Posted on 09/13/2024 6:56:56 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
He also claimed Churchill needed to drag the USA into the war. They had no hope otherwise. To that extent, Churchill (and those around him) needed to expand the war as much as possible.
We relied on The Royal Navy to guard the Atlantic, since expanding our presence in The Pacific, after gaining Hawaii and The Philippines. Even then they knew it would put us on an inevitable collision course with Japan. So we were kind of stuck. If the Royal Navy fell into Nazi hands, we would have been in a world of hurt.
He also said Hitler made several peace proposals to France and to England. He said Hitler did not want to be at war with England and wanted the British Empire to continue. This has been stricken from the accepted view of WWII history.
But Darryl Cooper is a weirdo and a nut case. Totally. If Cooper wants to make
Youtube videos, he should stick to showing people how to change a toilet seat.
He’s no more of a historian, than I am.
I think where we’re at here is that many are claiming Cooper made that assertion. I watched the whole interview with Carlson and I didn’t see that. Did I miss something?
and we all know Hitler would have honored those peace treaties...........................
When Hitler took over the rest of Czechoslovakia in 1939, even Chamberlain finally woke up and realized that Hitler couldn’t be trusted. Which is why they quickly allied with the Poles afterwards.
Hitler wanted The German Reich to be “Forged in Blood”. He was actually pissed off in 1938 when Chamberlain appeased him on The Sudetenland.
There’s also some suggestion, that had the Munich Agreement never happened, and they did go to war with Czechoslovakia, Hitler may have very well been overthrown by this generals. But Munich made Hitler too popular with the German people.
Invading Poland is a justification of all the horrors of WW2. This was not like Ukraine. This was the two worst political horrors of civilization, Faczism&Communism allying and then invading together.
The only thing the rest of the world could do is destroy both.
Tucker is a benevolent interviewer who does not often challange his guests. I think he tries to get the truth out, but he isn’t a filter.
Ukraine is Japan invading Manchuria in 1931.
It set the wheels in motion, but it took another 8-10 years for things to really blow up.
I don’t have a problem with Tucker’s approach, I just think this particular guest wasn’t worthy enough of having a forum.
Spouting controversial statements doesn’t make one a historian.
I like what VDH writes on the Cold War, ancient history, and immigration, but I disagree with him on WWI. He believes our intervention was justified and that the Treaty of Versailles was fair and just. I haven’t read his writings on the War Between the States.
Cooper is not a historian. And Tucker really damaged himself with that garbage.
[There’s also some suggestion, that had the Munich Agreement never happened, and they did go to war with Czechoslovakia, Hitler may have very well been overthrown by this generals. But Munich made Hitler too popular with the German people.]
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oster_conspiracy
Britain was the primary source of foreign investment in the US from the mid-19th century on. Britain poured vast sums into US industry and infrastructure.
In many ways Britain (at least partially) bought back their old colony. And helped, substantially, to turn the US into the global economic superpower.
1889 was the transition year, when the US overtook both Britain and Germany in steel production. Someone ought to do an “1889 project” btw, a genuine, economically-technologically based history of the US.
Economically, by 1914, it was effectively a transatlantic partnership. WWI reversed the capital flow.
Andrew Roberts is a superb historian. Cooper is no where near his league.
Cooper is sloppy and as Niall Ferguson (another great historian of our age) puts it “Darryl Cooper offers a series of wild assertions that are almost entirely divorced from historical evidence and can be of interest only to those so ignorant of the past that they mistake them for daring revisionism.”
Which assertion?
Cooper's critics are spewing so much chaff that it's easy to get lost in the blizzard.
Fair. There seems to be quite a blizzard of B.S.
People seem to be saying that Cooper saying the Allies being poopyheads at times, was him saying the Axis was not evil. Which he did not say. At least in this interview, but I don’t think at all.
Saying Churchill made mistakes and led the Empire to fall is a no no.
Even though he hinted that himself.
One of the more interesting books I have been reading recently is Blitzed: Drugs in the Third Reich.
Hitler being in a massive drug addiction makes sense. A LOT of sense.
So does most of the Nazi military being on meth.
As far as the Empire goes, I think Churchill knew he was playing with an ever-weakening hand. He couldn’t prevent all he could at best was delay the dissolution of the empire. He served his country and the Imperial cause as best he could.
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.