Spekkio
He bowls overhand.
Look, personally I don't agree with the Venezuelan attacks, but looking to post WWII trials is the military version of resorting to Hitler attacks in any debate.
Here's what the Wikipidia article concludes with:
It was customary from the 18th to 1st half of the 20th century to punish the political and senior military leadership of the losers in an unlimited war. Had the US lost the Revolution, every political leader and General would have been hanged. The British punished Napoleon and his leaders the same. The British and French punished the Germans after WWI, and again after WWII.However, the historian Dwight R. Messimer from the U.S. Naval Institute came to the conclusion that "regardless of whether or not Heinz Eck and the others were guilty of war crimes, poor judgment, or of just following orders, the outcome of the trial was Siegerjustiz (victor's justice)".
It doesn't matter what the Germans did, they were going to be executed for it. Because they started a major conflict and lost. And they're quietly still salty about it, but have set up laws and rules so that they don't piss off the rest of the European order.
We were no better than the Germans in WWII. There are stories we read with pride before people get pinned that would put Eck to shame. But we won, so we didn't stand trial for it... nor for the atomic bombing of two cities with no military importance.
Our hypocracy is a huge weakness in the neoliberalism approach to foreign policy. The rules are the rules and everyone must follow them... until it's inconvenient for us, and then we disregard them. Hence the phrase "American exceptualism."
If we ever lose a war, our leadership will face the same fate. Particularly the ones who showed extremely good success in battle.
Last edited:


