Why did Nazi Germany honour the Generva Convention?

[chequita guevara]

Yeah, Chiang was the official representitive of China in the Comintern. This, even after the massacre of the Communists in 1927. This was the source of Mao's inital break with Stalin, and the comintern rep in Mao's army kept trying to order him to reunite with Chiang.

The greatest irony in China was that the Trotskyist leadership of the CCP tried to follow the Comintern's orders while Mao, who broke with Stalin, later became the arch-Stalinist.

[germanos]

Originally posted by Ned
I think you guys are reading a lot of propaganda into what was very simple. Hitler abided by his legal obligations under the Geneva conventions. Whenever he strayed from them, it was because the allies violated one of their obligations first.

Unrestricted submarine warfare was a tipical German thing. (You might recall that the US only joined in hostilities in the end of 1941, when the war was allready raging for 2 years.)
So was retaliation against civilian populace in both the west and east. German civil populace was not under allied control untill the end of 1944.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Tingkai


The Geneva Conventions applied to the countries that signed it.

The agreement did not say you can't do this to a signatory country, but feel free to commit atrocities against countries that have not signed it.

Whether Russia signed it or not is not relevant.

Yes it IS!!!!!!!!!!

From Art. 2 of the Third Geneva Convention regarding POWS.

In addition to the provisions which shall be implemented in peace time, the present Convention shall apply to all cases of declared war or of any other armed conflict which may arise between two or more of the High Contracting Parties, even if the state of war is not recognized by one of them.

The Convention shall also apply to all cases of partial or total occupation of the territory of a High Contracting Party, even if the said occupation meets with no armed resistance.

Although one of the Powers in conflict may not be a party to the present Convention, the Powers who are parties thereto shall remain bound by it in their mutual relations. They shall furthermore be bound by the Convention in relation to the said Power, if the latter accepts and applies the provisions thereof.

[Ned]

Originally posted by germanos


Unrestricted submarine warfare was a tipical German thing. (You might recall that the US only joined in hostilities in the end of 1941, when the war was allready raging for 2 years.)
So was retaliation against civilian populace in both the west and east. German civil populace was not under allied control untill the end of 1944.

Yeah, but what the Germans did was due to Brit violations first.

[notyoueither]

The RN sent subs to sink anything afloat up and down the length of the Rhine?

[Ned]

NYE, quote the Geneva convention that applied at the time. Then we can decide.

[Tingkai]

Ned: What you posted proves my point.

"Although one of the Powers in conflict [THE USSR] may not be a party to the present Convention, the Powers who are parties [GERMANY] thereto shall remain bound by it [THE GENEVA CONVENTION] in their mutual relations."

Since Germany had signed it, Germany was obliged to follow the conventions' rules in its war on Russia.

The fact that the USSR did not sign the conventions is not relevant.

[germanos]

Originally posted by Ned


Yeah, but what the Germans did was due to Brit violations first.

Like... what?

[notyoueither]

What does 'mutual relations' mean?

[Ned]

Originally posted by Tingkai
Ned: What you posted proves my point.

"Although one of the Powers in conflict [THE USSR] may not be a party to the present Convention, the Powers who are parties [GERMANY] thereto shall remain bound by it [THE GENEVA CONVENTION] in their mutual relations."

Since Germany had signed it, Germany was obliged to follow the conventions' rules in its war on Russia.

The fact that the USSR did not sign the conventions is not relevant.

That's not a proper interpretation and you know it.

[Ned]

Originally posted by germanos


Like... what?

Like disquising warships as merchantmen?

[germanos]

Originally posted by notyoueither
What does 'mutual relations' mean?

I wondered about that as well.

To me it looks like it refers to the following situation:

Parties A, B and C are at war.
A and B are signatories, C is not.
A and C are allied against B.

C doesn't care about treaty, abuses POW.
Then according to the treaty, B is still bound to fulfill it's obligations to A, despite the alliance of A with C.

[germanos]

Originally posted by Ned


Like disquising warships as merchantmen?

That's the fisrt time I hear about that.

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by Ned


That's not a proper interpretation and you know it.

Come on Ned. You've been pwned.

[Saras]

IIRC sub warfare is governed by something else than Geneva convention; under that "something other" (which I can't be arsed to find out now, sorry) you have to stop the merchant, check it for contraband, remove the crew and THEN sink it.