Bert Trautmann was a member of the Hitler Youth, persuaded into it like thousands of other young Germans, and as a talented athlete he especially had reason to join. Then he was a soldier but not an SS man. He committed no war crimes and in later life he always said that he never knew what it was to live in a free country till he came to England, unlike under the government that had tried to brainwash him with propaganda. By comparison Ched Evans didn't grow up in a society that tried to teach him evil, he made his own mind up to commit his crime, so no, the comparison isn't valid.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Would You Accept A Rapist Playing For City?
- Thread starter Blue Hefner
- Start date
nice neil
Well-Known Member
I think this comment is worthy of its own thread. But I couldn't find the "rape is ok, really" forum.squirtyflower said:I just wonder if all those saying 'no' would also say no to an ex-prisoner of war with five medals for fighting against your forces?
Nice one. That's the point the Ched Evans apologists have been missing.nice neil said:I think this comment is worthy of its own thread. But I couldn't find the "rape is ok, really" forum.squirtyflower said:I just wonder if all those saying 'no' would also say no to an ex-prisoner of war with five medals for fighting against your forces?
kaz7
Well-Known Member
nice neil said:Ahhh! Different story now, isn't it ? Sexist pig ! ;-)karen7 said:
What are you on about?
I'm sexist because i don't want a rapist in our team?
D
D
dronefromsector7g
Guest
You should be ashamed of yourself, what a disgusting comparison.squirtyflower said:I just wonder if all those saying 'no' would also say no to an ex-prisoner of war with five medals for fighting against your forces?
Shaelumstash
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 30 Apr 2009
- Messages
- 8,254
Ali Benarbia said:Bert Trautmann was a member of the Hitler Youth, persuaded into it like thousands of other young Germans, and as a talented athlete he especially had reason to join. Then he was a soldier but not an SS man. He committed no war crimes and in later life he always said that he never knew what it was to live in a free country till he came to England, unlike under the government that had tried to brainwash him with propaganda. By comparison Ched Evans didn't grow up in a society that tried to teach him evil, he made his own mind up to commit his crime, so no, the comparison isn't valid.
Good point. Also it's ridiculous to blame soldiers for the decisions their superiors / government take. The very nature of being in the forces is that you follow orders without questioning them.
There are many people that question the validity of Vietnam, or even Iraq. But you can't blame the soldiers who followed orders. Same with WWII, there are many who morally question Nagasaki and Hiroshima, but you can't blame the US soldiers for the policies of their government / military.
acton28 said:dobobobo said:squirtyflower said:I just wonder if all those saying 'no' would also say no to an ex-prisoner of war with five medals for fighting against your forces?
I'm presuming you mean the prisoner of war was captured and held in a military prison? And not he was kept in prison because of a crime he comitted?
I don't know anyone involved in the armed forces nor have I ever been involved in the armed forces. (So I may be wrong with the following.) But, as I undertsand it, armed forces/governments don't class the killing of another soldier as murder/criminal offence. When a soldier kills a soldier of the oppotion I've heard this often said: "It's not murder, it's war." In other words, so long as the soldier who killed followed the rules of engagement then he hasn't comitted a crime. If it is believed the soldier didn't follow the rules of engagment then military police (from the soldiers nation) get involved.
My point being, Bert Trautmann never committed a criminal offence whilst fighting for the Nazi's. So I have no problem with him having played for City. If he had comitted a war crime when fighting for the Nazi's, then the answer is no he should not of played for City. Thankfully this was not the case and I'm glad he served City.
He never fought for the Nazis, he fought for the Luftwaffe, and his country - like the vast majority of Luftwaffe and armed force troops, he was not a Nazi. Actual Nazi supporters were few and far between. When you're drafted, you're drafted (or a deserter and dead/imprisoned-at best).
Taking the morale high-ground over sexual abuse/rape/sex crimes is far easier than war, where, loyalty was reversed and war crimes not noted.
I don't know much about history, so I aint saying you are wrong, but as I understand it the Nazi's were in charge of Germany, so anyone who fought on that side in World War II (Italians, Japanese, etc.) were fighting for the Nazi's.
I didn't say Bert was a Nazi, but he did fight for the Nazi's. In my mind there is a difference. If things were reveresed and Great Britain decided to invade Poland then the Royal Air Force would of been on the bad side / Nazi side. So I don't see how the member of the Luftwaffe are exempt.
As for the bit in bold, I totally agree. That is why I do not hate German people (of the time and now), they were fighting for the Nazis and not fighting for Germany. If they were fighting for Germany then i'd have the same view as I do of England/British Empire/Commonwealth.
Getting back on topic...
Do all those in favour and not arsed people realise that if a rapist had stopped at the point of hearing the female/male say "No" they wouldn't have to serve time and face a life time of people (mainly employers) saying no to them? Why should football say yes?
Do all those in favour and not arsed people realise that if a rapist had stopped at the point of hearing the female/male say "No" they wouldn't have to serve time and face a life time of people (mainly employers) saying no to them? Why should football say yes?
Shaelumstash
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 30 Apr 2009
- Messages
- 8,254
dobobobo said:acton28 said:dobobobo said:I'm presuming you mean the prisoner of war was captured and held in a military prison? And not he was kept in prison because of a crime he comitted?
I don't know anyone involved in the armed forces nor have I ever been involved in the armed forces. (So I may be wrong with the following.) But, as I undertsand it, armed forces/governments don't class the killing of another soldier as murder/criminal offence. When a soldier kills a soldier of the oppotion I've heard this often said: "It's not murder, it's war." In other words, so long as the soldier who killed followed the rules of engagement then he hasn't comitted a crime. If it is believed the soldier didn't follow the rules of engagment then military police (from the soldiers nation) get involved.
My point being, Bert Trautmann never committed a criminal offence whilst fighting for the Nazi's. So I have no problem with him having played for City. If he had comitted a war crime when fighting for the Nazi's, then the answer is no he should not of played for City. Thankfully this was not the case and I'm glad he served City.
He never fought for the Nazis, he fought for the Luftwaffe, and his country - like the vast majority of Luftwaffe and armed force troops, he was not a Nazi. Actual Nazi supporters were few and far between. When you're drafted, you're drafted (or a deserter and dead/imprisoned-at best).
Taking the morale high-ground over sexual abuse/rape/sex crimes is far easier than war, where, loyalty was reversed and war crimes not noted.
I don't know much about history, so I aint saying you are wrong, but as I understand it the Nazi's were in charge of Germany, so anyone who fought on that side in World War II (Italians, Japanese, etc.) were fighting for the Nazi's.
I didn't say Bert was a Nazi, but he did fight for the Nazi's. In my mind there is a difference. If things were reveresed and Great Britain decided to invade Poland then the Royal Air Force would of been on the bad side / Nazi side. So I don't see how the member of the Luftwaffe are exempt.
As for the bit in bold, I totally agree. That is why I do not hate German people (of the time and now), they were fighting for the Nazis and not fighting for Germany. If they were fighting for Germany then i'd have the same view as I do of England/British Empire/Commonwealth.
The world isn't divided up in to bad side and good side, unfortunately it's a lot more complicated than that.
Shaelumstash said:dobobobo said:acton28 said:He never fought for the Nazis, he fought for the Luftwaffe, and his country - like the vast majority of Luftwaffe and armed force troops, he was not a Nazi. Actual Nazi supporters were few and far between. When you're drafted, you're drafted (or a deserter and dead/imprisoned-at best).
Taking the morale high-ground over sexual abuse/rape/sex crimes is far easier than war, where, loyalty was reversed and war crimes not noted.
I don't know much about history, so I aint saying you are wrong, but as I understand it the Nazi's were in charge of Germany, so anyone who fought on that side in World War II (Italians, Japanese, etc.) were fighting for the Nazi's.
I didn't say Bert was a Nazi, but he did fight for the Nazi's. In my mind there is a difference. If things were reveresed and Great Britain decided to invade Poland then the Royal Air Force would of been on the bad side / Nazi side. So I don't see how the member of the Luftwaffe are exempt.
As for the bit in bold, I totally agree. That is why I do not hate German people (of the time and now), they were fighting for the Nazis and not fighting for Germany. If they were fighting for Germany then i'd have the same view as I do of England/British Empire/Commonwealth.
The world isn't divided up in to bad side and good side, unfortunately it's a lot more complicated than that.
Yep, I totally agree.