But all this happened after those trials were over.

Oh. So the Soviets didn't save anyone from justice then? Glad we cleared that up. The US-Vatican collaboration protected Nazis from justice. The Soviet program did not.

They weren't "prisoners of war"...the war was already over

They were subjects of occupation. Sure, they weren't soldiers who were captured on the battlefield. They were considered part of war reparations. You're right, that's not how we use the phrase POW, but I don't have a better word for it. Politically motivated slave labor is a closer phrase. Perhaps it would more accurate Slave Labor As Reparations. Regardless of what we call it, the result was the same. They were not Nazis who were saved from justice, they were Nazis who were pressed into involuntary labor under the Soviet prison system (GULAG) as a form of reparations and then released after they had served their time. This is the opposite of what the West did when they protected thousands of Nazis.

These people were scientists. None of them committed war crimes.

Again, we finally come back to the point. The US-Vatican collaboration to protect Nazis included many many Nazis who committed war crimes.

As you have now stated about Operation Osoaviakhim: it did not target people who committed war crimes, it was done after the justice process, it was forced slave labor and not rehabilitation or masking of their public image or integration of Nazis into society.

So when Substack publishes an article about NATO dying and someone says "wait, isn't Substack profiting from Nazi shit", then I will repeat that it's appropriate since NATO was staffed with Nazis put there by Nazi collaborators and sympathizers in power in the West.

And when someone says "oh really? The people who fought the Nazis are actually Nazis" I will repeat the historical record regarding the US's Nazi rallies, their Nazi summer camps for kids, their high level collaborations between the largest companies and Third Reich, the organized ratlines, West German elections, NATO appointments, and Operation Paperclip.

And when someone says "oh yeah, well Stalin signed a treaty with the Nazis" I will repeat the history of nearly everyone in the war signing their own non-aggression pact with the Nazis and how a non-aggression pact does not equate to saving Nazis from justice.

And when someone says "well after the war the Soviets also saved Nazis from justice" I will repeat my demand for evidence and if they bring up Operation Osoaviakhim I will repeat the historical record that this happened after Nazis had been brought to justice, was a form of war reparations, was a punishment not a "saving", happened at gun point in a single day and resulted in forced labor of Nazis, and in no way attempted to rehabilitate the image, careers, political standing, or social integration of the Nazis in question.

So thanks for helping me refine my language, I appreciate it. And thanks for getting to the point where your own claims support my argument.