Some people believe that the post-war trials were just a performance but that there wasn't any real justice meted out at Nuremburg or elsewhere. Particularly, many people charge that the German post-war trials were too lenient on accused Nazis. Do you think the trials should have been handled differently? What could have been a better option for prosecuting war criminals? Do you think that all Nazi soldiers simply by virtue of being members of the army of the Third Reich, should have been prosecuted for war crimes? What else could have been done to punish the guilty? What should the international community do to make sure such events don't happen again?

Where are the options?

In 911, a group of vikings lead by rollo besieged paris and chartres. after a victory near chartres on 26 august, charles decided to negotiate with rollo. the talks were led by hervé, the archbishop of reims. this resulted in the treaty of saint-clair-sur-epte, which granted rollo and his soldiers all the land between the river epte and the sea. it also granted him brittany, "for his livelihood". at the time, brittany was an independent land which france had not been able to conquer. in exchange, rollo promised the king his loyalty and military assistance when needed. also rollo also agreed to be baptised and to marry gisela, the king's daughter. the territory given rollo is about the same as upper normandy. this would grow to become normandy under rollo's descendants. - wikepedia