Nit-picking here, but I am not sure this person is accused of genocide. This person is not wanted in relation to the genocide of the Jews in WW2, but for his participation in the retaliation killing of Polish civilians. Today I learned that Germany killed about 5 million Polish, mostly civilians, during WW2 [1], which is mind-boggling. But I don't know if this was ever classified as genocide, as this was not done with the intent of exterminating the Polish population in part of whole (which is the definition of genocide [2]), while the Jews were killed with precisely that intent.
"Today I learned that Germany killed about 5 million Polish, mostly civilians, during WW2"
I thought I'd clarify one thing : two-thirds of those 5 million murdered Polish civilians were Jews.
Felt it was worth mentioning, as your comment differentiates between the Nazi slaughter of Jewish and non-Jewish civilians. The 5 million is a total count.
The 3.1 million Polish Jews that were killed represented nearly the entire Polish Jewish population.
FYI, I say this as a Jew who lost family to the Nazi's in Poland.
And the polish killed their fare share of German civilians.. It's a reason that statute of limitations is considered a part of a civilized justice system. Sometimes letting the past be the past and move on is a good thing.
While I personally is against dragging old people in front of courts 70 years after the alleged crimes (polish or German), at list the Polish do not discriminate.
You're being disingenuous. First of all, my objection was to your equating whatever instances of Polish (please capitalize) retaliation against Germans with German war crimes. THAT is despicable. You cannot draw a moral equivalency between systematic German extermination and instances of retaliation (whether expulsion, spontaneous and isolated retribution, Jewish revenge squads or actions orchestrated by the Russians). Sadly, there have been attempts by some (like Erika Steinbach) to relativize and manipulate history to make Nazi war crimes seem not unusual for the time period, presumably to soften the guilt. Your original comment was doing precisely that. Second, much of the history surrounding retribution is still not settled and controversial. Sadly, it is politicized. There have been attempts to use favorable narratives to, e.g., extract restitution from Poland (!!) for confiscated property or property abandoned even decades after the war. A number of exaggerated, fabricated or unsubstantiated claims about supposed Nazi collaboration have been published as well which were later discredited. Third, expulsion (which was ordered by Russia and not something alien to Germans) is not systematic extermination (see first point). Fourth, ideally, everyone, regardless of ethnicity, should face justice. It is not always possible, but it does not mean that it should not be done when possible. Sadly, of the thousands of members of the SS involved in extermination and massacres, relatively few have faced trial. Finally, it's worth noting that Michael Karkoc, the subject of the article, is not German but Ukrainian. Ukrainians have not yet come to terms with Ukrainian collaboration with the Nazis.
My comment was to the absurdity of having a trail for a 98 year old man. As I get from your emotional involvement in this case, you come from the region? As you then probably know, in one country the SS (local) are among many considered heroes, in the neighbour country criminals. Elements of the local SS units was after the war taken over by the CIA(Gehlen Organization). And was waging guerilla war against the soviets. There successor units are presently fighting in the eastern Ukraine and are US allies (Right sector and others)..
Not really defending the posters point, but the ethnic cleansing of former easternmost germany from modern poland is a well established historical fact, over 2 million may have died.
I think parent's point is that at 98, almost everyone has lost the vast majority of the mental faculties which constitute their identity, and if that's true of this individual, then the person they want to bring to justice effectively died years ago, and his body is just a shell of who he was.
(I'm not trying to condone or condemn seeking justice against him, here, just trying to explain what the origins of that statement seem to be.)
I wouldn't exaggerate decline in mental faculty and in such a general manner. Besides, what's important is whether this particular man can stand trial. Karkoc is apparently suffering from Alzheimer's, but according to prosecutors of war criminals, mental incapacity and health problems are frequently used by war criminals to evade trial.
I presume you mean prosecution, though that, too, is not the correct term. In any case, what you write is not really true. Public safety is a concern, yes, but there's more to it. There's maintenance of the social order, there's correction of the criminal, and yes, there's vengeance. Justice is not justice without penalty for the crime. It's important to understand that revenge, as it is traditionally understood, is not motivated by hatred or draconian in nature, but is rather a virtue. What is today sometimes meant by "revenge" is a corruption of the traditional meaning, i.e., something motivated by hatred, something draconian and even vigilatist.
In my mind, it's not about prosecuting an individual. The point is to demonstrate that civilized society should, without exception, pursue justice againt war criminals.
Justice entails penalties. Otherwise, crime is rewarded by an excess of laxity. Words like "revenge" or "vengeance" have come to be associated with acts motivated by hatred and draconian punishments, but that is not the traditional meaning.
