Nuremberg Trials: Prosecute or Amnesty (1945)
by Anonymous
After WWII, the Allies debated whether to try Nazi leaders for war crimes or simply execute/imprison them. The decision to hold formal trials established the precedent of individual criminal responsibility under international law.
International Criminal Trials
1945-1946
year
Formal prosecution with evidence and defense
approach
Crimes against humanity, individual responsibility
legal innovation
Chosen — established international criminal law
outcome
Summary Execution (Morgenthau's Preference)
1945
year
Shoot top leaders without trial
approach
None — victors' justice
legal innovation
Not chosen — Churchill initially favored this
outcome
General Amnesty
1945
year
Forgive and rebuild
approach
None
legal innovation
Not chosen — atrocities demanded accountability
outcome
Like this comparison? Make it your own.
Sign up to use as templateMore in History
Constantine: Adopt Christianity (312 CE)
Embrace Christianity vs Maintain Traditional Roman Paganism
COVID-19 Vaccines: mRNA vs Traditional (2020)
mRNA Vaccines (Pfizer/Moderna) vs Viral Vector (AstraZeneca/J&J) vs Inactivated Virus (Sinovac/Sinopharm)
Manhattan Project: Bomb Design (1943)
Gun-Type (Little Boy) vs Implosion (Fat Man)
Bretton Woods: Dollar Standard vs Bancor (1944)
Dollar as Reserve Currency vs Bancor (International Currency)
Magellan: Strait of Magellan vs Open Ocean (1520)
Navigate the Strait vs Round Cape Horn vs Turn Back
Apple: Macintosh GUI vs Command Line (1984)
Graphical User Interface (Macintosh) vs Command Line Interface (DOS)