Previous posts in this discussion:
PostNuremberg, Geneva, The Hague (Eugenio Battaglia, Italy, 11/19/20 8:35 am)
When commenting on my post of November 18th, John E cited Nuremberg as setting powerful precedents for human rights and international law. The various Geneva and The Hague International Conferences were much more effective in these regards, but they were not respected by both the winners and the losers.
We have to concentrate on them and not on the "justice" of the winners, which never is real justice.
JE comments: Eugenio cited vae victis (woe to the defeated) in his suggestion that Nuremberg was little (or nothing) more than a kangaroo court set up by the winners of WWII. There's probably some truth to this, especially if we consider the heavy hand of Soviet "justice." But does this mean we have to dismiss Nuremberg? The "moral relativism" argument only goes so far, and overlooks the unfathomable horrors of Axis atrocities.