The Nuremberg Trials were unjust.

Thank you for joining me, and welcome to the website to you too :-) I too am a lover of history, however I'm mostly interested in modern history from WWI and beyond. On a more serious note, I'd like to add that in the conclusion round no new arguments or rebuttals can be made, unless it is to clear up a MISUNDERSTANDING of the previous argument that the opponent did not realize. There may also be no new arguments during the rebuttal, since a rebuttal is an argument of "you're wrong and here's why" and not "you're wrong because I have evidence I haven't brought to the discussion yet." First off, I would like to discuss what exactly a "crime against humanity" is. It was used before the Nuremberg Trials to describe the actions of King Leopold II of Belgium Administration of the Congo. When the Trials came, the London Charter of the International Military Tribunal was to be created to draft out the rules of the future Nuremberg Trials, however until then they had no way of punishing someone for a "crime against humanity" for actions done to said person's own citizens that complied with the views of multiple countries. Thus, they had to include an official definition of what "crimes against humanity" are in the document. This was created a couple months before the trial, therefore the Nazis shouldn't have been punished for that specific reason since they committed said crimes before the definition was introduced, meaning the punishment that followed was ex post facto. Next we must look at the famous defense used by the Nazis: "I was only following orders". Like crimes against humanity, this has existed beforehand but only got into the spotlight during the trials. Due to the shocking and often gruesome nature of the acts committed by the Nazis, it is understandable why one would pass this as an excuse to shift blame for one's crimes onto a higher power. However, studies have shown that when one is ordered to do something by a higher authority/power, their actions feel more passive than voluntary, allowing them to disconnect from their own actions. In the research article "An Assessment of Moral and Character Education in Initial Entry Training (IET)", it was found by William that even during just basic military training, ones perception of morality can be shifted from what it is normally during peace time. Thirdly, one must think about the point of view of the Allies holding the trial. The trial was already against the favor of the Nazis because they were on the losing side of the war. The Allies wanted to punish the Nazis because of the acts they committed, and yet there are examples of people aligned with the Allies committing war crimes , and yet hey were never put up for trial in Nuremberg (it doesn't have to be crimes against humanity). These include, but are not limited to, events such as the London Cage Torture and the death of thousands of POWs through neglect because the camps they were in were understaffed. I can't wait to see what my opponent has to say on the matter. This was much more fun to research than I expected it to be :-) Sources (I expect my opponent to provide his/her sources as well) -------------------------- 1) https://en.wikipedia.org... 2) http://www.theatlantic.com... 3) http://forum.axishistory.com... 4) http://www.pbs.org... 5) http://www.debate.org... 6) http://www.tandfonline.com... 7) http://listverse.com...