Hitler's Book Returned

[carouselvic]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_hitler_s_album

 

[AmateisGal]

This guy wasn't with the 101st Airborne, Easy Company, was he? It didn't say what unit or anything he was with.

 

[John in Covina]

Should they give a small monetary honorarium to the guy? Often a small reward helps to make the return of such items a little bit easier for the holder.

 

[BellyTank]

This guy wasn't with the 101st Airborne, Easy Company, was he? It didn't say what unit or anything he was with.

I think you need a regiment/battalion between a division and a company.


B
T

 

[Doublegun]

I believe it was Hitlers Photo Albums that were snatched by a guy in the 101st.

 

[AmateisGal]

I believe it was Hitlers Photo Albums that were snatched by a guy in the 101st.

Yes, that's right. I *think* he lived in Colorado or Wyoming after the war.

 

[reetpleat]

I read that. Frankly, I am not sure if I would return it. I would certainly make it accessable to the good people working to restore the art to the rightful owners, museums etc. But the book only had one owner, Hitler, or arguably, the third reich government which no longer exists. It did not exist before that time, so no other ownership can be established. So, who owns this book? the German Government? maybe, maybe not.

If I risked my life to defeat Hitler's government, I would not feel too bad about keeping something that belonged to it and no other owner.

I don't know if there are laws that would prevent me from selling it, but I certainly would not give it away unless I was well off enough that neither me nor my family needed any money for it.

Ancient art, art that belonged to other people, souvenirs that belonged to a dead German that might give some solace to his family, I would return all of these. But this book? maybe not.

Interesting moral question, no?

 

[filfoster]

Buch 'em Dano

Is that available in paperback?

 

[LordBest]

I don't think there is much of a moral issue here, he is returning/donating them voluntarily. He 'looted' it, he can return it. Were he being coerced in some fashion, that would be an issue.

Once he (Pistone) met Edsel and learned about the Monuments Men, he knew it should be returned to Germany. "I just wanted to get it in the right hands," he said.

 

[John in Covina]

THe Germans "looted" a lot of stuff, I doubt they would have considered returning anything if they had won.

 

[LordBest]

Entirely true, but entirely irrelevent. Mr Pistone is choosing to return his book to German authorities, after he learnt of its historical significance. There is no moral issue to that.

THe Germans "looted" a lot of stuff, I doubt they would have considered returning anything if they had won.

 

[reetpleat]

I don't think there is much of a moral issue here, he is returning/donating them voluntarily. He 'looted' it, he can return it. Were he being coerced in some fashion, that would be an issue.

the moral question i propose is, if you had possession of it, would you feel the duty to return it. Who is the true owner? Who woulod you "return" it to? Would it be wrong to keep it or sell it?

Since he gave it up voluntarily, fair enough. but what if he didn't?

I think the "right" thing to do would be to make sure those who are returning art to rightful owners would be able to use it for their purposes. But as to possession?

I dare say, this would bring a pretty penny on ebay.

 

[John in Covina]

Taking home the Spoils of War is a human tradition come down thru the millenium and is the true meaning of loosers-weepers. Does this mean all of those war trophies of flags, swords and guns our soldiers looted need to be returned too?

 

[Marc Chevalier]

Taking home the Spoils of War is a human tradition come down thru the millenium and is the true meaning of loosers-weepers. Does this mean all of those war trophies of flags, swords and guns our soldiers looted need to be returned too?

That would be nice. Haven't we given back a bunch of ancient samurai swords to their original owning families? :eusa_clap


.

 

[Tiller]

Taking home the Spoils of War is a human tradition come down thru the millenium and is the true meaning of loosers-weepers. Does this mean all of those war trophies of flags, swords and guns our soldiers looted need to be returned too?

Personally I wouldn't return them, unless I felt I had no entitlement to them. If I had killed a Japanese Officer and kept his sword, I'd probably keep it till I died. I wouldn't have a problem with my children giving it back though.

That said it seems that those who are giving stuff "back", are doing it on their own accord so no big either way really. I don't think they have a moral obligation to though.

With that said I don't think the vast majority of the spoils that our boys brought home from WW2 have any "rightful owners". Most guys brought back home Nazi and Imperial flags, Lugers, and gendaito era swords. Such modern era weapons really belonged to the warriors who used them, and earned them by rights of combat.

 

[Tiller]

That would be nice. Haven't we given back a bunch of ancient samurai swords to their original owning families? :eusa_clap


.

Oh yes, but the majority of swords brought home by our troops were modern, many stamped out by machines, not made by craftsmen. Even back then many of the Japanese Officer Corps were from peasant stock. It would be interesting to know just what percent of the Japanese Officer Corps, were descendants of the old elite Samurai class, and what percent of them carried their families ancient blades into battle.

 

[filfoster]

To the Victor...

Taking home the Spoils of War is a human tradition come down thru the millenium and is the true meaning of loosers-weepers. Does this mean all of those war trophies of flags, swords and guns our soldiers looted need to be returned too?

John in Covina: I line up with you on this one. It's much easier to feel sympathetic decades after a conflict that caused world-wide death and suffering. As another post remarked, it's impossible (for me, I admit) to believe the Axis would have felt much contrition or desire to return the ill-gotten loot to the vanquished if they had had better innings.
They have other things to think about now, anyway. Good for Deutschland that Hitler's Koffeetisch book is home again. Still looking for the diaries.

The Elgin Marbles, well, that's different.

 

[Cigarband]

Just another case of wimpy revisionism. The book is a legitimate spoil of war. Since it is just photographs of paintings Hitler wanted and none of them made it to the never-built Museum, it's no different than the Sears & Roebuck Wish Book I poured over every Fall growing up.
Make it available to scholars, but keep it for your own family's historical legacy.

 

[reetpleat]

While I said I would keep it, as it has no real owner, I don't believe in the spoils of war. How would any of you feel about something that belonged to an american GI who was killed in combat, perhaps a family heirloom, that was kept by a german or japanese soldier. wouldn't you think it was the right thing to do to return it to his family? Spoils of war is not justified. It means, if you can take it, you can have it. I don't think that is what our country or morals should be about.

 

[Tiller]

While I said I would keep it, as it has no real owner, I don't believe in the spoils of war. How would any of you feel about something that belonged to an american GI who was killed in combat, perhaps a family heirloom, that was kept by a german or japanese soldier. wouldn't you think it was the right thing to do to return it to his family? Spoils of war is not justified. It means, if you can take it, you can have it. I don't think that is what our country or morals should be about.

Most things our GI's brought back weren't family heirlooms, as I said before. I don't see the luger and Nazi flag my Great Uncle brought back from the war as a stolen item that belongs to some family in Germany [huh]. As for what was taken off of our boys, I don't consider losing your Army issued Colt .45 to be the lose of a family heirloom. Maybe I'm just a bit harsh but I just don't see it as the big of a deal [huh].

The katana's brought home by our boys is an exception to that role, but even then it's not a huge exception. Most blades were machine made in the 1930's, not by ancient craftsman. And many of the Officer's who carried swords were the descendants of farmers and peasant stock not the Samurai.

I don't have any way to prove it, but my guess would be that most historically relevant swords were lost during the American Occupation instead of by our boys getting them off of officers they killed in the front. Although I could be completely wrong on that account.