[oc14]

Originally Posted by Frank Kelley

Yes, it would certainly appear that we do!

Perhaps you consider it to be okay for the men under his command to murder civilians, to murder enemy soldiers who had surrendered or very clearly expressed the desire to surrender.
In addition, to murder enemy soldiers simply because they had done their duty for their country and put up a fight and in effect delayed their enemies advance, or to murder them for little more than the colour of their skin.
To use civilians as human shields to cover the advance of your own men, to use your surrendered opponents for the same purpose, or indeed, as cover whilst you extract your own wounded.

That's all okay is it?
Really?
I'd say, it was not only "bad" form, but, even by the laws in use at the time, but, actually quite illegal and more than enough to hang him several times.

You refer to the men under his command and not Rommel himself. I will ask once again for a link to the evidence that you cite that makes Rommel a war criminal. I've tried to search for any evidence that Rommel was directly responsible for these crimes or gave orders for these crimes to be committed and am so far struggling to find anything. Perhaps you can steer me in the right direction ?
PL