and said "we need you to grow some tobacco (it's a strategic resource in any war ) for us on your field."

What should she do? Should she say "no, screw you, I am not a collaborator" and risk death? I am sure all you heroes who are so quick to tell what's wrong would have refused and died honourably.

I'd let them work the tabacco field without a doubt.

Different situation. The Nazis ask you to locate and reveal the jews hidden in your city. Would you cooperate and try to find as many jews as you can?

 

[Rik Meleet]

This is clearly a "No" for me, because the "All" in the question is far too wide.

 

[Winner]

Being forced to cooperate in some way under duress is not collaboration. Collaboration is actively working with the occupation to harm those working against it in any way. Therefore, Winner is, as usual, wrong and viewing the question from the completely wrong angle.

No, it is you who, once again, makes hasty and wrong conclusions.

There is no way of telling who cooperated willingly and who didn't. So if your death squads executed everyone who they deemed to be a willing collaborator, they'd probably kill many innocent people whose only crime was that they did what they had to.

Post-liberation era is always full of violence. People are full of frustration and suppressed anger that erups in one short period of time. Terrible things happens then. People are accusing each other, there is much confusion about who did what and why.

Therefore, there has to be a fair trial with the supposed collaborators. It is the only way how to find justice.

 

[Bozo Erectus]

You don't have it when your country is occupied. The occupiers control the courts, legislation, et al.

@Bozo. Well, it's wartime, without a court to hold such a trial because of the occupation. I doubt the occupiers would allow a trial against the people who are working with them.

That's why you need to go 'out back'

Nothing wrong with a process when it's possible.

The rule of law isnt about buildings and courtrooms. Its about respect for the law. Any group of organized citizens resisting an occupation should arm themselves with copies of their Constitution in addition to weapons. When someone is brought before the Resistance and accused of being a collaborator, there is some sort of process involved. Im sure a mere accusation wouldnt suffice to have someone dragged out back and shot in the head. So if theres going to be a process, why not make sure that its one that conforms with the laws of the government everyone is fighting to reinstate?

edit: Is it a good thing that the assasination on Hitler failed, because he would have had no trial?

Its a completely different situation.

 

[Pasi Nurminen]

English isn't your first language Winner, so I can forgive you for not reading any of my posts correctly. If you did, you'd know I am not talking about post liberation. I am talking about during the occupation.

I'll give you some time to rephrase your posts accordingly.

 

[Winner]

I'd let them work the tabacco field without a doubt.

Different situation. The Nazis ask you to locate and reveal the jews hidden in your city. Would you cooperate and try to find as many jews as you can?

No. I'd lie, I'd evade this task as much as possible. But I don't know what I'd do if they put a gun to my head and said: "tell me where the Jew is or you're dead".

I am sure that after the war, I'd be tried as a war criminal for the crime of staying alive.

Nobody can imagine how terrible such situation is, so I'll remain sceptical to all "internet heroes" who would probably crapped themselves in such situation.