This is yet another example of the Republican establishment using the same tactics as the left to smear Tucker.
i 100% agree that he is not a holocaust denier…the media will paint things in a way that supports their narrative. they will do this with news and with history. I purposely chose to post a jewish media outlet discussing a guy with a slightly different take on WW2 to get the most extreme version of this media manipulation.
Not only that, but should interviews only be conducted with people that agree with you? Funny how many ‘conservatives’ embrace the very tyranny they claim to abhor.
Here is what I wrote on another thread about both the historian being interviewed, and the conclusions he reached through his studies of the matter. These are my opinions. They absolutely will not align with everyone elses, but these are mine. As people often say here, “Your mileage may vary.”
**********************************************************************
Okay, I listened to that interview. This hysteria is all BS.
Period.
Tucker apparently characterized the guy as the most honest historian, and I cannot disagree much with that. The guy is honest and says what he thinks. And I think some of conclusions he reaches as a historian are not just wrong in my opinion, but some of them border on the crackpot. That is my opinion.
Personally, I didn’t like the guy at all. But what I saw and what this hysteria shows is dishonesty or ignorance on the part of those piling on Tucker Carlson.
BEING HONEST AND BEING RIGHT ARE NOT THE SAME THING.
This historian may be quite honest. That is a different thing than being right, so I have no issue with Carlson calling him “honest”.
Watching the WWII section of the video, it is clear that the historian Cooper wasn’t talking about the Jewish Holocaust in the WWII segment. Never in the interview that I listened to did he say the Nazi’s didn’t mean for the Holocaust to happen.
Unless I missed it.
Did I miss it? Did anyone else hear him say that? If so, can you mark the time for me so I can go back? (I mean that...if I missed it, I want to know)
Cooper was clearly talking about Barbarossa and the lack of planning on the part of Nazi Germany in many ways, and one of them was the lack of understanding that there were going to be huge masses of people they were going to have to take responsibility for, and that they didn’t think that through or anticipate it. That is a fair assessment.
To go further, anyone who knows history understands that Barbarossa wasn’t fully baked in many respects, due to the fact that Hitler was pushing it, and the Generals were compelled to go along with it (and did to along with it because they did not grasp the enormity of that endeavor, underestimated the unknowns in the Russian military and variables in that campaign and were flush with victory in Europe, which didn’t help them object in the manner they should have.) and that is one of them. But that is as far as it goes with that.
I have never heard of this guy, and frankly, while I didn’t care for him in his presentation and many of the “conclusions” he reaches, he isn’t wrong on everything. I didn’t mind his way of thinking outside the traditional box, I have known lots of people who do that. Some of the things he said were the equivalent of putting yourself in the other person’s shoes and trying to imagine their thought processes. That is often both interesting and illuminative. I think some of the things he said were put forth in that mindset of looking at it from the “other side”, and I think people who might not be following the whole conversation but only getting a piece of it out of context and it would, of course, sound completely outrageous.
For example, it has been clear to me in many histories I have read that Hitler did not want to go to war with England, he thought that the British and the Germans were natural allies against the Russians, and he didn’t think the British would declare war on him if he invaded Poland. He thought they would be all bluster.
And his assessment of Churchill was loaded with a degree of personal animus that I believe clouded and invalidates his judgement in my mind. That is my opinion. Anyone who has read much of anything about Churchill, either written by him or by others knows that the guy was an extremely eccentric guy, even for a Englishman. He was also an extraordinarily heavy drinker who was able to consume huge amounts of alcohol each day that would put others under the table, but according to most people who knew him, he remained functional. I would characterize Churchill in retrospect as a high functioning alcoholic, something I know about since I viewed my father as one.
I objected to his characterization of Churchill as a “psychopath”. I thought it was childish and demeaning, and watching his demeanor as he made those statements reduced his credibility in my eyes. That I think very highly of Churchill must be factored into my response to it, that is plain, but something smacks of his treatment of Churchill that falls outside (in my eyes) the purview of an honest historian.
And I also take issue with his assessment of the firebombing of Germany. The world entered into unrestricted warfare in WWII. It is war. And when you see what the Nazis did to those people they subjugated, there is no doubt that factored in the Allies decision to engage in unrestricted warfare.
When one engages in unrestricted warfare (as some of the people on this forum wish to see happen in Ukraine) it is an absolute certainty that things will get out of hand. What the Nazis did to both Guernica and Rotterdam even BEFORE the Blitz showed that was the course things would take. It ended up with the round the clock bombing by the Allies. Germany would have done the same if they could have, but they couldn’t. That they resorted to the use of V1 and V2 weapons was only due to the fact that they couldn’t do it with conventional weapons. If they had nuclear weapons, they would have used them.
War is war, and once you go on the path of unrestricted war, you better win.
What the Nazis did to the Jews is proof that there wasn’t going to be mercy for any victim of the Nazis. The Holocaust wasn’t an accident. It wasn’t unintentional. It was planned. And that fact that Communists (the heroes of today’s Leftists, including the two people at the top of the Democrat Presidential ticket) have murdered far, FAR more many people than the Nazis ever did does not excuse what the Nazis did, and for THAT the Nazis deserved total defeat.
People I know disagree with me on this. It is my opinion. Others may feel differently.
Way over time to clean house!
The Nazis killed millions; especially Jews in particular. There is no denying the well-known facts. Facts know since during the years before the war ended. They killed Jews because they wanted to completely eliminate them (and Roma).
Is Tucker Carlson still registered to vote as a Democrat?
THE NAZIS KILLED 6 MILLION JEWS, AND PLANED TO KILL MANY MORE. DEBERITLY. WHAT 5HE H—L IS WR9NG WITH YOU?
This is the domestic thing you have ever posted.
Discusting.
Killed thousands? The Nazis killed millions.
simply said the motive was expediency (because of a lack of planning on how to hold prisoners) rather than anti-Semitism.
This is Holocaust denial. The Nazis operated extermination camps which were purpose built for the sole purpose of exterminating entire peoples. They poured an enormous percentage of their war economy into genocide - which involved redirecting huge amounts of resources away from their own war effort because Hitler was so obsessed with the goal. The Holocaust wasn't an accident, it was deliberate German policy.
“He simply said the motive was expediency (because of a lack of planning on how to hold prisoners) rather than anti-Semitism.”
Gosh I guess enacting the Nuremburg Laws and imprisoning Jews for being Jews is not anti-semitism until you deliberately murder them.
I wish you were right but you’re not. Cooper said that the Nazis killed the Jews because they had too many POWs and lacked the resources to take care of them, so many of them died. This is false, and a whitewash of evil. The Nazis killed the Jews because they hated God. They hated Christianity too, for the same reason. Read a book called The Law of Blood, by Johann Chapoutot. Also, learn about the Evian Conference and the Wansee Conference. At the first, in 1938, the Nazi government tried to get countries other than Germany to accept the entire Jewish population of Germany. Nobody would take the Jews except the Dominican Republic and later, Costa Rica, which each agreed to take a handful. Faced with the prospect that the Jews couldn’t be removed, the Nazis held another conference, at Wansee in 1942, at which it was decided to murder all of the Jews in German territory, including any territory they conquered. The Jews didn’t just “die” in World War II. They were murdered: gassed in the millions, shot and worked to death.
There’s no room for uncertainty here, and anyone who claims there is is an antisemite. Period.
So those trains loaded with Jews for the camps in Poland was just to make things easier for them. I realize it’s 1200 pages double columned but take a try at reading The Destruction of the European Jews.
“One thing I should like to say on this day which may be memorable for others as well as for us Germans: In the course of my life I have very often been a prophet, and have usually been ridiculed for it. During the time of my struggle for power it was in the first instance the Jewish race which only received my prophecies with laughter when I said that I would one day take over the leadership of the State, and with it that of the whole nation, and that I would then among many other things settle the Jewish problem. Their laughter was uproarious, but I think that for some time now they have been laughing on the other side of their face. Today I will once more be a prophet: If the international Jewish financiers in and outside Europe should succeed in plunging the nations once more into a world war, then the result will not be the Bolshevization of the earth, and thus the victory of Jewry, but the annihilation of the Jewish race in Europe!”
-Adolf Hitler January 30, 1939 in a speech to the Reichstag
Which is total bullshit. Not surprising coming from you
Do you really think that the reason the N’s killed the Jews was expediency, not anti-Semitism?
Kazan “the Nazis killed thousands”
Do you really believe the death toll to be just THOUSANDS???
Is that what is taught in Kazan, Tatarstan, Russian federation?