would it be just not to?...

This man should be shown mercy, for mercy is superior to justice. His crimes were long ago, and he seems to have really madea life for himself here. I don't see how any good will come of deporting him. It seems like an unnecessary punishment.

The man is a mass murderer.

I don't understand the question. Are you suggesting a statute of limitations on the crime? Please.

Was the man a commander, general, or a simple foot solider? What were his crimes precisely? The man should only get the punishment that fits the crime. Perhaps he did nothing more than wear the uniform out of fear his family would be slaughtered if he did not. A mer cog in a huge horrible machine.

If he did however have a hand in the slaughter itself, does it merit justice to have someone atone for the actions of a man barely out of his teens? What of Vietnam Vets? Did they too not kill? Korea, Cuba, WWII, any of the current soldiers? Some have killed, some have not. Should we lose the war, can our soldiers be taken 57 years later and told. You were the member of this military, you must leave your home!

There are no simple answers to deceptively simple questions. To say he is a mass murderer is to say any solider who ever picked up so much as a bar of soap in supplies is as guilty of the slaughter of innocent people, as the solider who acted not out of orders, but intended malicious hatred.

Plus, has he shown exemplary life? This too should be factored in.

These are my thoughts.
Nancy Louise

Ah ... one of the many problems that come about when justice is not swift.

I'm with EyeHatePeas.

Leonidas: Answering a question with a question. Shame on you.

SkyMarshalOz: Shall I also show mercy to a killer who rapes and murders young children? Did this man show any mercy to his victums? Did he have a care for their families?

SwordAndSacrifice: It is a simple question. I suggest nothing. I only solicite your thoughts and opinion.

NanLou4: We are not talking here about a simple foot soldier doing his duty. I'm sorry, but you need to review your history. I do aagree that there are no simple answers to deceptively simple questions, but where the Nazis are concerned, that question is neither deceptive nor simple.

EyeHatePeas: Ahhhh. That is at the heart of the matter. We know what we would do if the man were 30. But 91 and in poor health? But SkyMarshalOz suggests that mercy is superior to justice. Is that really true?

There is nothing "just" about our "justice" system anyway.

I think that the judge and prosecutors had little discretion. However, it is a bit silly to deport him, when he poses no risk of further crime, when we don't deport illegal immigrant criminals who are released from prison, allowing them to stay in the country, even if they are murderers or rapists and could kill or rape again and even though they entered the country illegally.
http://www.city-journal.org/html/14_1_the_illegal_alien.html

Perhaps he should just flee to a "Sanctuary City" like LA, where they deliberately don't enforce immigration laws.
Bottom line: It is just for the US to revoke citizenship gained through lies and due process has been done. However, it seems that he has been unfairly singled out for deportation, when there are literally millions of non-citizens living in the US.
Also, this would be very different if he were being extradited. Is Lithuania planning on trying him? If not, then the US is complicit in hastening his death, not merely enforcing its immigration rules. Remember that he has not been tried, let alone convicted, of any war crimes and therefore does not deserve to be executed, which seems to be the actual result of deporting him.
I would say, revoke his citizenship, allow him to stay as a permanent resident in exchange for complete disclosure of his past (sort of like the post-Apartheid Truth Commissions). Recording the truth about history is more important than punishing a 91-year-old man.

If no, where do you draw the line regarding when you shouldn't bothering punishing crimes, and why?

Sorry about the question-answering question. To rephrase, I can't say it would be right to not punish him, since I couldn't provide justification or an answer to my above post.

I don't think that it is. Judi

I'd deport him to Israel.

I like Anabaptist's plan. They'd probably take care of him - and prove the point above about mercy being greater than justice in a whole new way. Haha!

As a point of justice, most societies have crimes in which the suspect is sought forever. Murder is one of those crimes.

If this "91-year-old man" had shot and killed a single man or woman in another country, we would not even think twice about deporting him (especially to a country like Lithuania, whith whom we enjoy particularly good relations and a very liberal extradition policy). And that's just true if he had only had ONE victim, let alone hundreds . . . possibly thousands.

The fact that there is even a discussion about this issue says less about a spirit of forgiveness and everything about ignorance of justice. Balance is everything. A return to Lithuania is NOT a death sentence. That is a matter for the courts of this alleged criminal's homeland to sort out. The role of the United States in this matter is to allow justice to be done. 

Whether that entails mercy or not remains a matter for the Lithuanian people.

Actually, tx_christian, I was thinking they'd kill him.