Re: WW2 and the disintegration of British empire

"brandon" <brandon_z2003@xxxxxxxxx> wrote

Excellent. This is the exact defence proposed by Jodl at the Nuremberg
trials when confronted by question of taking hostages, reprisal
killings etc. He quoted the same international law.

No, Jodl claimed that the taking and killing of hostages in reprisal for
acts of sabotage or armed resistance in territories under military
occupation was not forbidden by international convention. And he was right,
just, in that these acts were nominally still available to the occupying
power.

But as the IMT pointed out, the conventions required any hostage-taking and
reprisal killings to be strictly limited and in all cases proportionate to
the acts committed, whereas German hostage-taking and reprisal killing was
carried out on an arbitrary and gigantic scale. So Jodl had no defence at
all, on that point.

And you have failed to grasp the difference between international law
stating the rights of military occupation authorities, and international law
stating the rights of colonial authorities within colonial territories. They
were quite different.

(snip silliness)

.