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

[Morley]

Markk, to summarize the points that you're making in this thread about Nazis and Darryl Cooper:

1. The Nazis didn't always have their plans worked out concerning what they were going to do with the Jews.

2. ?

3. ?

4. ?

5. ?

I don't think anyone disagrees with # 1. Nazi strategy evolved until they came up with the idea of in-your-face, outright extermination. Most of the history I've read (and you've also undoubtably read) presents this same argument.

Number one is also the only thing that you seem to unabashedly agree with Cooper on. Please tell me if I'm wrong.

I'm not sure what your 2, 3, 4, and 5 are. Or maybe there aren't any other points? Keep it short and simple, if you would.

Specifically, Cooper said that they weren't ready for the millions of POWs, political prisoners and others, which would have included Jews no doubt. And he stated why he believed that. In that context #1 is correct, although folks doubt that and made it something it was not.

I disagree on Churchill, although I gained a little understanding why he felt the way he did.

Gad disagreed, at least in part, he said there were not millions of Russian POW's. But that is just undefendable. I have no idea what Cakes believes he is lost.

Morley, the thread, like all threads take rabbit trails, and one here, which is really important in my view....it the evolution of the Jewish Question, and how it grew in the end to the Final Solution to the Jewish Questions. It has been a good exercise. I have had to go and read through some of my books and re-remember things, and best of all learn new things.

One point that needs to be noted is Cooper is not a Nazi apologist in any way.

Another point is History matters, and blaming a person for telling a true history, even if inconvenient to the narrative does not make them the bad person.

Sorry, that about as short as I can make it. There is so much to explore and say about this subject.

Thank you.

So, revised it is:

1. The Nazis didn't always have their plans worked out concerning what they were going to do with the Jews. Everyone agrees that they didn't.

2. Cooper said some dumbass things. Everyone here and elsewhere agrees with that. (Seemingly, even Cooper, since he felt he had to set the record straight.)

3. Cooper is not a Nazi apologist in any way. You, Cooper, and Tucker are pretty much alone in a corner on this one. Most everyone else, here and abroad, conservative and liberal, Jew and gentile, thinks that he certainly presents like one--at least in this case.

4. History matters. Everyone agrees with this.

5. Both you and Cooper think that he is telling an 'inconvenient truth.' Everyone else thinks that the way Cooper is framing something that was already widely known (indeed, it was quoted in the documents for the Nazi trials) was unfortunate.


Have I got it now?

[canpakes]

All of this would have been easily resolved if the Nazis didn’t decide to kill Jews for being Jewish.

That seems like the least stressful and most humane option. Almost like a ‘win-win’ for everyone. But, some folks apparently thought that killing folks in gas chambers and ovens was more humane than not doing so. Odd decision.

[Markk]

Specifically, Cooper said that they weren't ready for the millions of POWs, political prisoners and others, which would have included Jews no doubt. And he stated why he believed that. In that context #1 is correct, although folks doubt that and made it something it was not.

I disagree on Churchill, although I gained a little understanding why he felt the way he did.

Gad disagreed, at least in part, he said there were not millions of Russian POW's. But that is just undefendable. I have no idea what Cakes believes he is lost.

Morley, the thread, like all threads take rabbit trails, and one here, which is really important in my view....it the evolution of the Jewish Question, and how it grew in the end to the Final Solution to the Jewish Questions. It has been a good exercise. I have had to go and read through some of my books and re-remember things, and best of all learn new things.

One point that needs to be noted is Cooper is not a Nazi apologist in any way.

Another point is History matters, and blaming a person for telling a true history, even if inconvenient to the narrative does not make them the bad person.

Sorry, that about as short as I can make it. There is so much to explore and say about this subject.

Thank you.

So, revised it is:

1. The Nazis didn't always have their plans worked out concerning what they were going to do with the Jews. Everyone agrees that they didn't.

2. Cooper said some dumbass things. Everyone here and elsewhere agrees with that. (Seemingly, even Cooper, since he felt he had to set the record straight.)

3. Cooper is not a Nazi apologist in any way. You, Cooper, and Tucker are pretty much alone in a corner on this one. Most everyone else, here and abroad, conservative and liberal, Jew and gentile, thinks that he certainly presents like one--at least in this case.

4. History matters. Everyone agrees with this.

5. Both you and Cooper think that he is telling an 'inconvenient truth.' Everyone else thinks that the way Cooper is framing something that was already widely known (indeed, it was quoted in the documents for the Nazi trials) was unfortunate.

Have I got it now?

Lol, no Morley you don't.

[canpakes]

Thank you.

So, revised it is:

1. The Nazis didn't always have their plans worked out concerning what they were going to do with the Jews. Everyone agrees that they didn't.

2. Cooper said some dumbass things. Everyone here and elsewhere agrees with that. (Seemingly, even Cooper, since he felt he had to set the record straight.)

3. Cooper is not a Nazi apologist in any way. You, Cooper, and Tucker are pretty much alone in a corner on this one. Most everyone else, here and abroad, conservative and liberal, Jew and gentile, thinks that he certainly presents like one--at least in this case.

4. History matters. Everyone agrees with this.

5. Both you and Cooper think that he is telling an 'inconvenient truth.' Everyone else thinks that the way Cooper is framing something that was already widely known (indeed, it was quoted in the documents for the Nazi trials) was unfortunate.

Have I got it now?

Lol, no Morley you don't.

I think that he’s got it.

[Morley]

Thank you.

So, revised it is:

1. The Nazis didn't always have their plans worked out concerning what they were going to do with the Jews. Everyone agrees that they didn't.

2. Cooper said some dumbass things. Everyone here and elsewhere agrees with that. (Seemingly, even Cooper, since he felt he had to set the record straight.)

3. Cooper is not a Nazi apologist in any way. You, Cooper, and Tucker are pretty much alone in a corner on this one. Most everyone else, here and abroad, conservative and liberal, Jew and gentile, thinks that he certainly presents like one--at least in this case.

4. History matters. Everyone agrees with this.

5. Both you and Cooper think that he is telling an 'inconvenient truth.' Everyone else thinks that the way Cooper is framing something that was already widely known (indeed, it was quoted in the documents for the Nazi trials) was unfortunate.

Have I got it now?

Lol, no Morley you don't.

I hit all your points but the Russian POWs.

How am I wrong?

One by one, if you would.

[Moksha]

If you like Trump, then Nazis are the good guys much maligned by those awful progressives!

[Markk]

Lol, no Morley you don't.

I hit all your points but the Russian POWs.

How am I wrong?

One by one, if you would.

Morley, you're better than this. I expect it from Cakes and the others, its what they do after the conversation goes full circle and they know they have nothing. This is where they just team up and throw ad homs, again expected. I'll continue to make my points here until the thread burns out completely. If you want to actually have a real conversation jump in.

You are wrong in that you aren't even trying, and I think you know what I mean.

This was your first post on this thread.

Seriously?

In his Tucker Carlson interview, Cooper describes the Nazis as having “…gone in with no plan for [handling prisoners]… millions ended up dead there… we don’t have the food to feed these people… one of them actually says ‘Rather than wait for them all to slowly starve this winter, wouldn’t it be more humane to just finish them off quickly now?’ “

He presents this as the motivation behind resorting to gas chambers. Gassing the Jews was more humane than letting them starve.

That you buy this stuff is incredible, Markk.

Morley, between you and I, I believe I have shown that the road to the "Final Solution, to the Jewish Question" was highly impacted by the invasion east and the influx of the masses, of prisoners.

I am not sure how you see Cooper saying that, he does not mention gassing in the podcast, but what you said has deep truths to it in the correct context. We can see what the Nazi leaders were also saying, and in their context.

This is what he said that we are basically discussing. I have to go to work, but I want to start over with what you first wrote, and what Cooper said, and lets take a look at why, right or wrong, where the conversation has gone between us. Thanks.

Yeah. Well, and the next thought that comes into their head is that, oh, you're saying Churchill was the chief villain, therefore his enemies, Adolf Hitler and so forth, were Stalin, the protagonists. Right. They're the good guys. If you think he's a villain, that's not the case. That's not what I'm saying. Germany, look, they put themselves into a position, and Adolf Hitler is chiefly responsible for this, but his whole regime is responsible for it, that when they went into the east in 1941, they launched a war where they were completely unprepared to deal with the millions and millions of prisoners of war, of local political prisoners and so forth that they were going to have to handle. They went in with no plan for that, and they just threw these people into camps, and millions of people ended up dead. There you have letters as early as July, August, 1941, from commandants of these makeshift camps that theyre setting up for these millions of people who were surrendering or people theyre rounding up. So its two months after, a month or two after Barbarossa was launched, and theyre writing back to the high command in Berlin saying, we can't feed these people.

[00:49:42]
We don't have the food to feed these people. And one of them actually says, rather than wait for them all to slowly starve this winter, wouldn't it be more humane to just finish them off quickly now? And so this is like two months into the invasion. Right? And my view on this, I argue with my zionist interlocutors about this all the time with regard to the current war in Gaza. Look, man, maybe you, as the Germans, you felt like you had to invade to the east. Maybe you thought that Stalin was such a threat or that if he launched a surprise attack and seized the oil fields in Romania, that you would now not have the fuel to actually respond and you'd be crippled and all of Europe would be under threat. And whatever it was, whatever it was, that, like, maybe you thought you had to do that, but at the end of the day, you launched that war with no plan to care for the millions and millions of civilians and prisoners of war that were going to come under your control, and millions of people died because of that. You can look at it and say, well, yeah.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

Hitler never signed or gave a order, it's hard to believe he did not verbally, but there is none. There are quotes like yours above, and there are others that show he wanted them simply deported. Which is why most historians will concede it is unclear as to what the plan actually was in regard to what no doubt came to be, the Final Solution.

I mean, it was well known that Germans under Hitler’s command were operating under implicit instructions and within a decentralized format. It’s kind of like how Dump can make a semi-vague statement or suggestion, and his subordinates understand which direction to go. Dump doesn’t always issue decrees signed with a Sharpie.

The “task force” mission to shoot Jews, et al, was ran by two guys who reported directly to Hitler. This kind of direction didn’t happen out of thin air. If Hitler wanted it stopped, it would’ve stopped.

In ‘42, there was a conference wherein the industrialized plan to exterminate the Jews was formalized. Goring gave the go ahead to the organizer. Goring would not have acted without Hitler’s knowledge and approval. All the main characters in the Nazi regime, for whatever reasons they held, kept diaries and would annotate that Hitler knew this and Hitler knew that. One of them wrote in their diary, reference to Jews, that Hitler wanted to “make a clean sweep.”

Hitler was aware, and he was managing it. He was the Supreme Leader. This happened under his leadership. Policy did not appear or change without his knowledge or consent.

So, what’s this really about Markk? Why do you have such a hard on for this topic?

[canpakes]

So, what’s this really about Markk? Why do you have such a hard on for this topic?

It seems that with the conversation going on for over a week, Markk hasn’t been able to explain what point he’s arguing. It’s absolutely odd.

[Gadianton]

Morley, between you and I, I believe I have shown that the road to the "Final Solution, to the Jewish Question" was highly impacted by the invasion east and the influx of the masses, of prisoners.

Which is an outright lie. Another good wiki article:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Einsatzgr ... 0Holocaust.

The mobile killing squads followed up the German army's advancing front, killing communists and Jews but mainly Jews, in masses. If you have mobile killing squads, no need for imprisonment.

You should also read the Wikipedia article on concentration camps I walked through but then it got buried instantly. Cooper's quote talking about millions and millions of prisoners; the wiki article shows it to be a lie.

non-Jewish prisoners of concentration camps, especially POWs, became the fodder for experiments in killing at scale with gas. Jews were not significantly represented in concentration camps.

Jews were never significantly prisoners. They were hunted and killed in a series of plans to kill them under the broad ideological banner that they should be exterminated per Hitler.

The only way you could say that the final solution to Jews generally was impacted by the invasion of the East was that millions of Jews happened to live in the east as civilians, and as they went along taking territory, they had greater access to Jews to kill.

But this isn't what you mean. You have in mind Cooper's model that you quoted, where "some such" Jews were built up incidentally among a broader population of prisoners from the war, and everyone was getting fed in prisons, until the prison population grows to the millions, and then suddenly, there's not enough food, and prisoners are dying of starvation. It's a lie. Cooper isn't even the least bit a historian.