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

[Marcus]

It astonishes me that Markk would write that the SS were distressed at having to shoot to kill people, so the solution was to use gas to kill many more people.

No nazis were 'distressed' at that?

To me, it's still an attempt to minimize what was done by pretending considerations were humane, or that all these horrific things 'just happened' because he thinks they weren't 'planned.'. (again, markk's opinion, not facts.)

...This is Wiki, if you want more, and it you want to have a real discussion about this history, let me know and I will provide more...

Thank you I can read wiki, and no thank you, you don't have 'real' discussions, you have endless cycles of trying to insist your opinion is fact. Also, the fact that you want people to listen to Cooper because he's charismatic and hides his racism just cleverly enough to keep you complacent is enough to give anyone pause in this thread.

[Marcus]

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?

Works for me.

[Chap]

Works for me.

And for me too. Outside the particular issues discussed in this thread, this part of Morley's summary is an instance of something really important in the world of 'I saw a video with this guy who ..." and so on.

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.

People like Cooper basically try to make a career by persuading people that "Hey! Here's something that all those élite intellectual liberals don't want you to know." As in this instance, what they then present is usually some contention that is all too familiar to people with a little real knowledge of the topic in question, and which has long been debunked.

But the people who view, listen to or read the Coopers of this world don't know that, and they feel excited about the sense of possessing a piece of something special that has been concealed from them by all those people up there who think they are so darned clever and superior. And once that idea has got into their heads, it is very very difficult to get it out again, as this thread has shown.

[Morley]

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.

Markk, I'm not interested in what I said and you said, or what you think I said or didn't say, or what I think Gad said or what you think Cooper said. None of that. At this point, it's all a mishmash of conflicting statements, half-expressed ideas, and inanities. I'm trying to dig our way out of the weeds, by finding what your specific complaints or points are--and what you see as the rebuttals or agreements.

It's plain dickish for you to chide me about how I could do better or tell me that I'm not even trying.

No, Cooper didn't say the word "gassing". Yes, the Nazi capture of Russian soldiers added to the problem. I don't see how either changes any of (what seems to me) the points. If what I laid out aren't your points after all, maybe you can bullet point them?

I am frankly trying to get a handle on what your specific complaints are--and how you think that you and history--and even Cooper--have been misunderstood.

[Markk]

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?

We agree here with most of this. I stated most of the same thing, several times.

1. The task force so to speak, was the Einsatzgruppen, but others were also involved for sure.
2. The two persons were primarily Himmler and R. Heydrich.

Where we have to clarify, and you even touched on it, there were programs like Madagascar, and the gradual evolution to the final solution.

1. As you wrote Hitler was the 'boss", and for sometime, generally he, or someone, allowed only the shooting of Jewish men . When the invasion east started with Barbarossa, all bets were off so to speak and the Einsatzgruppen and other units started shooting women and children, the aged, and whole communities, by Heydrich's orders. At this time Expulsion also stopped.
2. There were three or four Einsatzgruppen divisions or units (I am not sure what size) tasked to Barbarossa.
3. The 42 conference which I mentioned maybe ten times was Wannsee....we agree here.
4. Yes Goring gave the go ahead for it, I mentioned this also....we agree.
5. Hitler told Goring to issue the order...we agree. I stated this.
6. We agree that Hitler stated he wanted to annihilate the Jews, I stated this and even how Goebbels had to caution him in the early years because many Germans were not ready for a final solution. But, there are problems here, huge problems with it being policy or intended policy, and I will explain why at the end of the post with a question to you.

But there is also evidence otherwise that he was more than happy for expulsion, as you also touched on.

If you read the thread you would know my position is, that it is just not clear and I have sated why.

While you and I basically agree....others here attacked me for my position of showing a evolution to the final solution.

But anyways, would you agree with this, I pasted it some time ago....

The Germans began World War II by invading Poland in September 1939. The Nazi leaders then shifted priorities in anti-Jewish policy from expulsion from German-controlled territory to concentration of European Jewish populations in locations suited to future permanent removal. It is not clear that the Nazi leaders were already envisioning mass murder as their "solution" to their so-called Jewish problem.

As a temporary measure, while the top leadership considered long-term options, German authorities established ghettos in the Generalgouvernement (that part of German-occupied Poland not directly annexed to Germany, attached to German East Prussia or incorporated into the German-occupied Soviet Union) and in the District Wartheland, commonly called the Warthegau (an area of western Poland directly annexed to the German Reich). From late 1939, German SS and police authorities deported Polish, German, Austrian, and Czech Jews to these ghettos.

https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/ ... %20ghettos.

Let me ask you this, and you don't have to answer, why did Hitler tell Goring to give the order for the Wannsee conference if the final solution was a known Nazi policy?

I'll quote this one more time....

After several decades of debate, historians have reached relative consensus on a number of important points concerning the decisions for the Final Solution. First, there was no single decision, no “big bang,” that produced the Final Solution. Rather, there were a series of decisions taken incrementally; the decision-making process was cumulative and prolonged.

Second, the Final Solution on Soviet territory did not result from a clear decision and unequivocal instructions given to the Einsatzgruppen prior to the invasion on June 22, 1941. Instead closure of this phase of the decision-making process was reached in mid-summer, and both awareness and implementation of the new goal spread unevenly across the Eastern Front.

Third, there is more continuity than discontinuity between the decisions for the Final Solution taken in 1941 and those behind the policies of ethnic cleansing and demographic engineering—what the Nazis euphemistically called “population policy” or Bevölkerungspolitik—in 1939–40. Fourth, decision-making did not abruptly stop in 1941; vital decisions continued to be made in 1942 and even later. Finally, most historians agree that the decision-making process was an interactive one between the center and the periphery, and it was based on both consensus and polycracy. It must be studied from below as well as from above. Christopher Browning.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

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.

He’s arguing the Nazis didn’t to want initially kill the Jews, but as the war evolved they were either forced to liquidate them due to resource constraints, or they died due to supply lines being cut so starvation and disease took over. He doesn’t have the balls to come out and say what he’s really getting at, which is he believes the numbers of Jews killed in WWII were greatly exaggerated by the Jews in order to use it as a cudgel to gain control over the goyim.

Nazi apologists put the figure of Jewish death at ~350,000.

- Doc

[Markk]

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.


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.

Markk, I'm not interested in what I said and you said, or what you think I said or didn't say, or what I think Gad said or what you think Cooper said. None of that. At this point, it's all a mishmash of conflicting statements, half-expressed ideas, and inanities. I'm trying to dig our way out of the weeds, by finding what your specific complaints or points are--and what you see as the rebuttals or agreements.

It's plain dickish for you to chide me about how I could do better or tell me that I'm not even trying.

No, Cooper didn't say the word "gassing". Yes, the Nazi capture of Russian soldiers added to the problem. I don't see how either changes any of (what seems to me) the points. If what I laid out aren't your points after all, maybe you can bullet point them?

I am frankly trying to get a handle on what your specific complaints are--and how you think that you and history--and even Cooper--have been misunderstood.

Then listen. A lot has been said, a lot has been discussed, and you among others have waffled on your views and understandings of what Cooper said and the rabbit trail conversations that have been created in this thread.

I am not here to follow you marching orders, you act like you are the Red Queen here, or Lol Jersey Girl. You insinuated in a negative way that ..." you buy this stuff is incredible, Markk."

You are correct, Cooper did not mention gassing, or to others assertion being stressed....he said this....

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.

It is important to me, that if you want a review, we start here, with your first false assertion, which ironically. more or less buy now. One of the "arguments" I am asserting is that up until Barbarossa and a while beyond, the Nazis were mixed with the answer for the Jewish Question. History just isn't clear here....which is what Cooper is saying, they had no clear plan going east, and because of that Millions died, which is just the truth.

Cooper states his view, by saying it was his view, that they had no clear plan which is just true, they were exploring many different avenues at he time Barbarossa was launched. Keep in mind and this is critical, Barbarossa was launched in June of 41, and yet the Wannsee conference was not held until six months later in early 42 where senior staff meet, to nail down the "Final Solution" to the Jewish Question.

[Morley]

Markk, I'm not interested in what I said and you said, or what you think I said or didn't say, or what I think Gad said or what you think Cooper said. None of that. At this point, it's all a mishmash of conflicting statements, half-expressed ideas, and inanities. I'm trying to dig our way out of the weeds, by finding what your specific complaints or points are--and what you see as the rebuttals or agreements.

It's plain dickish for you to chide me about how I could do better or tell me that I'm not even trying.

No, Cooper didn't say the word "gassing". Yes, the Nazi capture of Russian soldiers added to the problem. I don't see how either changes any of (what seems to me) the points. If what I laid out aren't your points after all, maybe you can bullet point them?

I am frankly trying to get a handle on what your specific complaints are--and how you think that you and history--and even Cooper--have been misunderstood.

Then listen. A lot has been said, a lot has been discussed, and you among others have waffled on your views and understandings of what Cooper said and the rabbit trail conversations that have been created in this thread.

I am not here to follow you marching orders, you act like you are the Red Queen here, or Lol Jersey Girl. You insinuated in a negative way that ..." you buy this stuff is incredible, Markk."

You are correct, Cooper did not mention gassing, or to others assertion being stressed....he said this....

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.

It is important to me, that if you want a review, we start here, with your first false assertion, which ironically. more or less buy now. One of the "arguments" I am asserting is that up until Barbarossa and a while beyond, the Nazis were mixed with the answer for the Jewish Question. History just isn't clear here....which is what Cooper is saying, they had no clear plan going east, and because of that Millions died, which is just the truth.

Cooper states his view, by saying it was his view, that they had no clear plan which is just true, they were exploring many different avenues at he time Barbarossa was launched. Keep in mind and this is critical, Barbarossa was launched in June of 41, and yet the Wannsee conference was not held until six months later in early 42 where senior staff meet, to nail down the "Final Solution" to the Jewish Question.

To my knowledge, no one is saying that the specific Nazi plans about the Jews did not evolve--and tragically so. That's pretty well documented historically.

What's your next gripe?

[Markk]

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.

He’s arguing the Nazis didn’t to want initially kill the Jews, but as the war evolved they were either forced to liquidate them due to resource constraints, or they died due to supply lines being cut so starvation and disease took over. He doesn’t have the balls to come out and say what he’s really getting at, which is he believes the numbers of Jews killed in WWII were greatly exaggerated by the Jews in order to use it as a cudgel to gain control over the goyim.

Nazi apologists put the figure of Jewish death at ~350,000.

- Doc

I'm not, I am arguing it was not clear and their were mixed views. I stated this in some of my first posts here. In 41, when they went East, it is clear that they let Russian POW's die, and that was a clear plan by some Nazis, and not so by others. Hitler want Jews dead from early on, he said so, but there were political reasons he could not just do so....it was complicated in that context as history shows.

You are showing a real weakness to go down the road that I am supporting the murder of Jews as less than it was. That show you are just losing the argument and unwilling to come to grips with the whys of the Holocaust and how it evolved.