WW2 politics, and leading up to the War and beyond...

[Markk]

Dude: some people have argued that, sure, but when all is said and done there is no good reason to believe it is true.

Oh, but in order to have the right to say that, you have to listen to any podcast and watch any video that Markk puts up. In his world that is called 'doing research'.

If you were paying attention, it was Cakes that pasted information taken from, and based on, the podcast in question, which I happened to have listened to. Did you read Cakes's CF?

I have given you plenty here to think about WW2 and how the US was key to victory. If you don't agree fine, but at lease try to objectively follow the arguments for either position.

[huckelberry]

Markk, what podcast are you talking about? Your link is to an article starting with mention of Tucker Carlson and proceeding with brief review of Lindberg,America first, John Birch etc.

[Markk]

I did not give a link, I pasted a link from Cakes. In that link the first paragraph reads....

Tucker Carlson may have reached a disturbingly new low when he hosted a two-hour podcast with Darryl Cooper, a Nazi apologist whom he called “the best and most honest popular historian in the United States.”

If you are interested in the podcast, here it is.....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vOTgPEGYS2o

Keep in mind you don't have to agree with either Cooper or Tucker's ultimate conclusions, I certainly don't on all of them, but understand that neither of them are Nazi apologists or close to it. The article that Cakes posted is just nonsense and a hit piece.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

I did not give a link, I pasted a link from Cakes. In that link the first paragraph reads....

Tucker Carlson may have reached a disturbingly new low when he hosted a two-hour podcast with Darryl Cooper, a Nazi apologist whom he called “the best and most honest popular historian in the United States.”

If you are interested in the podcast, here it is.....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vOTgPEGYS2o

Keep in mind you don't have to agree with either Cooper or Tucker's ultimate conclusions, I certainly don't on all of them, but understand that neither of them are Nazi apologists or close to it. The article that Cakes posted is just nonsense and a hit piece.

As usual, you’re fantastically wrong, not that I can convince an Unreachable otherwise. Tucker Carlson has made controversial statements that align with rhetoric associated with Nazi apologetics, white nationalism, or historical revisionism benefiting white supremacy. Carlson is clever enough not to explicitly defend Nazis or Nazism, but he’s made remarks that echo or minimizes Nazi atrocities, justifies collaborationist behavior, and redirects blame in ways that Nazi apologists do.

- Doc

[huckelberry]

I did not give a link, I pasted a link from Cakes. In that link the first paragraph reads....

Tucker Carlson may have reached a disturbingly new low when he hosted a two-hour podcast with Darryl Cooper, a Nazi apologist whom he called “the best and most honest popular historian in the United States.”

If you are interested in the podcast, here it is.....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vOTgPEGYS2o

Keep in mind you don't have to agree with either Cooper or Tucker's ultimate conclusions, I certainly don't on all of them, but understand that neither of them are Nazi apologists or close to it. The article that Cakes posted is just nonsense and a hit piece.

Markk, thanks for the link to clarify or do that a little. I am doubtful over investing two hours.

I watched a piece starting with ww2. The general point about societies guarding preferred readings of pivotal events has some truth yet that was being exaggerated I thought. The period 1930 or 23 to 1940 being ignored or collapsed into a trick, Germans advanced civilization went nutty but now are ok again the story does not fit the amount of historical review of that important period which has been made.

[Markk]

Keep in mind you don't have to agree with either Copper or Tuckers ultimate conclusions, I certainly don't on all of them, but understand that neither of them are Nazi apologists or close to it. The article that Cakes posted is just nonsense and a hit piece.

Markk, thanks for the link to clarify or do that a little. I am doubtful over investing two hours.

I watched a piece starting with ww2. The general point about societies guarding preferred readings of pivotal events has some truth yet that was being exaggerated I thought. The period 1930 or 23 to 1940 being ignored or collapsed into a trick, Germans advanced civilization went nutty but now are ok again the story does not fit the amount of historical review of that important period which has been made.

I get it. I have said it several times here I have a long commute so I have the luxury of being able to listen to podcasts like this. But I do also while working around the house with headphones.

I just started listening to Cooper on Rogan, maybe I will change my mind on his approach and views. If you can find the time listen to the part of the podcast on Jonestown....it is well worth it, in my opinion, aside from the topic, but on how we should approach the tough subject from a pure objective historical view.

[Markk]

Keep in mind you don't have to agree with either Cooper or Tucker's ultimate conclusions, I certainly don't on all of them, but understand that neither of them are Nazi apologists or close to it. The article that Cakes posted is just nonsense and a hit piece.

As usual, you’re fantastically wrong, not that I can convince an Unreachable otherwise. Tucker Carlson has made controversial statements that align with rhetoric associated with Nazi apologetics, white nationalism, or historical revisionism benefiting white supremacy. Carlson is clever enough not to explicitly defend Nazis or Nazism, but he’s made remarks that echo or minimizes Nazi atrocities, justifies collaborationist behavior, and redirects blame in ways that Nazi apologists do.

- Doc

Such as, and with context? I have no problem admitting it if he is spouting claims as you wrote. I disagree with Tucker on many things. Please do provide the cf. And to be clear, I am not asking you to convince me of anything, I am asking you to support your claims with the original sources so that if what you assert is correct I can "convince" myself.

There is a difference Doc between searching and looking for a dirt on someone that supports your mindset, than actually reading and researching what the person said and in the context they said it.

[Gadianton]

I watched part of the podcast when it first happened just for kicks.

It was nearly surprising to see Markk first declare himself as a WW2 history buff, but then, directly following that, he brings up a "great discussion" about WW2, which turns out to be "the discussion" between none other than Tucker Carlson, a know-nothing provocateur, and Daryll Cooper, a Nazi apologist. He's not a scholar with a fringe opinion or even a real journalist. Did he even go to college?

Why would anyone care what a couple of loud mouths think about WW2? It's a subject so extensively documented that there is no reason a person with a serious interest in history would have any reason whatsoever to watch the podcast. Tucker had Cooper on for the shock value; to get views.

It's just -- wow -- the lack of self-awareness is staggering. How is it that Markk doesn't think he's going to simply get made fun of for first, having the gall to announce himself as a history buff, and then directly following that up with the infamous Carlson/Cooper podcast, that, you know, a person with deep interest in WW2 could learn a whole gosh-darn lot from!?

How you can take a podcast the least bit seriously that crescendos with Tucker coming to realize as Cooper insists, that killing all those Jews was a humanitarian act! By golly, the Nazis hadn't thought about the logistics of the situation and simply did what was best for everybody, including the Jews!

The religious right is truly sick.

[Markk]

I watched part of the podcast when it first happened just for kicks.

It was nearly surprising to see Markk first declare himself as a WW2 history buff, but then, directly following that, he brings up a "great discussion" about WW2, which turns out to be "the discussion" between none other than Tucker Carlson, a know-nothing provocateur, and Daryll Cooper, a Nazi apologist. He's not a scholar with a fringe opinion or even a real journalist. Did he even go to college?

Why would anyone care what a couple of loud mouths think about WW2? It's a subject so extensively documented that there is no reason a person with a serious interest in history would have any reason whatsoever to watch the podcast. Tucker had Cooper on for the shock value; to get views.

It's just -- wow -- the lack of self-awareness is staggering. How is it that Markk doesn't think he's going to simply get made fun of for first, having the gall to announce himself as a history buff, and then directly following that up with the infamous Carlson/Cooper podcast, that, you know, a person with deep interest in WW2 could learn a whole gosh-darn lot from!?

How you can take a podcast the least bit seriously that crescendos with Tucker coming to realize as Cooper insists, that killing all those Jews was a humanitarian act! By golly, the Nazis hadn't thought about the logistics of the situation and simply did what was best for everybody, including the Jews!

The religious right is truly sick.

What was the context in which Cooper, as a historian, said "killing all those Jews was a humanitarian act?"

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

It's just -- wow -- the lack of self-awareness is staggering. How is it that Markk doesn't think he's going to simply get made fun of for first, having the gall to announce himself as a history buff, and then directly following that up with the infamous Carlson/Cooper podcast, that, you know, a person with deep interest in WW2 could learn a whole gosh-darn lot from!?

Markk is astoundingly intransigent, ie, Unreachable. Anyway. Not only is it not news that Tucker is an apologist for Nazism, he’s been at it for years. For anyone to claim they don’t know this, well, it’s just more fascistic game playing; it’s how Markk and others amuse themselves on this board. idiot Carlson said:

1) “Hitler’s portrayed as the most evil man in history... But was he really that much worse than some other leaders?” (2024 interview with Vladimir Putin)

- This is a revisionist’s effort to downplay Nazi atrocities by equating them with atrocities of other regimes.

2) Praised Waffen-SS collaborators, “They weren’t fighting for Hitler. They were fighting against Soviet occupation.” (2024 comments on Latvians who joined Nazi units)

– Typical of Far-Right attempts to rehabilitate the image of Nazi collaborators in Eastern Europe.

3) Framed WWII as ideological, not moral, political operation, “Was it really America’s job to be fighting ideological wars in Europe?” (Fox News, 2022)

– Minimizes the threat of fascism and equates the fight against Nazism with Cold War-style interventions.

4) Promoted (he’s done this repeatedly, by the way) the “Great Replacement” theory when he said, “The Democratic Party is trying to replace the current electorate... with new people, more obedient voters from the Third World.” (Repeated on Fox News 2019–2023)

– This conspiracy theory has a direct line to fascist propaganda, and is cited in multiple white supremacist manifestos.

5) Paraphrased criticisms that the Holocaust is used to “guilt” Americans and to push “woke” ideologies.

- Nazi 101 apologist tactic to delegitimize the Holocaust.

6) Routinely claims Western civilization is under attack. And I quote, “They hate Western civilization. That’s what this is really about.”

- Common fascist rhetoric blaming Jewish meddling (use of immigrant) to erode traditional society.

7+) “The ruling class hates democracy… they prefer control, like China.” (Fox News)

“Would you let people you don’t like move into your neighborhood, just because they work for less?” (Fox News, 2018)

“Our leaders are decadent, out of touch, and hate the people they govern.”, which is a Nazi trope about secretive, powerful elites undermining the nation so we should, ironically, hand power over to secretive, powerful elites.

You could literally fill pages with idiot quotes that are like the above. Markk is 100% full of pig vomit, playing like he doesn’t know this.

- Doc