Nuremberg Tribunals

NUTLEY BOY

Can anyone recommend a good book that details the history of the Nuremberg trials in a factual way (as distinct from a drama) ?

jonniebgood1

NUTLEY BOY wrote: »

Can anyone recommend a good book that details the history of the Nuremberg trials in a factual way (as distinct from a drama) ?

For factual evidence of the views of the defendants in the trial I would suggest 'the nuremburg interviews'. Reference is made to the trials (it does'nt deal with the process of the trials) in this but mostly the views of the defendants in relation to the charges put against them. Parts of it are fascinating but it is also quite heavy going, certainly not drama. They are first hand accounts so only contain the bias of the person expressing them. http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1212988.Nuremberg_Interviews_the

Second hand from amazon http://www.amazon.co.uk/Nuremberg-Interviews-Conversations-Defendants-Witnesses/dp/1844139190/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1313501682&sr=8-1

hinault

NUTLEY BOY wrote: »

Can anyone recommend a good book that details the history of the Nuremberg trials in a factual way (as distinct from a drama) ?

You can get a free download of David Irvings book "Nuremburg : The last battle"

I haven't read the book but I'm sure Irving's view would make for interesting reading.

http://www.fpp.co.uk/books/Nuremberg/index.html

jonniebgood1

hinault wrote: »

You can get a free download of David Irvings book "Nuremburg : The last battle"

I haven't read the book but I'm sure Irving's view would make for interesting reading.

http://www.fpp.co.uk/books/Nuremberg/index.html

Free= good.

I wonder when is the Times comment on front page from? The book is 1996 after much of the controversy over Irving.

David Irving is in the first rank of Britain’s
historical chroniclers’ – THE TIMES

Has anyone read this?

Morlar

jonniebgood1 wrote: »

Free= good.

I wonder when is the Times comment on front page from? The book is 1996 after much of the controversy over Irving.

Has anyone read this?

You have to realise that before the campaign against him he was the premier TR era historian. I went through it years ago. I am more familiar with some other of his works than this one. He also translated the Keitel diaries for example and his 'Hitler's War' is a key book on this era. So much so that West point military academy had it on it's required reading list until jewish advocacy groups pressured for it's removal.

You can buy also this book if you prefer :

http://www.amazon.com/Nuremberg-Last-Battle-David-Irving/dp/1872197167

In fact that amazon page has some interesting reviews :

It was the writer/author Montgomery Belgion, I believe, who first doubted the wisdom and juridical standing of the Nuremburg Trials after World War II (1946/7). Others, including prominent American and British leaders--the jurist F. J. P. Veale (in his ADVANCE TO BARBARISM) and Senator Robert H. Taft--objected to the trials and to the made-up ex post facto categories used to convict the defendants (after all most of the Allied leaders would have been guilty of the same crimes, if not in the same measure). To those who would disagree with the verdict these early critics reached, let me state right away that none of them were "Nazis"--the term that for some seems the best way to counter criticism of the trials. David Irving is a controversial writer, indeed. But that should not blind readers to the material he carefully analyzes in NUREMBERG: THE LAST BATTLE. As noted historians Sir John Keegan, Gordon Craig, and Hugh Trevor Roper have stated, in referring to any number of Irving's books, they are "meticulously researched and very valuable." Dislike the writer or his supposed politics, if you will, but if you plan to comment on this or other Irving books, be prepared to test his notes and scholarly apparatus first (as I have done). Yes, I know, historian John Lukacs in his broadside against 'revisionist' history, THE HISTORY OF HITLER, claims to have found various quotations that aren't quite right or are taken out of context. I have examined almost all of them, and Lukacs is the one who should be checked for accuracy. In almost every case, Irving's citations are correct; additionally, Irving has offered detailed commentary on these pseudo-historical red herrings (on his web site, for instance). Again, I think we can disagree strenously with a person's politics, but simply to dismiss him because of that is wrong and not worthy of a society that supposedly prides itself on "openness" and "free speech." NUREMBERG: THE LAST BATTLE is an significant thrust against the encrusted myths surrounding the Nuremberg Trials. It's high time we looked anew at that painful portion of history....

Highly readable and troubling work - exposing the hypocrisy of the Allied leaders in their "noble" quest to exact justice at Nuremburg. The deep hate vengeful nature of Allied leaders Morgenthau, Churchill, Eisenhower and even Roosevelt are exposed in their full reality. From documented meeting discussions at Yalta, Tehran, Quebec and Washington - Irving reveals the underlying personal agendas of these men. From the Germanophobic vindictiveness of Henry Morganthau (who's infamous "Morganthau Plan " was finally smashed by a more cool headed and straight thinking Truman) - to the historically documented (and long supressed) distastful and disgusting political discussions between Churchill and Stalin ---- Churchill's coziness with "Uncle Joe" and the jocular amnner in which he agreed to the partitioning of Eastern Europe, repatriation of Russian defectors, and the deprotation 5,000,000 Germans as reparation slave laborers is particularly dispicable --- and completely ignored by the current "candy-store" history establishment bent on painting a completely one-sided account of WWII. War is ugly - plain and simple --- and both sides will do whatever it takes to win.
The "establishment" will criticize Irving and this book because it doesn't like the mirror he holds to their faces. I fail to see how publishing verbatim transcripts of meetings and words spoken by these leaders (Irving fully footnotes and sources his quotes) - in which they fully reveal their true feelings and ambitions - is regarded as "garbage analysis." We don't always like the truth - but that never erases it.
My family personnally experienced the repurcussions of Churchill's and Roosevelt's monumental failures at Tehran and Yalta - in which they handed Stalin the easten half of Poland he originally negotiated and waged aggressive war for after the Ribbentop-Molotov pact. While the Nuremburg judgements were justified -- they were also SELECTIVE --- Regardless of what establishement "feel-good" historians want us to believe. At the very least Iving' book makes us think deeper about the command "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone." Interesting how it was the Stalin's Soviet Union who was most eager to begin flinging the rocks - and the declining British Empire ---- who colonized most of the globe though millitary aggression --- which claimed "moral authority."

Nuremberg, the Last Battle by David Irving is truly the "last" World War II History Book. It sums up current knowledge about Nazi atrocities far more accurately and using far more original sources than anyone else's work. The incredible thing, in this day and age when the world is once again pursuing "world courts" to punish crimes against humanity, is how many of the charges even against the Nazis could not be easily proven, or were crimes also committed by the victors.

This is not a picture of triumph, or of anything a rational person would ever want to see imitated.

Irving, as always, footnotes to an extent unheard of by any other historian, and his footnotes are always where the "juicy", controversial stuff is. That's for you to discover!

I can think of no other Third reich era historian who has had their work so intensely analysed, globally for errors and ommissions than Irving.

If you held others to that high a standard then you would find that multiple more errors and omissions would arise.

I have to say that in general I agree with the points about footnotes. That is something that annoys the hell out of me, historians/authors throwing out pieces of information without footnotes, even in books without indexes. Oftentimes picked up and then used as sources in other works. I'd also share the view that a lot of ww2 books are simply regurgitated from other books with absolutely no reference to the original documents whatsoever. The thing with Irving is that he bases his works on documents, if it's not supported by original documents - then it's generally left out. Whereas other historians will simply repeat conclusions not (seemingly) supported by documents. This is primarily what leaves him vulnerable to most criticism in my view. It's also worth pointing out that the majority of people who dismiss him and offer criticism are totally unfamiliar with any of his work, nor do they apply the same stringent standards & obsessive over analysis to ANY other authors whose conclusions they agree with.

jonniebgood1

Morlar wrote: »

I can think of no other Third reich era historian who has had their work so intensely analysed, globally for errors and ommissions than Irving.

If you held others to that high a standard then you would find that multiple more errors and omissions would arise.

I have to say that in general I agree with the points about footnotes. That is something that annoys the hell out of me, historians/authors throwing out pieces of information without footnotes, even in books without indexes. Oftentimes picked up and then used as sources in other works. I'd also share the view that a lot of ww2 books are simply regurgitated from other books with absolutely no reference to the original documents whatsoever. The thing with Irving is that he bases his works on documents, if it's not supported by original documents - then it's generally left out. Whereas other historians will simply repeat conclusions not (seemingly) supported by documents. This is primarily what leaves him vulnerable to most criticism in my view. It's also worth pointing out that the majority of people who dismiss him and offer criticism are totally unfamiliar with any of his work, nor do they apply the same stringent standards & obsessive over analysis to ANY other authors whose conclusions they agree with.

He is interesting, ill give him that, worth looking into in great detail. I will leave this thread for OP's request for books on the Nuremburg trials and we can discuss Irving in a new thread which I will start.

NUTLEY BOY

jonniebgood1 wrote: »

He is interesting, ill give him that, worth looking into in great detail. I will leave this thread for OP's request for books on the Nuremburg trials and we can discuss Irving in a new thread which I will start.

Thanks for that.

I hope that I haven't started a fight :D

Morlar

jonniebgood1 wrote: »

He is interesting, ill give him that, worth looking into in great detail. I will leave this thread for OP's request for books on the Nuremburg trials and we can discuss Irving in a new thread which I will start.

As this is a subject which is also of interest to me, I have started a thread on this subject here :

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056358841

I have also added a public poll.

jonniebgood1

Morlar wrote: »

As this is a subject which is also of interest to me, I have started a thread on this subject here :

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056358841

I have also added a public poll.

Wow, what a child...

Morlar

jonniebgood1 wrote: »

Wow, what a child...

Umm, sorry but you don't hold own subjects which come up for discussion. I also think that a poll on this issue is of benefit.

jonniebgood1

Morlar wrote: »

Umm, sorry but you don't hold own subjects which come up for discussion. I also think that a poll on this issue is of benefit.

Maybe I should start a double good poll to best yours,
times 10,
no comebacks....!

Seriously, are you like 10 years old?

Morlar

jonniebgood1 wrote: »

Maybe I should start a double good poll to best yours,
times 10,
no comebacks....!

Seriously, are you like 10 years old?

Perhaps if I were I would be the one engaging in playground namecalling

Seriously, you don't own subjects which come up for discussion.

jonniebgood1

heyyy, I said no comebacks

BlaasForRafa

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_AOeSrLCD-U

Morlar

War is hell.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MIRPaKgPwEs

Fuinseog

NUTLEY BOY wrote: »

Can anyone recommend a good book that details the history of the Nuremberg trials in a factual way (as distinct from a drama) ?

werner Masser has a good book on the subject.

it was the greatest show trial of the 20th century and the first time in history enemy generals were hanged like common criminals.

it was similar to the Nazis Peoples Court the way they stripped the defendants of their uniforms and gave them ridiculous clothes to wear.