Pax UN
Armed conflict is in decline all over the world, and one the principal reasons is the success of the United Nations in preventing war, according to the Commission on Human Security, an institute Co-Chaired by Sadako Ogata, former UN High Commissioner for Refugees and Amartya Sen, Nobel Laureate and Master of Trinity College, Cambridge in a report entitled War and Peace in the 21st Century. (Hat tip: Shrinkwrapped)
The key points are summarized in the report's overview:
- The number of armed conflicts around the world has declined by more than 40% since the early 1990s
- armed secessionist conflicts are at their lowest point since 1976
- Notwithstanding the horrors of Rwanda, Srebrenica and elsewhere, the number of genocides and politicides plummeted by 80% between the 1988 high point and 2001
- International crises, often harbingers of war, declined by more than 70% between 1981 and 2001
- The dollar value of major international arms transfers fell by 33% between 1990 and 2003. Global military expenditure and troop numbers declined sharply in the 1990s as well.
- The number of refugees dropped by some 45% between 1992 and 2003, as more and more wars came to an end
- Five out of six regions in the developing world saw a net decrease in core human rights abuses between 1994 and 2003
- The period since the end of World War II is the longest interval of uninterrupted peace between the major powers in hundreds of years.
- The number of actual and attempted military coups has been declining for more than 40 years. In 1963 there were 25 coups and attempted coups around the world, the highest number in the post–World War II period. In 2004 there were only 10 coup attempts—a 60% decline. All of them failed.
- "International terrorism is the only form of political violence that appears to be getting worse, but the data are contested"
The BBC notes that "The report credits intervention by the United Nations, plus the end of colonialism and the Cold War, as the main reasons for the decline in conflict." Not everyone agrees that these were the causal factors. Owen Greene, director of the Centre for International Co-operation and Security at Bradford University "cast doubt on its praise for the United Nations, saying the international body had been more successful at preventing conflicts from resuming than starting in the first place. 'Its record in preventing large-scale conflict has been rather poor'" he said.
Shrinkwrapped thinks two major factors are responsible for what is, by historical standards, an epidemic of peace:
- the fall of the expansionist, imperialist, communist, USSR; and
- the ascendance of a non-expansionist, non-imperialist power "despite the desperate claims and hysterical charges from the left"
The Commission on Human Security notes that the media has been remarkably oblivious to this surprising trend towards peace. That's not surprising given that probably nowhere has the process lauded by the Commission on Human Security been more in evidence than in Afghanistan, and more studiously ignored. The UNHCR itself admits that "more than 3.5 million Afghans have returned to their homeland since the end of 2001", one of the most remarkable reversals of refugee flows in history -- and then gives the credit to the United Nations -- "when the Bonn Agreement set Afghanistan on the long and bumpy road to political stability and socio-economic development." But what else happened in that time frame? Inquiring minds want to know.
Kofi Annan has recently made it known that he was for elections in Iraq all along. The restoration of constitutional rule in Iraq is destined to become yet another feather in the cap of the World Organization.
"The secretary-general pays tribute to the courage of the Iraqi people and congratulates the Independent Electoral Commission of Iraq, as well as the thousands of Iraqi election workers and monitors, on having organized and carried out the referendum in such challenging circumstances," said the spokesman, Stephane Dujarric. The world organization had an electoral assistance team in Iraq to help with preparations leading up to the voting and continuing through the tally.
A Korean professor of Peace Studies published a syllabus in 2005 outlining the principal lessons underlying the remarkable spread of world peace.
1. Diplomacy, Negotiations and Conflict Resolution
2. Peace through Strength?
3. Disarmament and Arms Control
4. International Organizations
5. International Law
6. World Government
7. Ethical and Religious Perspectives
8. World Peace Model
9. World Peace through Pax UN
posted by wretchardthecat at 10/18/2005 12:27:00 AM
43 Comments:
Ronald Reagan once said, "You can accomplish anything as long as you don't care who gets the credit." This is what he meant.
But the lies underlying all these make me uneasy. Orwellian doublespeak at its finest.
Sure, the doers might not care about the credit, but when the UN and its supporters start believing their own lies, they might not be happy to find their worldview crashing down amidst the death of thousands.
Seriously, this is good news. A lot of people grew up wondering 'when is my generations World War 2 going to happen' and it didn't. We are living through the longest period of general peace in modern history. The fact has been observed. The explanation for it is contentious.
Yet like most things that are generally true, it is not exactly true. Families are separated, men are maimed, young men are buried -- in smaller number than before it's true -- but buried nonetheless so that the general peace can continue. Each day that begins normally, with children going off to school and people worrying about whether they are late for work, are days of blessing. Yet fain should we remember those who gave with no expectation of gratitude. "When you go home, tell them of us and say, for your tomorrow, we gave our today."
It's Pax all right
Pax Americana
Rat,
Read you last comment on the previous thread. Nice one. Still laughing.
Who's imploding exactly?
The decline of formally declared wars has resulted in genocide all over the planet, but at least the millions of dead people were not killed in a war, thank god. One could really reach and stretch and conclude, somehow, that the UN presence in Rwanda for instance prevented a war - hell, Canada maybe for all we know wanted to invade - but at least no standing army was wielding the machetes and clubs that butchered 10s of thousands. That much we can all be thankful for and the UN can rightfully thump its chest.
True, this is longest period of peace in modern history. But if we want long-term peace we need to go Roman:
When Octavion becomes emperor with his victory over Mark Antony and Cleopatra (of the line of Greek Ptolemaic Pharaohs) the period of peace which follows is known as Pax-Romana, lasting 300 years. It is the longest period of peace in the history of Greece.
The Roman emperors Nero and Hadrian take a special interest in Greece. Nero begins work on the Corinth Canal, using slave labor.
http://www.ahistoryofgreece.com/roman.htm
We must be winning if someone else is trying to claim the credit.
Unfortunately, one of the side effects of the larger peace is terrorism. The losers realize that are losers and react with the same logic as teenagers kicking over mailboxes. And due to the larger peace we can't just go initiate the required disposal actions. The problem with being in a state of peace relative to big wars is that it makes so many indifferent to the small wars.
P.S. As near as I can tell, nigelhuffy is actually some sort of SPAM program. Makes as much sense, anyway.
Democracy, peace, the people decide.
Does anyone out there seriously think the UN in its present incarnation (or at all) will still be around in ten years? Or even five years?
If you've got no UN to flaunt these stupid reports, then what difference does it make what they choose to write?
If they can get Mr Trump to do the renovation on the building the UN will still be hanging around in another decade.
The need to have a world forum has been seen as important,by US, for about 100 years, now. That need will not disolve, regardless of the bile that is produced.
We need to better manage how US monies are spent by the UN. We have mismanaged our 'power of the purse' for quite a while.
cntaylor,
I don't think anybody is calling it a long-term trend just yet but with more and more people becoming free throughout the world and the way information can travel throughout the world faster and faster you would have to say tomorrow is a better day than today and so on and so on. It's a compounding factor. We are truly on the threshold of a new dawn. Standby. It is going to be both exciting and glorious. Grab a beer, plant yourself down in front of the plasma and behold the exciting and happy new times coming. We are living in extremely important times right now. Lucky for us! Are children are truly fortunate.
pd quig
The decline is not "worldwide".
Population decline is occurring in the "west".
Check the UN fact book for Iran. average age is still around 22+/-, Uzbeckistan is about the same. Across Central Asia young men abound.
Look at Mexico, there you may well find a shortage of young men, only because they have infilitrated north into US.
The Dr Erlich's "Population Bomb" was not taken seriously in South America and Mohammedan countries, while it was a quasi-religious text when I was in High School.
Words count and ideas matter.
The ideas that emerged from the 60's took greater hold in Europe then here. The more "educated" and "civilized" the Society, the further down the road to self neutering they've traveled.
The Europeans regard US as uncivilizd oafs, we regard the "tribal" as being illiterate. The Romans held the Northern Europeans in contempt.
Beware the Barbarians
Civil war in third world countries must not count.
The combatants in these affairs lack many of the accoutrements of conventional armies but it is warfare nevertheless.
Should the UN apologists be allowed to define it otherwise?
These numbers support the fact that the Soviet Union, and the wars they waged against the US by proxy, were, eventually defeated, or yet, whose ruinous policies succeeded in destroying themselves. Such a convenient era, 88-03.
In the days where ruling might was obtained at the end of a sharp stick, there were many contenders. The advent of bronze upped the ante for war making technology and created the edge required to form nations and states. From bronze to smart weapons technology has found ways to contain those who would openly wage warfare. Like pressing on a balloon, retrospectively, terrorism is the logical bulge when all avenues are impeded.
The war to end all wars only ended those in the past. Let the UN administer peace while braver men create it. May the word go forth, that shall ye evil dictators who shall taunt and demand attention, that men with guns will come knocking down the door, pulling them by the scruff of the collar out into the street to a jeering mob. Iraq was said by some to become a Stalingrad, it has instead become a poignant message to those who would make threats to a nation thought to have no will. We will.
dave h
I do not totally disagree, the President does, though.
Every President since Wilson has advocated for a World Forum. We designed the UN, it is a child of US birthing at the Fairmont Hotel in San Francisco. It may have grown wayward, perhaps, but our child none the less. Even today it is the allowance we provide that allows the UN to operate.
Much like a disruptive teen we are left with few good choices. Tough Love seemingly the best. Hopefully Mr Bolton is there to provide some. It seems we should pursue that course with the UN, as niether Mrs Clinton or Mr Giuliani are likely to remove US from it, after '08.
Precisely Dan. This is why we shall need to go to war again, and soon. May we be more brutal to the quislings who attempt to filch the US of the respect it merits? Next time they think, the Left will bring ‘em down. War is inevitable.
Once upon a time, we were all slapping each other on the back over the inexorable march of the enlightenment and the unprecedented gains in liberalism that were witnessed in the latter half of the 19th century and the first part of the 20th, and then the entire thing came crashing down and a new century of fascism and horror was born.
I mention this not as a prediction, but as a warning. Man has never lived in a world of such peace, so there is literally no data available to tell us what to expect. Whenever we enter the unknown, we enter dangerous times. What happens when we start to believe in a world with no cost? What happens when our people subscribe to a world of rational behavior? What happens when we get our manageable world?
We should be wary of who mixes our drink. Ideas, once drunk, can cause unconsciousness, and in this new century of peace we cannot afford to be impaired.
If the American dream ever dies, it will die in its sleep. Be suspicious of who wants to put us there.
OT:
for anyone on the East Coast USA interested in signit intel during the cold war, the Center for Cryptologic History at the NSA is hosting "Three Days of Cryptologic History"
26, 27, 28 October 2005 at
Johns Hopkins Applied Physics Laboratory,
Kossiakoff Center. Its open to the public. Registration will be available until 10/20.
http://www.nsa.gov/cch/cch00020.cfm
The 27th will deal mainly with new information derived from the Venona cables. the 28th will deal with operations during the viet nam war. the cost is $35@ day but you can opt to attend only one day. I'm going on the 27th. I've got an email into the public affairs office about what rules pertain to reporting the event. should be interesting.
here's a pretty good piece about the immense US current account deficits.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1504600/posts
GWB is a divider not a uniter… it is precisely so because of those who would agitate against him, it takes two to tango and the music is still playing.
We are bound to a future of Low Intensity Conflict. Those conflicts will strive to maintain the sovereignty of nation states, whilst those who oppose order will labor to disintegrate the same. To disrespect the boundaries of nations, to expand into a greater conflict, will bring more rapidly the dissolution of peace amongst states and the conflict will bloom into first a regional and then a world war. When China, Russia, and Germany see just cause in our destruction, the ineludible outcome will be global thermonuclear war. Embrace LIC. Enjoy the cessation while it lasts, no one ever attained glory by starting peace.
Come Now. PAX AMERICANA IS RIGHT.
America is the World's hyper-power. That's what the French say and arent they always right?
America is to blame for everything in the world.
Surely, they too can be blamed for this disturbing lack of violent conflict since the fall of USSR.
verc
Even when we agree, you like to argue about it.
Civilization is in the eye of the beholder, as is much in life. The Europeans believe they are at the "peak" of Civilization.
I hope the US never sinks so low.
Many think of the US as a great Barbarian Nation, those in China, for example.
I celebrate the Barbarian aspects of America, while having visited the great Art Museums of US and Europe, I find more pleasure on the back of a horse, exploring the endless horizon of the American West.
I hail the individual over the collective, the rights of the minority above the fear and loathing of the majority.
Perhaps that makes me a Conservative, a wingnut, a Liberal, a loonie or just an American.
Really, lucky is all I am, to have been born in America in this age, able to defend it's Principles while I was young and particpate in it's future as I age.
well said, 'rat. the same goes for those of us lucky enough to migrate here.
10. Bad guys in handcuffs, graves, or hiding.
pd
Really interesting in that Japan and perhaps the Chinese sea coast are now fitting the "Western" mold. Perhaps modernity would have been a better term to use.
1st vs 3rd world reproduction rates seems to be the story.
Central Asia still being youth oriented and home to Osama.
Aristides,
"What happens when we start to believe in a world with no cost? What happens when our people subscribe to a world of rational behavior? What happens when we get our manageable world? "
When that occurs, it will be followed at some point by the equivalent of what would happen if someone were to re-introduce smallpox to today's world.
So today, those looking to improve their lot in life, today's best and brightest dont go into the "conquest" careers anymore(dictators, military general, colonial govenors, etc). They become engineers or marketing managers. They dont start wars, they start companies. Because (as Dilinger sayed) that is where the money is...
this explains islamic-splodey-dopes...
aint the sharpest tacks on the wall...
Failure is an orphan, success has thousands of fathers.
Cliche but true, and it is time for Special Report with Britt Hume.
Monty Python's view:
LORETTA:
And it's safe to walk in the streets at night now, Reg.
FRANCIS:
Yeah, they certainly know how to keep order. Let's face it. They're the only ones who could in a place like this.
COMMANDOS:
Hehh, heh. Heh heh heh heh heh heh heh.
REG:
All right, but apart from the sanitation, the medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, a fresh water system, and public health, what have the Romans ever done for us?
I never knew George Bush worked for the UN! Live and learn....
It would be interesting to see where the conflicts were and how each ended.
Here is a list I did on my own:
El Salvador - US Backed government held Democratic Elections and defeated a Marxist insurgency backed by Cuba and the USSR
Costa Rica - US Trained counterinsurgency forces backed by Spectre gunships defeated a Marxist Insurgency backed by Cuba and Russia.
Peru - Local government defeats Marxist Insurgency.
Maybe the report should read - Marxism discredited, USSR Falls apart, violence ends.
This report is an echo of the meme that is gaining strength amongst the great and the good of Europe - who have conveniently rewritten recent European history so as to excise the The US from any role in the largley peaceful colapse of Communism and the integration of the east. Of course the silent reproach offered by a checkpoint charlie has to be removed so as to ensure that the falsification holds - and I am sure the next major anniverssery of the berlin Airlift is quieltly dreaded in not a few capitals for the awkward questions it may raise, to say nothing of reminders of what precisely occured in the Balkans as recently as the last decade.
But no matter - the project has already gone so far that it is a commonplace for Europeans to castigate the US for it's violent and primitive approach to matters of international realtions and to do so whilst holding up as an example their "own" brilliantly sophisticated model as applied to the question of Eastern Europe, and the postwar period in Europe more generally. Those who still half remember that this history used to inlcude references to a distant country accross an ocean, whose young men and women stood on Europes frontiers as token of that countries commitement to undergo anahillation in defence of Europe, may feel a little beffudled. They seem also to remember that the diplomacy that set the conditions for the end of the cold war was conducted by protaganists who would find the new history of events they can still remember to be surreal.
Orwell thought that it would take the application of totalitarin terror to rewrite a history that was still living memory - and now we find that all it takes is self satisfied wishfull thinking and a little forgetfullness.
"Orwell thought that it would take the application of totalitarin terror to rewrite a history that was still living memory - and now we find that all it takes is self satisfied wishfull thinking and a little forgetfullness."
Bears repeating.
20th century history has already gone down the memory hole for much of that continent.
Maybe it's why Europe wants to take over the internet, to make sure their memory hole stays blocked.
Red River: very simple & straightforward analysis.
Inadmissable at the UN.
Therefore, I too vote for dissolving the UN immediately; scheduling a FORMAL convocation to discuss What Comes Next (within a year); before then ecouraging the study of WHAT WORKS for humans; and then discuss, argue and engage in dialogues about the collective future of humankind.
Clean slate, no obeisance to dictators or legitimizing them; break with 7,000 years of things that don't work and adopting the few extracts from those previous 7,000 years THAT DO WORK, and get them to We, the People of the world: responsible freedom, right to pursue happiness, under God, respect for minorities, equality of the sexes...
New Day!
Future of Freedom in Muslim World:
In Egypt, the al-Wasat (Moderate) Party is an Islamic-based political party that calls for a reformed and modernized version of Islamic Sharia, which gives both women and Christians full and equal rights under the law. In fact, al-Wasat not only welcomes Egypt's Coptic Orthodox Christians to join, but has absolutely no problem with a Christian becoming head of state. If such a party is legally recognized by the current Egyptian government, and if it can win the trust and cooperation of Egypt's small, yet influential and well-organized Christian communities, a dramatic victory could be won for democratic struggles in the Middle East.
These examples are but a small sample of the many cases of religious groups finding compatibility with democratic principles in the Muslim world. More importantly, these are the groups that are actively involved in humanitarian aid work - such as helping out communities in the aftermath of the major earthquake that hit Pakistan and India last week.
http://www.aina.org/news/20051018124844.htm
IIRC, a few years back the UN declared that by any reasonable standard of meaurement -- reduction of poverty, infant mortality and disease; increased life expectancy, literacy and wealth, etc. -- the last 50 years of the 20th century saw more improvements in the human conditon than the previous 500 years, largely the result of increased economc activity and trade.
This from and organization institutionally hostile to capitalism, the engine of this progress. And this, despite the fact that no nation has been raised from poverty by trillions in foreign aid, UN receivership or the earnest admirable work of NGOs.
That this occured during a peak in American global influence -- or hegemony, according to critics -- is more than a coincidental or concurring event.
Those who've labored mightily for decades at deconstructing and delegitimizing American leadership and authority might not like what comes after the last chous of "Ding Dong The Witch is Dead" fades.
Kstagger notes: The Nuremberg trials provided a chance for Germany to be cleansed by divesting itself from the Nazi regime. This trial may provide the same outlet for Iraq
I agree with kstagger. The quicker it is done the quicker the Iraqis can start on a fresh slate.
Jrod notes: This newswire headline just crossed: IRAQI TRIBUNAL CHIEF JUDGE SAYS SADDAM TRIAL ADJOURNED MAINLY BECAUSE WITNESSES DID NOT SHOW UP
Maybe because they're all dead?
This is a real possibility. Or, the defendant's family have been kidnapped or intimidated by other means. This is a bad precedent. It's must not stand.
NanhCee notes: It behooves the other dictators in the Middle East to pooh-pooh the proceedings as much as possible, too. I anticipate we'll be seeing much more of the same sort of overt spin as you can read in this article out of Abu Dubai's GulfNews:
'Iraqis in Dubai say court case is a political farce'
Yes, there are a number of tin pot dictators who will feel the sense of loss. They will naturally align themselves with Saddam.
Ray echoes the same thing in his 2nd point:
2) The bigger audience for this trial is outside of Iraq, not inside of it. The Arab political world will squirm with unease as Saddam's pathology is exposed since he represents the pinnacle of traditional Arab political development. Consider the contrast with Nuremberg, where Soviet judges could, without a trace of irony, sit in judgement of crimes against humanity.
One of the main differences I note between the Nuremberg Trials and Saddam Hussein's trial is the length of time to bring Saddam to trial (let alone get a verdict).
Saddam Hussein was captured on Saturday, December 14, 2003, while the US occupied Iraq. Yet, one of the first meaningful court proceeding occurred on October 19, 2005. This would be about 675 days.
Rewind back to the Nuremberg Trials - and choose one of first trials "The Doctor's trial" (and one of the most complex trials) which 23 defendant were arraigned on November 21, 1946. Let's assume they surrendered on or about May 8, l945 or V-E day 'Victory in Europe' - and that is a generous assumption (the county was shattered, they were probably were in hiding and the logistics of rounding them up).
That would have brought Germans to trial in 563 days (or less). That about 112 days shorter than Saddam's first meaningful date in court!
Now, we hear there will a delay of 45 days because of certain witness failure to appear - so now the difference be Nuremberg and Saddam's trial is 157 days! This smacks of witness intimidation or manipulation of the court by the defendant and his considerable wealth (and possibly his ability to continue to intimidate people). This is the opposite of what should happen.
Further, this extra time allows Saddam's thugs to carry out more terror attacks and kill more Americans (and Iraqis).
I also note that once the "doctor's trial" started it ran rather smoothly until the end. Something I hope will happen in Saddam's trail.
Let's look at the "doctor's trial"
[Harvard]:
Summary
The Medical Case, U.S.A. vs. Karl Brandt, et al. (also known as the Doctors' Trial), was prosecuted in 1946-47 against twenty-three doctors and administrators accused of organizing and participating in war crimes and crimes against humanity in the form of medical experiments and medical procedures inflicted on prisoners and civilians.
Karl Brandt, the lead defendant, was the senior medical official of the German government during World War II; other defendants included senior doctors and administrators in the armed forces and SS. They were indicted on four counts: 1. conspiracy to commit war crimes and crimes against humanity; 2. war crimes (i.e., crimes against persons protected by the laws of war, such as prisoners of war); 3. crimes against humanity (including persons not protected by the laws of war); and 4. membership in a criminal organization (the SS).
The specific crimes charged included more than twelve series of medical experiments concerning the effects of and treatments for high altitude conditions, freezing, malaria, poison gas, sulfanilamide, bone, muscle, and nerve regeneration, bone transplantation, saltwater consumption, epidemic jaundice, sterilization, typhus, poisons, and incendiary bombs.
These experiments were conducted on concentration camp inmates. Other crimes involved the killing of Jews for anatomical research, the killing of tubercular Poles, and the euthanasia of sick and disabled civilians in Germany and occupied territories. The defendants were charged with ordering, supervising, or coordinating criminal activities, as well as participating in them directly. The fourth count concerned membership in the SS (Schuttzstaffeln) of the Nazi regime.
Karl Brandt and six other defendants were convicted, sentenced to death, and executed; nine defendants were convicted and sentenced to terms in prison; and seven defendants were acquitted.
The material presented in this project includes case file documents (the briefs and document books created and used in the course of the trial), evidence file documents (the evidentiary documents from which the prosecution, and occasionally the defendants, derived their exhibits), and the trial transcript.
The trial documents and evidence file documents related to Case 1 amount to approximately 2800 documents and 13,000 pages of material.
1. High-altitude experiments. March - August 1942... experiments were conducted at the Dachau camp using a low-pressure chamber... R. Brandt and Sievers were convicted.
2. Freezing experiments. August 1942 - May 1943. .. primarily for the German air force to investigate treatments for persons who had been severely chilled, using prisoners at the Dachau camp. ...R. Brandt, Handloser, Schroeder, and Sievers were convicted.
3. Malaria experiments. February 1942 - April 1945... experiments were conducted on more than 1000 prisoners at Dachau... Sievers was convicted.
4. Mustard ("lost") gas experiments. September 1939 - April 1945... experiments were conducted at Sachsenhausen, Natzweiler, and other camps... K. Brandt, R. Brandt, and Sievers were convicted.
5. Sulfanilamide experiments. July 1942 - September 1943... experiments were conducted at Ravensbrueck... K. Brandt, Fischer, Gebhardt, Handloser, Mrugowsky, and Oberheuser were convicted.
6. Bone, muscle, and nerve regeneration, and bone transplant experiments. September 1942 - December 1943. Conducted for benefit of German armed forces, using Polish inmates at the Ravensbrueck camp... Fischer, Gebhardt, and Oberheuser were convicted.
7. Seawater experiments. July - September 1944... test methods of making seawater drinkable; experiments were conducted at Dachau. Becker-Freyseng, Beiglboeck, Gebhardt, Schroeder, and Sievers were convicted.
8. Epidemic jaundice experiments. June 1943 - January 1945... experiments were conducted on Polish prisoners at Sachsenhausen and Natzweiler camps... K. Brandt was convicted.
9. Typhus ("spotted fever") and other vaccine experiments. December 1941 - February 1945. .. Poison experiments. December 1943 and September - October 1944.
10. Poison experiments. December 1943 and September - October 1944. Conducted to investigate the effect of various poisons, including poison in food and poisoned bullets; experiments were conducted at Buchenwald (food) and Sachsenhausen (bullets). .. Mrugowsky was convicted.
11. Incendiary bomb experiments. November 1943 - January 1944. .. experiments were conducted at Buchenwald, involving the infliction of burns by materials from incendiary bombs. All were acquitted.
12. Sterilization experiments. March 1941 - January 1945. Conducted to develop methods of rapid, large scale sterilization in order to ensure the eventual elimination of "enemy" populations while keeping captive workers as a labor force during the war. Experiments were planned and/or conducted at Auschwitz, Ravensbrueck, and elsewhere employing drugs, x-rays, and surgery. .. Brack, R. Brandt, and Gebhardt were convicted.
13. Skeleton collection. June 1943 - September 1944. Conducted to complete a skeleton collection for an anatomical research project at the Reich University of Strasbourg; one hundred twelve Jews at Auschwitz were killed for the purpose. Charged against R. Brandt and Sievers; both were convicted.
14. Tubercular Polish nationals. May 1942 - January 1944. Polish nationals alleged to have incurable tuberculosis were imprisoned or killed on the pretext of protecting the health of Germans in Poland.
15. Euthanasia. September 1939 - April 1945. Involved the secret killing of the aged, insane, incurably ill, deformed children, and others, beginning at asylums in Germany and later in the camps and occupied territories. .. Brack, K. Brandt, and Hoven were convicted.
16. Phenol (gas oedema) experiments. 1942 - 1944... Hoven and Mrugowsky were convicted.
Chronology of the Medical Case
Indictments (25 Oct. 1946)
25 Oct 1946 Indictment filed
5 Nov 1946 Indictment served
21 Nov 1946 Arraignment
5 Dec 1946 Defense motion for continuance (Transcript begins)
9 Dec 1946 Defense pleas; court procedures
9 Dec 1946 Prosecution opening statement
10 Dec 1946 Prosecution: Documents, defendants, and
organizations
10 Dec 1946 Prosecution: High altitude experiments
11 Dec 1946 Prosecution: Freezing experiments
13 Dec 1946 Prosecution: Malaria experiments
16 Dec 1946 Prosecution: Seawater experiments
16 Dec 1946 Prosecution: Sterilization experiments
18 Dec 1946 Prosecution: Jewish skeletons collection
19 Dec 1946 Prosecution: Jaundice experiments
19 Dec 1946 Prosecution: Tubercular Poles program
19 Dec 1946 Prosecution: Sulfanilamide and bone/muscle
experiments
2 Jan 1947 Prosecution: Polygal and phlegmon experiments
2 Jan 1947 Prosecution: Lost (mustard) gas experiments
3 Jan 1947 Prosecution: Typhus and other vaccine experiments
10 Jan 1947 Prosecution: Biological warfare experiments
10 Jan 1947 Prosecution: Euthanasia program
28 Jan 1947 Prosecution: Criminal organization
29 Jan 1947 Defense opening statements
3 Feb 1947 Defense: Karl Brandt
11 Feb 1947 Defense: Siegfried Handloser
20 Feb 1947 Defense: Paul Rostock
25 Feb 1947 Defense: Oskar Schroeder
28 Feb 1947 Defense: Karl Genzken
4 Mar 1947 Defense: Karl Gebhardt
10 Mar 1947 Defense: Fritz Fischer
12 Mar 1947 Defense: Kurt Blome
21 Mar 1947 Defense: Rudolf Brandt
26 Mar 1947 Defense: Joachim Mrugowsky
3 Apr 1947 Defense: Herta Oberheuser
8 Apr 1947 Defense: Helmut Poppendick
9 Apr 1947 Defense: Wolfram Sievers
16 Apr 1947 Defense: Gerhard Rose
25 Apr 1947 Defense: Siegfried Ruff
1 May 1947 Defense: Hans Romberg
6 May 1947 Defense: Georg Weltz
8 May 1947 Defense: Viktor Brack
19 May 1947 Defense: Hermann Becker-Freyseng
2 June 1947 Defense: Konrad Schaefer
6 June 1947 Defense: Wilhelm Beiglboeck
21 June 1947 Defense: Waldemar Hoven
25 June 1947 Defense: Adolf Pokorny
26 June 1947 Defense: additional documents
28 June 1947 Prosecution: rebuttal evidence
30 June 1947 Defense: additional documents
1 July 1947 Prosecution: rebuttal evidence
2 July 1947 Defense: additional documents
3 July 1947 Prosecution: rebuttal evidence
14 July 1947 Tribunal ruling on Count One of indictment
14 July 1947 Prosecution closing statement
14 July 1947 Defense closing statements
19 July 1947 Defendants' personal statements
19 Aug 1947 Tribunal judgment
20 Aug 1947 Sentences (transcript ends)
22 Nov 1947 Appeals denied by Military Governor of
U.S. Zone (Lucius Clay)
16 Feb 1948 Appeals denied by U.S. Supreme Court
(333 U.S. Reports 836)
2 June 1948 Execution of seven defendants sentenced to death
see: the Doctors' Trial
The Thirteen Nuremberg Trials
Interesting what backwards loops and contortions people will do to pursue an ideological agenda. You silly silly people! The UN was an idea whose main backers were the United States and Britain! It is a successor to the League of Nations which was an organization promoted by President Wilson after World Ware I! Stalin went for it because the US and Britain pushed so hard for it after World War II and noone wanted to fight anymore at that time.
So go ahead and rip away at how the UN is trying to take credit for world peace. You silly people don't seem to realize that even if the UN is claiming more credit than it should, that still is a credit to the US because we created the damn thing in the first place!
And the statement hightlighting the fall of the Soviet Union and the rise of the United States (Pax Americana) as the main reasons for the current climate were already quite clearly stated, and I quote "The report credits intervention by the United Nations, plus the end of colonialism and the COLD WAR, as the main reasons for the decline in conflict."
Yes, the END OF THE COLD WAR. Who do you think fought the cold war, Brazil? No, it was the US. And with the cold war over, deaths have gone down! And yes, Colonialism was a major contributor, too. And yes, apart from Cuba, The Phillippines and a few other places, the US was not a conlonial empire. So that was covered too.
The only reason to downplay the UN is because that would mean giving credit to other countries who have also contributed money, time, effort, sweat and bodies to UN missions. Remember Korea? Yes, it was primarily an American War, but it was sponsored by the UN, and had contributions from Australia, Britain, Canada, and over a dozen other Asian, African and European nations.
Not to mention many other wars or police actions that were driven primarily by the US, but with contributions from other nations. Even as recently as the first Gulf War, which was given a UN stamp and included armies from dozens of countries and fat bank from countries who didn't contribute bodies. Not to mention massive financial and peacekeeping assistance to formerly colonized nations and other countries that received education, financial assitance, arbiters, structual improvements and a long list of other items.
Yes, at least 50% if not more of this was driven by the United States, but always with assistance from the rest of the world. By highlighiting this and crowing over the same thing over and over its the equivalent of saying "Well enough about me, what do YOU think about me?"
Some people are probably upset that the UN didn't go along with us when our President circumvented the very rules that we set up in the first place and invaded Iraq. I'm not even going to go into the controversies we all know of regarding the rationalitaions given and the rushed job those at the top of the chain did in order to get us there.
Jeez...
Post a Comment
<< Home