Talk:Anton Dostler

Untitled

Clarification: The 15 American soldiers were dressed as civilians, out of uniform, therefore spies, engaged in a military mission. Sorry to say, and correct me if I'm wrong, but according to the "rules of war" isn't death the appropriate punishment? Missaeagle —Preceding unsigned comment added by Missaeagle (talk • contribs) 23:56, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

You're wrong. They were dressed with US military uniforms, so after capture they should have been treated as POWs. Their execution was unlawful, making Dostler a war criminal. The andf (talk) 00:10, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

It was actually Kesselring who was responsible, not Dostler. (Bhdjed (talk) 19:16, 15 March 2020 (UTC))

Snuff Video on Youtube

Watch the 2:31 min long video if you think its "his last minutes before" his MURDER. When we as a fact can see the full cold blooded murder on screen. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.102.43.193 (talk) 21:28, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

You're an idiot. End of story. Spread your garbage somewhere else.Bllasae (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 19:25, 16 May 2010 (UTC).

I agree with the 83.102 fellow above. It was murder. 81.131.122.138 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 11:30, 21 September 2011 (UTC).

And I disagree. Dostler was executed as a war criminal. What was murder was his execution of POWs. The andf (talk) 00:11, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

The Americans regularly executed POWs. In any case Dostler was following a direct order from Kesselring. (Bhdjed (talk) 19:18, 15 March 2020 (UTC))

Video with his execution

In this site: http://br.youtube.com/watch?feature=related&v=wKuyMgX5zi0 , you can see the execution of this nazi general, in 1945. Agre22 (talk) 16:50, 11 August 2008 (UTC)agre22

There is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that General Dostler was a Nazi. 81.131.122.138 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 11:26, 21 September 2011 (UTC).

No, but plenty of evidence he was a war criminal. He was executed for war crimes, not for being a Nazi. The andf (talk) 00:07, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

Wrong Wrong Wrong

Four witnesses, including two members of German Naval Intelligence, testified that the soldiers were in uniform when captured. See e.g. http://www.loc.gov/rr/frd/Military_Law/pdf/Law-Reports_Vol-1.pdf

Who comes up with this stuff? Dduff442 (talk) 07:30, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

The US Military prosecutors stated that they were in civilian clothes when captured.81.131.122.138 (talk)

The views of the son of the defense lawyer writing 60 years later cannot stand in the face of those of 4 German army and 2 German navy witnesses, plus a deposition from a 5th army witness who was in hospital at the time of the trial, to say nothing of the testimony of the US witnesses. That the captured US troops were in uniform (and that the officers wore rank insignia etc) was not only attested to by the witnesses (one of whom, Dohna zu Schlobitten, reiterated the claim in his memoirs published in the 1980s), it was a fact entered into the LXXV Korps war diary as well. The bodies of the defendants had been recovered, so material evidence was also in existence. Dostler's defense team made numerous legal arguments about jurisdiction and claimed the uniforms lacked insignia "identifiable at a distance", however if this element of the defense had been accepted the large majority of the troops of all armies would have been liable for execution as the uniforms in question were not substantially different in this regard from any others.

After their representations to Dostler failed, Korvettenkapitaen Klaps was threatened with court martial and later moved to a different position (subsequently testifying at Dostler's trial) and Dohna zu Schlobitten (who is quite famous in his own right due to leading a march of refugees out of East Prussia in 1945 and for his efforts to build reconciliation with Poland after the war) was dismissed from the Wehrmacht.

Whatever the legal merits of Emery's arguments (and it seems his father sincerely doubted the basis for the conviction), any force they posses does not rest on the US troops being out of uniform, and in fact the article linked to never makes this claim; it is only stated that the defense made this claim and in fact the claim at trial was that the insignia were not recognisable at a distance and not that no uniforms were worn. The men were shot without trial, a fact even the defense acknowledged and accepted was a right to be accorded even to spies. Furthermore the so-called Commando Befehl upon which the "only following orders" defense rested, the real core of the defense, stated that commandos were to be either shot in pursuit or handed over to the Sicherheitsdienst, neither of which occurred in reality.

Editors should note that IP 81.131.122.138 deleted the Schlobitten reference not only from this page but also from Schlobitten's own Wiki page, which was then edited in blatant defiance of the man's own autobiography! Dduff442 (talk) 20:18, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Pretty sure the United States military executed tons of Native American civilians.... out of uniform. Not to mention the bombing of Dresden, Hamburg, Hiroshima and Nagasaki later containing 600,000 civilians, most of which... were not in military uniform... because they weren't military combatants at all. So I find the argument that these sabetuers acting on behalf of their state, had any protection of the Geneva Convention... considering the US military flagrantly disregards it when it is in its own best interest. And by doing so, it thereby loses the protection of said rules of war. 71.226.11.248 (talk) 18:10, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

References

Soldiers in Uniform

I have changed the article to reflect the facts in the case supported by the Law Reports of Trials of War Criminals prepared by the UN War Crimes Tribunal. http://www.loc.gov/rr/frd/Military_Law/pdf/Law-Reports_Vol-1.pdf The relevant info is at the bottom of page 25. 94.14.196.12 (talk) 01:02, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Anton Dostler. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20040305033639/http://www.nd.edu/~com_sens/issues/old/v17/v17_n5.html to http://www.nd.edu/~com_sens/issues/old/v17/v17_n5.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:20, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

Using colourized images is factually inaccurate

If the original images of his execution is in black and white then that is how it should be shown. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.29.164.191 (talk) 03:05, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

I agree, and have put back the original.—Chowbok ☠ 07:10, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

Lede

The lede should make clear that Dostler was relaying orders from Kesselring. (86.147.59.254 (talk) 17:00, 18 April 2022 (UTC))

Hi! I hear your perspective; having read up more on the issue, I think I see why you thought that the superior orders issue was sufficiently notable to merit includsion in the article's lead section. I added some more context in a new draft--how does it seem to you now? (I'm open to changing it further if there's aspects of my new draft that you don't think adequately address the issue!) CogitoErgoSum14 (talk) 18:59, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

Place of court proceedings

The Dostler case was not tried in Nuremberg, but in Caserta near Naples (Italy). Monte Pelmo (talk) 09:18, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

Burial

The statement, that Dostler was buried in Pomezia immediately after his execution, cannot be true. This is because the Pomezia military cemetery was not built until 1947 and was opened to the public in 1960. Monte Pelmo (talk) 10:19, 5 October 2023 (UTC)