I think, New York Times is quite serious source. 

What is your opinion, was cooperating with Nazis a right move from USA or not, both technically and ethically?

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/27/us/in-cold-war-us-spy-agencies-used-1000-nazis.html?smid=nytnow-share&smprod=nytnow&_r=1

lol should've known it was a topic from you. Yes America is evil we get it.

man... NYT article was also written by me?

No the posting part was by you

Plenty of articles supporting whatever view you have on the internet.

Please, tell me, where in the OP i say that USA is evil?

You do realize that the US also used many defecting Nazi's to help during the Manhattan project right? As deplorable as the belief system is in America it is taught and believed that people have a God given right to believe in what ever they want. It is one of the building blocks of our nation. As long as they don't break any laws they have the freedom to believe what they want. It doesn't matter if they are Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Jihadist, Nazi, or Tea-party gun nut. At the end of the day there is no difference between any extremist. As long as they arn't actively breaking the law or actively plotting to kill/hurt people then they have the right to believe what ever they like. If the U.S. government sees a use for those people that will lead to betterment of the country and protect it's people then I believe it is perfectly ethical. They just need to watch those people in case they later turn on them. Take bin laden for example, at the time it was perfectly ethical for the CIA to train him and his people, unfortunately it ended up backfiring because since we had some pretty terrible presidents(Reagan that actually gave the training to Bin Laden, and then the two Bush's which were basically responsible for AlQueda's motivation and creation). The point is as long as the people calling the shots are intelligent and responsible then working with them should be fine ethically and not have many if any negative repercussions(like when we worked with Nazi defectors in WWII) but if the leadership is not careful, or greedy and unintelligent(like when Reagan trained Bin laden and then the Bushes exploited him) then things can and will go bad. 

Oh boy, an opportunity to almost literally be the devil's advocate. Lucky me.

Putting them to use helping to prevent World War III is a lot more productive than sending them to a prison to rot for 60 years, or killing them outright. It's like Catch Me if You Can only instead of forging checks they nearly committed genocide.

The Manhattan Project had no negative repurcussions? I hope this post never becomes ironic enough to be funny. It would be a damn waste of a good joke.

Please don't put words in my mouth. Saying there were not many if any is not the same as saying there were none.

im not sure about that.  getting people like werner von braun into the usa and goverment jobs is unethical, but it was usefull, u cant say the same thing about german spys.  they had no connections to the enemy and couldnt spy on the S.U. because they would be killed instandly by a russian firesquad after entering eastern europe.

i dont have a big problem with wehrmachhts soldiers or nazi scientist, but known nazi spys and high ranking SS stuff?

Sorry, I was a little confused by your phrasing. Or maybe the sentence was just a little long.

It was a lighthearted jab, not trying to antagonize you. Just found it amusing that you didn't seem to count the creation of nuclear arms as a "negative repurcussion" of the Manhattan Project, the entire purpose of which was... the creation of nuclear arms. It was a joke, see.