Posted on 09/09/2025 6:38:34 PM PDT by Rummyfan
The living memory of World War II is passing away. In April, the oldest known survivor of Pearl Harbor died at 106 years old. A few weeks ago, a 102-year old veteran who stormed the beaches of Normandy on D-Day (June 6, 1944) entered his eternal reward.
Sadly, less than one percent of the war’s veterans are still alive. However, more troubling and dark, the increasing deaths of witnesses — those who endured the conflict and its horrors — has been coupled with the rise of revisionist ahistorical conspiracies about the Second World War. Worse, this is increasingly a right-wing phenomenon.
Nearly a year apart from each other, Tucker Carlson interviewed guests Darryl Cooper and David Collum — “amateur” historians — who have erroneously circulated false narratives about the war, contradicting the story that the Allied Powers were entirely morally ‘good.’
Last summer, Cooper ignited a bevy of notoriety and backlash by claiming Winston Churchill was the “chief villain” of World War II for declaring war on Germany after the invasion of Poland. He even provided cover for Adolf Hitler. This August, Collum posited, “The story we got about World War II is all wrong” to which Carlson agreed, and even suggested the Allies should have aligned with the Nazis and fought the Soviet Union.
(Excerpt) Read more at realclearhistory.com ...
That's phrased in kind of a straw man way. Did Allied troops ever do anything wrong? Sure. But overall, it isn't close. I mean the original Allies, or 1939 - June 1941.
What a bunch of maroons.
If Hitler hadn’t been persecuting Jews in death camps, then siding with Hitler might have made sense.
Patton was correct in his belief that after defeating Hitler, we should have kept fighting to defeat Stalin.
I used to be a big fan of Pat Buchanan. But here’s where he lost me. He argues that Britain and France should have just let Hitler take Poland - just as he took Austria and Czechoslovakia earlier.
And so what if Hitler later established the horrible death camps of Auschwitz and Treblenka in Poland? Who cares?
Something is wrong with Buchanan, and folks who also think that way. I can’t believe they’re stupid. So they’re either pro-Nazi or antisemitic. Or both.
Disgusting trash, all of them.
“Worse, this is increasingly a right-wing phenomenon.”
Really? Really? These guys are nuts. Conservatuves by-and-large know much more about military history, including WWII, than any 10 liberals.
Treblinka, not Treblenka.
I think that the contributions of Darryl Cooper (and Pat Buchanan before him) are much needed.
As Napoleon said, "History is a series of lies that people have agreed upon."
Or if you prefer it in the comedic style of Norm MacDonald:
"It says here in this history book that luckily, the good guys have won every single time. What are the odds?"
I don’t see how you get that from what he actually wrote
https://buchanan.org/blog/who-won-and-who-lost-world-war-ii-137459
Are you so open minded that your brains fell out?
I took him to mean certain Conservative "influencers" and speakers (and those that agree with them), not your rank and file Conservative.
One of the best tools, is newspapers.com, and reading the newspapers from that time, it really does give a perspective that historians, who were born after the war simply cannot.
The World At War was a British 26 part documentary made 20 years after the war ended. It is the best documentary about World War II I have ever seen.
“Down this road on a summer day in 1944, the soldiers came.....”
I will agree with you that reasoned and sensible questioning of historical narratives can be a good thing.
But Buchanan is quite clear here. He says that Poland should have simply been abandoned to the Nazi war machine. That’s not reasoned and sensible questioning. It’s far beyond that.
Oh, and thumbs up for the Norm MacDonald quote. The guy was a genius. We lost him way too soon.
Also Indy Neidell’s WWII series is fantastic, especially the Pearl Harbor and D-Day episodes.
The bottom line is, after Hitler violated the Munich Pact, and marched into the rest of Czechoslovakia in 1939, he could no longer be trusted.
I have no issue with the Munich Agreement at the time, but deep down, even Chamberlain knew, that most likely war was inevitable, and he was buying time. When Hitler started making his demands to Poland to give up Danzig, it was obvious by then, that it wasn’t just about Danzig.
I think the world was exhausted by war though. If you consider the Italians in Abyssinia, the Japanese in China, the Spanish Civil War, and WW II, it had been going on for almost fifteen years.
As Patton was quoted as saying, 'we might as well fight them now when we have the army here to do it". But I don't know.... it certainly would have made a huge difference to Poland and Czechoslovakia and Hungary and ...
I could make the case for maybe trying to liberate Poland and Czechoslovakia, but only a mad man would have even thought of invading the Soviet Union, proper.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.