Welcome to the WWII Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the community.

What should we think of Switzerland during ww2?

Discussion in 'Western Europe' started by HellWarrior, Jan 28, 2015.

  1. phylo_roadking

    phylo_roadking Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2010
    Messages:
    1,381
    Likes Received:
    155
    ...if they were "touchable". It wouldn't have made sense for instance for Hitler to decalre war on any number of "neutral" South American nations 1939-41 despite their support for the U.S. under the Pan American Union, and thus of said "non-Neutral" actions ofn the U.S.' part ;)
     
  2. lwd

    lwd Ace

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    12,322
    Likes Received:
    1,245
    Location:
    Michigan
    True. But then what recourse did he have? I guess they could target ships registered to that nation "legally" of course the U-boats could also just "accidently" sink any they came across. Not much need for such countries to declare themselves neutral either (unless they thought it would up the payoff for declaring war later). I better stop I think I'm getting to cynical ....
     
  3. phylo_roadking

    phylo_roadking Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2010
    Messages:
    1,381
    Likes Received:
    155
    Actually - there was a "need" under the Hague Conventions, if only to prevent their nationally-flagged shipping from being boarded or even sunk ;) On the outbreak of hostilities all nations were supposed to register their status vis a vis that particular conflict by telegraphing the Dutch government at Hague, the custodians of the Conventions, within a week IIRC.
     
  4. MLW

    MLW recruit

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2009
    Messages:
    74
    Likes Received:
    17
    And so now we learn that the Swiss Bank HSBC has been helping rich people avoid taxes in their home countries and providing a means for drug traffickers, arms dealers, and other criminal types to launder money. I wonder if there is any terrorist organization money in their bank as well. Does not sound very neutral to me and is probably the result of decades of such behavior, perhaps even reaching back to WWII.
     
  5. LJAd

    LJAd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2009
    Messages:
    4,997
    Likes Received:
    237
    As long as the HSBC was not violating Swiss laws, there is no problem :as far as I know,the power of the US laws/of the US tax authorities stops at the US border;about drug traffickers (arms dealers are not criminals) ,the US should not blow their trompet : it is a public secret that the CIA was collaborating in the past with drug traffickers,and ,I would be surprised if this collaboration has stopped .

    To me, what Switserland did during WWII ,sounds very neutral : Switserland was not at war,thus,it was neutral .
     
  6. lwd

    lwd Ace

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    12,322
    Likes Received:
    1,245
    Location:
    Michigan
    Not quite right, indeed quite wrong. HSBC is an international bank so it's not just Swiss laws that they have to pay attention to. Nor is the power of US law restricted ot the US borders. Arms dealers may or may not be criminals it depends on what they are selling to whom and how.
     
  7. green slime

    green slime Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2010
    Messages:
    3,150
    Likes Received:
    584
    If you really think that the power of US laws and US tax authorities stop at the US border, you really need to have a second look at the world today.
     
  8. LJAd

    LJAd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2009
    Messages:
    4,997
    Likes Received:
    237
    US laws have no authority outside the US.

    The FBI can not arrest a Swiss in Switserland .Without the consent of the Swiss authorities,the FBI can even not investigate the Swiss accounts of an American citizen .
     
  9. LJAd

    LJAd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2009
    Messages:
    4,997
    Likes Received:
    237
     
  10. lwd

    lwd Ace

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    12,322
    Likes Received:
    1,245
    Location:
    Michigan
    Even a minimal awareness of related current events would demonstrate the fallacy of the above. A rather clear example I saw on TV a while back. A US citizen was involved with sex with minors in a SE Asian contry. The local police detective (for some reason, I suspect to make sure he didn't bribe his way out of the charge) contacted the American embasssy and got them in on the investigation. The American was arrested and turned over to US officials for trial in the US for violation of US laws and is currently serving time in a US facility.

    They may not be able to arrest someone in Switzerland but that doesn't mean they can' t investigate Swiss accounts and indeed they do so.

    Still haven't figured out the quote function have you.
    My statement was indeed correct and yours is not. Now he may be able to keep out of jail as long as he remains in France and has the support, as you say, of the French authorities. That doesn't mean that other actions cannot be taken against him nor does it mean he isn't a criminal. Then of course if he lacks the support of said French authorities he could be trouble much quicker even if he hasn't violated French law.
     
  11. LJAd

    LJAd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2009
    Messages:
    4,997
    Likes Received:
    237
    Your first answer is an own-goal :the US citizen was arrested ,not by the FBI,but by the local police and than extradited to the US .All depended on the local authorities . Polanski is an other exemple : as long he remains in Poland,the US can do nothing against him .

    Your second answer is also wrong : the US can investigate Swiss accounts ONLY by the consent of the Swiss authorities .

    The same for Dassault : as long he is not inculped,arrested and condemned by the French justice,he is no criminal,he is innocent,and,noone in France would dare to claim that he is a criminal :he would be condemned by the court for slander and would have to pay millions of Euro to Dassault .

    The opposite is also the same :Stormfront is free to spout its hate campaign against the Jews in the US,in Europe,it would be impossible,but the justice of the European countries has no power against Stormfront .
     
  12. lwd

    lwd Ace

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    12,322
    Likes Received:
    1,245
    Location:
    Michigan
    Not really. He was prosecuted for actions while over seas not for actions in the US so quite clearly it is established that US law applies outside the US national borders.

    Wrong. First of all Polanski didn't break any federal laws so it's hardly the case of the US taking or not taking action. There are still options available although Poland has refused to extradite him. However and especially since it's not a federal case there is little reason for the US to go to much effort in this case. The FBI has arrested people overseas by the way. Here's a source and a quote:
    http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/faqs
    Although I think I recall a case or two where they have made arrests overseas. Certainly they have taken action against individuals on foreign soil who have broken US laws.

    Not really. They may be limited in what they can do in Switzerland but that doesn't mean they can't investigate Swiss accounts.

    So someone in France who has been convicted of a crime in another nation can't be called a criminal? That's rather strange but irrelevant to the topic at hand. The point of course is that the US can take a number of actions against him. They may not be able to take him into custody without French permission as long as he stays in France but they can apply to extradite him. They can seize his shipments under in some cases, they can freeze and in some cases take custody of his assets, etc.

    I'm sure the Greenpeace ship in New Zeeland felt the same way.
     
  13. LJAd

    LJAd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2009
    Messages:
    4,997
    Likes Received:
    237
    No : everything depends on the consent of the state where the indicted person is living:if that state is saying :njet,the US are powerless,unless they are sending the SEALS to kidnap him .

    About Dassault :France never will extradite a French citizen,and,without the arrival of Dassault in the US,there can't be a trial against Dassault .

    Other 'theoretical) exemple : in the US,it is forbidden to smoke in restaurants,which is not the case in certain European countries .If a US citizen is smoking in a restaurant in a country where this is allowed, the US can ask (better:beg) for his extradition, but,as long as the ghost country is saying : no,the US is powerless .

    There is in Belgium the case of a drugs-dealer who has been indictednbut the man had fled to Thailand,where he has been condemned for other crimes committed in Thailand and taken in prison .As long as he remains in Thailand,the Belgian justice is powerless.

    It is the same for Dassault :what he has done outside of France is not the business of the French justice,also for Polanski :what he has done outside of Poland is not the business of the Polish justice .both are innocent people in France and Poland .
     
  14. lwd

    lwd Ace

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    12,322
    Likes Received:
    1,245
    Location:
    Michigan
    Still wrong. The US may not be able to or may pay a substantial price for actually arresting someone residing in a foreign country but that doesn't mean they can't and won't do it. a person of significant interest has to be very careful where they travel. If they have assets outside the country they live in those to are at risk. Then of course there have been a number of individuals who got a graphic lesson in just how not powerless the US was via a smart weapon.

    If he was dealing with ISIS the French would likely take care of him themselves. And a trial isn't the only action. The US has frozen and/or siezed assets of a fair number of individuals and companies for varios violations.

    If I had tried to come up with a ludicrous example I couldn't have come up with one that good. First of all it is not forbidden to smoke in resteraunts in the US. Some and I believe most states now have regulations on the matter and some comunities inside the others may as well. However violating this would be a local misdimeaner and wouldn't cover anyone outside the state or local jurisdiction in any case. So there would be 0 grounds for the US even considering extradition. If the US did they are still not powerless. There are diplomatic pressures than can be applied if the country fails to extradite espeically if there is a treaty related to it in place.

    Hardly powerless, but why spend resources when someone else has him already in jail.

    Are you sure about that? Poland refused to extradite becuase it exceeded their statue of limitations. France was getting ready to extradite Polanski thats why he left. In any case he was convicted so are you still saying he isn't a criminal. As for Dassault you are talking about a hypothetical there.
     
  15. LJAd

    LJAd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2009
    Messages:
    4,997
    Likes Received:
    237
    US did not extradite Amanda Knox,although Italy asked it.Why should France extradite Dassault if he did (indirectly) outside France something that in the US would be considered as an offence/crime ?

    If a UScitizen did something outside the US,which in the US was considered as an offence/crime ,how could the US justice get her claws on him ?

    The answer is very simple : ONLY if the state where the person was living ,would deport him to the US.

    And,if a US citizen committed a crime in the US ,but was leaving the country (ex:Snowden),how could the US justice get her claws on him ?The answer is the same :ONLY if the guest state would deport him to the US .

    Conclusion :the power of the US justice (or Californian,etc) stops at the border of the US,something which is obvious,otherwise,the other countries would not be independent states;but US colonies .
     
  16. LJAd

    LJAd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2009
    Messages:
    4,997
    Likes Received:
    237
    1)given the French pro-Arab attitude,this is more than doubtful,besides,France has a long tradition of selling weapons to not recommendable persons,thus,ISIS or Saddam Hussein,etc,what would be the difference ?

    2)Not correct : The US has frozen assets ,etc,which were located in the US .

    3)Polanski has the French nationality,and France is not extraditing its citizens .
     
  17. lwd

    lwd Ace

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    12,322
    Likes Received:
    1,245
    Location:
    Michigan
    There's an old saying that I think we've suggested you follow before. When you have doug youself into a hole the first step in getting out is to quite digging. Most US citizens who commit crimes over seas return to the US. For those crimes that apply no matter where they are committed it doesn't matter that it was committed overseas they can still be tried and convicted in a US court. So US law is applying outside US boundries. Now if the person tryies to stay outside of jursidictions where the US can get their hands on him that does make bringing him to justice more difficult but not impossible nor does it prevent other action being taken against him. So US law and the US justice system clearly extend beyond US borders. How likely one is to face justice if one is overseas depends on quite a few factors. But the same holds true to a lesser extent to criminals who never leave the US. Your position has been clearly refuted continue to flail about if you wish.
     
  18. lwd

    lwd Ace

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    12,322
    Likes Received:
    1,245
    Location:
    Michigan

    I think you underestimate the French especially with recent experiances in Mali and for that matter France itself. Of course this isn't all that relevant to the point at hand any more.

    Actually they have frozen assets in other countries as well. Including Switzerland. There are those pesky treaties ...

    Really? What do you make of this then?
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Polanski_sexual_abuse_case
     
  19. LJAd

    LJAd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2009
    Messages:
    4,997
    Likes Received:
    237
    The fact remains that France did not extradite Polanski:as far as I know,he is not in an American jail .
     
  20. denny

    denny Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2013
    Messages:
    611
    Likes Received:
    47
    Location:
    USA, CA, Solano County
    One of you guys mentioned earlier.....Germany ran military trains through Swiss rail tunnels......
    Troop/Supply trains to and from the Italian Front .....is that correct.?
    Thank You
     

Share This Page