My person opinion is they knew about 3000 of the commanders/members of these groups, only about 200 were tried.
I would have hung them all.

excellent multipart series on the nazi extermination groups operating in russia and central europe.
einsatsgroupen if i spelled it right.
It pretty much spells it out with photo footage a lot of what happen.
My person opinion is they knew about 3000 of the commanders/members of these groups, only about 200 were tried.
I would have hung them all.

Don’t know about that group, but the guards at Dachau were dealt with appropriately.

Is there a specific venue broadcasting this or do you need telepathy?

Not all Allied soldiers who served in WW2 felt the same way about it as you do.

maybe you should ask yourself why that is...

hint; in A big dirty nasty war of such length and scale there is a thing called perspective.

Folks will recall the 'Malmady massacre'...Col. J.Peiper and other members of the 1st SS Panzer regiment
went to trial, 73 in all....42 received the death sentence including Peiper , the final result was none were
executed and all were out of prison by 1956.
Some will say they all should have hanged, well if justice is to be served in such manner then the Americans
who murdered similar size groups of German prisoners in Normandy should also have been tried and hanged.

And those allied pilots that firebombed some 70 Japanese cities killing many innocent non combatant civilians
surely a horrendous war crime worthy of severe punishment.

German Sixth army [Heeresgruppe B] played a large role in assisting the Einsatzgruppen.

Shot a buncha Slav’s in the back of the head.

They can’t be all bad.

you need to do a little more reading, or watch the program on netflix. no comparison to wartime activities between warring armies.
such as murdering hundreds of thousands of women and children.
.

einsatsgroupen if i spelled it right.

sorry
netflix

Yes, General Walter Karl Ernst August van Rechenau loved to help.

No that’s funny right there

excellent multipart series on the nazi extermination groups operating in russia and central europe.
einsatsgroupen if i spelled it right.
It pretty much spells it out with photo footage a lot of what happen.
My person opinion is they knew about 3000 of the commanders/members of these groups, only about 200 were tried.
I would have hung them all.

Total War is something I hope we never see in our lifetime!

Their purpose was to capture and summarily execute Soviet agents in advance of occupation. They used the locals to help identify them, who were generally more than happy to do so, having been living under their despotic yoke for years. Yes, it was ruthless. War sucks. Summary execution of enemy partizans is a part of war, however.

And I'm sure that during the process, war crimes were carried out, and innocents were murdered. Happened on all sides, and in every war. Our side had such incidents during the Vietnam War. WWII, also, and likely every other war we were involved in. Such crimes were routine for the Soviets during WWII, and they were our beloved allies.

At Babi Yar alone over 30,000 civilians were machine gunned to death. That are a lot of innocent souls.

I wouldn’t say that FDR or Churchill thought of the Soviets as our “beloved” allies, more like necessary allies. 😉

excellent multipart series on the nazi extermination groups operating in russia and central europe.
einsatsgroupen if i spelled it right.
It pretty much spells it out with photo footage a lot of what happen.
My person opinion is they knew about 3000 of the commanders/members of these groups, only about 200 were tried.
I would have hung them all.

I’m watching a series on Netflix right now about the Charisma of Hitler.

What’s the name of the series Ron?

Having been to Dachau and seeing the place up close I have little patience for the bullshit spewed by the revisionist retards. I also watched an interesting documentary on Ben Ferencz one of the prosecutors during the Nuremberg trials last night.

The sad thing is very few of these evil scumbags ever got prosecuted. They slaughtered innocent people by the thousands, went home,
and went about their lives like nothing happened.

Of the 3,000 odd member Einsatzgruppen, how many returned to Germany surviving the war?

At Babi Yar alone over 30,000 civilians were machine gunned to death. That are a lot of innocent souls.

So you have no idea whatsoever as to how many Einsatzgruppen survived the war and escaped prosecution.

Have you spent all your hate on the Nazis or have some to spare for the Soviets and Allies
that killed large numbers non- combatant civilians?

the Allies killed like 70,000 civilians in the Normandy push by bombing a list of densely occupied cities that had virtually
no German forces in them....just level them at whatever ruthless cost cause we were the good guys and such is the price of freedom.

'trusty us friend , we are unnecessarily bombing you for your own good'..

In any war, the winners get to write the history and the losers are always the ones that come out on the short end of the stick. WW2 was no different. There is not doubt whatsoever that the Germans committed numerous atrocities.....but so did the Soviets, probably more than the Germans. The Japanese were no slouches in the atrocity department either. Also, the Allied bombing campaigns killed untold numbers of innocent civilians, most as a result of bombing that had no strategic value, so I don't see how they can get off scott free either.


It's simple, in a war, people die, many of them unnecessarily. It's always been that way, always will.

and don't forget about klink, schultz, burkholter and hochstetter

That's where you got your WWII education, eh? LOL.

Having been to Dachau and seeing the place up close I have little patience for the bullshit spewed by the revisionist retards. I also watched an interesting documentary on Ben Ferencz one of the prosecutors during the Nuremberg trials last night.

I wouldn’t say that FDR or Churchill thought of the Soviets as our “beloved” allies, more like necessary allies. 😉

You might want to google the word strategic.

I don't know.........I heard that the whole Jew thing never happened......It was a story told just so the Jews could get a little sympathy........

I worked with a guy that actually believed this.

The fact still remains that many of the German and Japanese cities that were bombed had no strategic value. They were bombed to send a message to the citizens of those countries. Now, while most Japanese did whatever the Emperor said to do, most Germans did not belong to the Nazi party, yet were considered as "fair game" in the Allied bombing campaigns.

It all boils down to one thing.....you do whatever you have to do in order to win a war. That's what we did in WW2, and we won. We did not do that in Korea and Vietnam, and we did not win. We settled for a draw in Korea, and for a pullout of South Vietnam. We also have not won in Afghanistan or Iraq, as we're still there.

My point is that if you want to win a war, you eliminate whoever gets in your way, as both the Axis and the Allies did in WW2. We justified our actions in bombing civilians who had no part in the fighting process, and we hanged the Nazis for doing the same. Meanwhile, the damned Soviets got off scott free, and they were worse than the Germans.

WW II in and of itself pretty stupid. It began as a war of Britain and France against a dictatorial regime that invaded an ally while ignoring that another dictatorial regime invaded that same ally at the same time. After six years of war and somewhere between 50 and a 100 million deaths, they willingly ceded the entirety of their “ally’s” territory to the most murderous dictator in history.

Their purpose was to capture and summarily execute Soviet agents in advance of occupation. They used the locals to help identify them, who were generally more than happy to do so, having been living under their despotic yoke for years.

Yes, it was ruthless. War sucks. Summary execution of enemy partizans has historically been a part of war, however.

And I'm sure that during the process, war crimes were carried out, and innocents were murdered. Happened on all sides, and in every war. Our side had such incidents during the Vietnam War. WWII, also, and likely every other war we were involved in. Such crimes were standard operating procedure for the Soviets during WWII, and they were our beloved allies.

Come now, didn't you hear wonderful speech the "Golden Gal" made at the 75th anniversary of D-Day landing. She said that thanks to those brave men that landed on the French beaches the Germans were freed from the enigmatic almost mythical Nazis that ruled over the poor Germans since ca. 1933? I bet the Western Leadership bought that BS and applauded wildly. Would you care to guess what percentage of Germans chose to vote for the NSDAP in 1933 democratic elections? You know, it's only when the bombs started falling on Germany en mass they started to loose faith and support for previously "wonderful" Fuhrer.

Spot on.

Sounds like you should have fought harder, but I guess you enjoyed it, because right after them came the communists who obviously had an effect on you...

The most detrimental action of modern times is FDR's decision to enable Stalin to spread Communism around the world. The world has been paying a price for that ever since,....and now it seems like it's America's turn.

Wacko foreign policy back then. Looking back, I have to believe that FDR was either an idiot,...or he was more than a bit pink.

He wasn't an idiot.

The fact still remains that many of the German and Japanese cities that were bombed had no strategic value. They were bombed to send a message to the citizens of those countries. Now, while most Japanese did whatever the Emperor said to do, most Germans did not belong to the Nazi party, yet were considered as "fair game" in the Allied bombing campaigns.

It all boils down to one thing.....you do whatever you have to do in order to win a war. That's what we did in WW2, and we won. We did not do that in Korea and Vietnam, and we did not win. We settled for a draw in Korea, and for a pullout of South Vietnam. We also have not won in Afghanistan or Iraq, as we're still there.

My point is that if you want to win a war, you eliminate whoever gets in your way, as both the Axis and the Allies did in WW2. We justified our actions in bombing civilians who had no part in the fighting process, and we hanged the Nazis for doing the same. Meanwhile, the damned Soviets got off scott free, and they were worse than the Germans.

Total War is something I hope we never see in our lifetime!

Name of show please.

Hellstorm.

The sad thing is very few of these evil scumbags ever got prosecuted. They slaughtered innocent people by the thousands, went home, and went about their lives like nothing happened.

what the hell you putting in your coffee this morning?

Some intelligence you failed to capture...

So you have no idea whatsoever as to how many Einsatzgruppen survived the war and escaped prosecution.

Have you spent all your hate on the Nazis or have some to spare for the Soviets and Allies
that killed large numbers non- combatant civilians?

the Allies killed like 70,000 civilians in the Normandy push by bombing a list of densely occupied cities that had virtually
no German forces in them....just level them at whatever ruthless cost cause we were the good guys and such is the price of freedom.

'trusty us friend , we are unnecessarily bombing you for your own good'..

WW II in and of itself pretty stupid. It began as a war of Britain and France against a dictatorial regime that invaded an ally while ignoring that another dictatorial regime invaded that same ally at the same time. After six years of war and somewhere between 50 and a 100 million deaths, they willingly ceded the entirety of their “ally’s” territory to the most murderous dictator in history.

i am quoting from memory, but i believe they found over 2200 members still alive after the war. The names were turned over to the german authorities and less then 200 ever faced any kind of justice.
Starman, i am not sure which one of the perenial dipshi*s you are that hang around this forum, but the dipshi*t part is correct.
you ought to stay off commenting on this stuff, if you can't see the difference of a nazi walking across the bodies of the wounded and dieing, given them the head shot, or extermination of 90% or better of a group of people with no respect for man woman and child. No, dresden is bothersome to me, but a different thing than babi yar.

Starman, i am not sure which one of the perenial dipshi*s you are that hang around this forum, but the dipshi*t part is correct.
you ought to stay off commenting on this stuff, if you can't see the difference of a nazi walking across the bodies of the wounded and dieing,
given them the head shot, or extermination of 90% or better of a group of people with no respect for man woman and child

. No, dresden is bothersome to me, but a different thing than babi yar.

Ben Ferencz was one of the prosecutors at Nuremberg and he was the one that prosecuted Ohlendorf and many of the other Einsatzgrupen officers. He said that he wasn’t interested in the private’s and corporals or other enlisted men, he was interested in the leaders. He had not only piles of their paperwork with their signatures but he had their full admission when they were on the stand. Ohlendorf admitted that he didn’t like the gas vans because they were inefficient and destroyed morale within the ranks. He suggested to his men that if a baby was nursing on the mother’s breast that they should shoot the baby that way killing both mother and baby. He also said that he’d do it again to his own sister if ordered. Ben Ferencz thought he was honest and likely a gentleman in real life but that his crimes needed to be punished.

A sad and morbid period of world history.

[
You realize that the confessing Germans at Nuremberg were reading from provided scripts, right? This was preceded by brutal torture, and threats against their wives and children, should they do otherwise.

Source?

You realize that the confessing Germans at Nuremberg were reading from provided scripts, right? This was preceded by brutal torture, and threats against their wives and children, should they do otherwise.

Auschwitz guard offers Germans something rare: A Nazi who admits what he did

On the opening day of his trial on 300,000 counts of accessory to murder, the man known as the “accountant of Auschwitz” told of the moment he lost his “euphoria for Adolf Hitler.”

He was standing on a train platform after Hungarian Jews had been unloaded at the Nazi death camp. The unwitting condemned already had been sent to the gas chambers. The newly arrived slave laborers had been sent in a different direction.

Left behind on the platform was a crying infant. As the child cried, one of the now 93-year-old Oskar Groening’s fellow SS officers approached it, grabbed it by the leg, dashed its head against a nearby truck, then tossed the lifeless body into the truck.

As horrific as that story is, what might have been more shocking was Groening’s next observation.

“I don’t know what else I could have expected the guard to do with the baby,” he mused. “I suppose he could have shot it, though.”

The casual acceptance of brutality that the former Waffen SS officer displayed even 70 years after the Third Reich was destroyed provided a rare insight into the twisted nature of the Nazi death camp mindset. Even from a man who admitted in court that he carried “moral guilt” if not legal guilt for the Holocaust, there was no notion that, perhaps, the baby did not need to have been killed.

He made the same point in his testimony Thursday. “I did not expect any Jews to survive Auschwitz,” he said.

Efraim Zuroff, director and head Nazi hunter for the Israeli office of the Simon Wiesenthal Center, said Groening’s testimony, even in its cool detachment, is unique and historically important.

“In my 35 years of trying to bring Nazis to justice, I’ve not met one Nazi who expressed any regret,” he said. “Even now, his words show how deeply the attitudes that made the Holocaust possible run.”

Zuroff noted that Groening hardly deserves credit for coming forward, at 93. He said he once had hoped that nearing the ends of their lives, more old Nazis “would want to come clean before they had to meet their maker.”

That has not been the case with others. Zuroff noted that other Nazi war crimes defendants have tended to claim the wrong person was arrested or that they did not do what they were charged with doing. Groening, therefore, is different.

Still, his testimony exposes the flaws in a decades-long German policy of pursuing only Nazis who could be shown to have blood on their hands.

Groening fully admits he was enthusiastic in his backing of Hitler. He described standing with another guard as he dumped the poison Zyklon B into a panel above a mass “shower room” and how he could hear the screams diminish after that. He talked about how, upon arriving to work at Auschwitz-Birkenau for the first time, he was informed that a large part of the camp was devoted to “discarding” the arriving Jews deemed unfit for slave labor.

Groening knew about and watched all that happened at the death camp. He didn’t actively kill people, but as the prosecution in this case is arguing, his actions made what happened possible. In fact, prosecutors note that his collecting cash that the doomed Hungarian Jews carried when they arrived at Auschwitz, and eventually hauling boxes of it to Berlin, “made it possible for the Nazis not only to continue but to profit from mass murder.”

Previously, the attitude of the guards who staffed Auschwitz and other Nazi death camps has been inferred only from the experiences of survivors or liberators. That’s why Groening’s words fill a void, Zuroff said.

Groening is an important figure, others note, because he is German. Other recent trials have focused on Eastern Europeans. Groening was a proud product of Hitler’s Fatherland.

Michael Wolffsohn, a German historian and expert on German Jewish history, noted in an email answer to questions that Groening was “an exception to the rule. He DID admit his crimes.”

It’s difficult to see actual justice coming from the case, however, Wolffsohn said, when the defendant is 93.

“The trial as such is counterproductive,” he wrote. “A maximum sentence of six years for the murder of 300,000! It would have been better to just analyze Groening’s statement. Justice and law are not always identical.”

Still, the trial has had an impact. In a recent opinion poll, about half of all Germans said they believed it was time to “draw a line under the Holocaust” and move on. But the reaction to Groening’s testimony has overwhelmed such notions.

In particular, the German press has been highly critical that this case took decades to bring to trial. The influential Sueddeutsche Zeitung newspaper noted in an editorial that “German justice, after the court agreed to take this case, should have asked the victims and the world to be forgiven for having delayed the punishment of the Nazi killers for so long, and even until a point where punishment barely makes sense.”

The newspaper noted that one of the witnesses against Groening, Eva Moses Kor, 81, who was born in Romania, had been a 10-year-old who survived Auschwitz only because she was a twin, a class of people valued by Nazi Dr. Josef Mengele for medical experiments. During the trial, she stared at Groening and said, “Mr. Groening, I want you to come out clearly. Tell the young neo-Nazis that Auschwitz really existed and Nazi ideology has produced no winners, only losers.”

The neo-Nazis and Holocaust deniers were not likely to listen, however. Ursula Haverbeck, one of Germany’s more infamous Holocaust deniers, was in court for Groening’s initial testimony. But after listening to his detailed description of what happened in the camp, she merely noted “he’s been turned.” To her, he’s now a traitor.

Thomas Wulff, a convicted German neo-Nazi, provided a similar view as he stood hoping to get in to see the trial. “This is a late, Allied revenge trial,” he said. “Groening was a victim of his time and now he’s a victim of the German justice system.”

Another newspaper, though, noted that the trial really isn’t about punishing an old man. “It’s about identifying the most severe injustice, as long as those responsible are still alive,” wrote the Stuttgarter Zeitung. “That this so far has not happened, as German justice was blind for so long, does not change the demands of justice.”

“Nazi perpetrators got away because statutes of limitations expired and the legislature failed to intervene,” added the Augsburger Allgemeine newspaper. “Cases were terminated, leaving historians and critical lawyers stunned. . . . Many trials of elderly offenders imploded. The reasons were profane: illness and death.”

And Pascal Durain, writing in the newspaper Mittelbayrische Zeitung,‏ said the trial is a reminder that Germany has debts to pay, as do all former death camp workers.

“Groening owes the truth to the audience,” Durain wrote. “The court owes him a verdict. The state of law owes justice to the survivors. And Germany owes all a message that no perpetrator will get away.”

You realize that the confessing Germans at Nuremberg were reading from provided scripts, right? This was preceded by brutal torture, and threats against their wives and children, should they do otherwise.

Dresden was courtesy of Bomber Harris and the RAF.....

The British and the RAF via Bomber Harris, insisted that the way to beat the Nazis was enough civilian causalties, that they would finally revolt against the Nazi Regime and Hitler....

Single digit percentages of ALL bombs the RAF dropped over Europe during WW2 , were even within 5 miles of their intended target... averages depending upon the raids were about 10 miles or more from the
" intended target"... Bomber command wanted civilian casualties.. the USAAF was doing the strategic stuff for the allies..

Well, I've been reading about WWII practically my entire adult life and I've read auto-biographies (some published after their executions or by their wives), specifically, Jodl, Keitel and Speer. Nowhere did I read about the scripts (other than translations) or torture by any of them. That said, if this is another attempt to dispel the kook notion Death Camps didn't kill that many jews, then don't bother.

Of course, it can be said that the Germans started it by bombing London.

https://www.spectator.co.uk/2013/10/the-bombing-war-by-richard-overy-review/

Up until Churchill’s appointment as prime minister both Germany and Britain had stuck to a pledge not to attack targets in each other’s cities where civilians were at risk. Overy dismisses the long-held belief ‘firmly rooted in the British public mind’ that Hitler initiated the trend for indiscriminate bombings. Instead, he says, the decision to take the gloves off was Churchill’s, ‘because of the crisis in the Battle of France, not because of German air raids [over Britain].’

Ethical restraints which had been imposed at the start of the war became slowly eroded as a result of Britain’s decision to initiate ‘unrestricted’ bombing of targets located in Germany’s urban areas.

all of which leads up to the point I was making.......the killing of civilians by the Germans was in many ways no worse than the indiscriminate bombing of German cities by the Allies.

https://www.spectator.co.uk/2013/10/the-bombing-war-by-richard-overy-review/

Up until Churchill’s appointment as prime minister both Germany and Britain had stuck to a pledge not to attack targets in each other’s cities where civilians were at risk. Overy dismisses the long-held belief ‘firmly rooted in the British public mind’ that Hitler initiated the trend for indiscriminate bombings. Instead, he says, the decision to take the gloves off was Churchill’s, ‘because of the crisis in the Battle of France, not because of German air raids [over Britain].’

Ethical restraints which had been imposed at the start of the war became slowly eroded as a result of Britain’s decision to initiate ‘unrestricted’ bombing of targets located in Germany’s urban areas.

You realize that the confessing Germans at Nuremberg were reading from provided scripts, right? This was preceded by brutal torture, and threats against their wives and children, should they do otherwise.

That's a fugkin' doozy.

Uh, the Germans were obliterating civilians (Roterdam & Warsaw) ring a bell) Wayyyy before. Honestly, a "pledge"? source? And I suppose there was a "pledge" not to torpedo civilian ships too? GMAFB.

I’m going to back out of this discussion now because I don’t have the patience for hyperbole and stupidity. I’ve read volumes and nowhere was it ever suggested that torture was needed elicit the truth from the Germans, they had no reason to lie, they received no leniency for lying nor were they ashamed of what they’d done. Ohlendorf spoke about smashing babies against light poles and told his men he didn’t want them doing that, instead he told them to shoot the baby in the mother’s arms thereby getting a twofer while saving ammo.

Trying to draw a moral equivalence between bombing cities that had military objectives and where civilians die to the systematic extermination of an entire group of people by barbaric methods is as hollow and empty as the usual assertions by the revisionists.

We entered the war in '41. American strategy wasn't going to mesh with some sort of idiotic "we don't wanna hurt the civilians" ideals that some dumb fugks in England had in mind.

As far as the documentary, it's pretty raw. They talk to the civilians that lived there and witnessed a lot of what was done. The majority of them seem pretty indifferent to it all. Talks a lot about the kids being executed and has a lot of images that aren't real pleasant.

There are a few interviews with actual soldiers that did a lot of executions. They're not German though. Most of them were conscripted euro-trash and supervised by Nazi's.

I’m going to back out of this discussion now because I don’t have the patience for hyperbole and stupidity. I’ve read volumes and nowhere was it ever suggested that torture was needed elicit the truth from the Germans, they had no reason to lie, they received no leniency for lying nor were they ashamed of what they’d done. Ohlendorf spoke about smashing babies against light poles and told his men he didn’t want them doing that, instead he told them to shoot the baby in the mother’s arms thereby getting a twofer while saving ammo.

Trying to draw a moral equivalence between bombing cities that had military objectives and where civilians die to the systematic extermination of an entire group of people by barbaric methods is as hollow and empty as the usual assertions by the revisionists.

No kidding. Bombing factories, railroads, depots and cities is in NO WAY SHAPE OR FORM THE EQUIVALENT OF THE SYSTEMATIC MURDER AND GASSING OF CIVILIANS. One is war and one is cold blooded murder.

I wonder if those from the greatest generation that liberated those camps are being called liars for recounting what they saw?

I was went to Dachau, do the revisionists think that was staged or am I lying about what I saw?

We entered the war in '41. American strategy wasn't going to mesh with some sort of idiotic "we don't wanna hurt the civilians" ideals that some dumb fugks in England had in mind.

As far as the documentary, it's pretty raw. They talk to the civilians that lived there and witnessed a lot of what was done. The majority of them seem pretty indifferent to it all. Talks a lot about the kids being executed and has a lot of images that aren't real pleasant.

There are a few interviews with actual soldiers that did a lot of executions. They're not German though. Most of them were conscripted euro-trash and supervised by Nazi's.

And if Germany invaded east and nobody else nobody would have gave a fugk.

If you like to read:

https://www.unz.com/proberts/the-lies-about-world-war-ii/

World War II was initiated by the British and French declaration of war on Germany, not by a surprise blitzkrieg from Germany. The utter rout and collapse of the British and French armies was the result of Britain declaring a war for which Britain was unprepared to fight and of the foolish French trapped by a treaty with the British, who quickly deserted their French ally, leaving France at Germany’s mercy.

Germany’s mercy was substantial. Hitler left a large part of France and the French colonies unoccupied and secure from war under a semi-independent government under Petain. For his service in protecting a semblance of French independence, Petain was sentenced to death by Charles de Gaulle after the war for collaboration with Germany, an unjust charge.

In Britain, Churchill was out of power. He figured a war would put him back in power. No Britisher could match Churchill’s rhetoric and orations. Or determination. Churchill desired power, and he wanted to reproduce the amazing military feats of his distinguished ancestor, the Duke of Marlborough, whose biography Churchill was writing and who defeated after years of military struggle France’s powerful Sun King, Louis XIV, the ruler of Europe.

In contrast to the British aristocrat, Hitler was a man of the people. He acted for the German people. The Versailles Treaty had dismembered Germany. Parts of Germany were confiscated and given to France, Belgium, Denmark, Poland, and Czechoslovakia. As Germany had not actually lost the war, being the occupiers of foreign territory when Germany agreed to a deceptive armistice, the loss of approximately 7 million German people to Poland and Czechoslovakia, where Germans were abused, was not considered a fair outcome.

That was smart!

I wonder how smart all those men and women on the east side of Germany felt when it was all wrapped up.

That quote has SO MANY inaccuracies or plain lies, why bother.

Probably about as smart as America felt when the Soviet Union started putting nukes in Cuba 17 years after FDR enabled those murdering, raping Russian Communists to build an empire.

How did that end for America?

The actions of France after WW1 was the impetus that led to WW2.

England didn't start WW2. Churchill just saw Germany settling scores and decided to get involved so he could make his name in history. He knew that America would bail him out.

It's been suggested that Germany broke its pact with Russia because it was concerned that Russia would align with England after Churchill stuck his nose in it.

Is your last name Chamberlain? Jeesh.

I doubt any country that puts that much effort into their war machine has peace as a goal

I agree. Any country that spends more on its military than the next two or three countries combined, can’t have good intentions.

Obama.

Antifa marching in the streets assaulting patriots for exercising their right of free speech.

A constant flow of millions of illegals across America's southern border. 10's of thousands of homeless living in tents and schitting all over California.

,...and the list hasn't ended yet.

Muslims in Congress.

We entered the war in '41. American strategy wasn't going to mesh with some sort of idiotic "we don't wanna hurt the civilians" ideals that some dumb fugks in England had in mind.

As far as the documentary, it's pretty raw. They talk to the civilians that lived there and witnessed a lot of what was done. The majority of them seem pretty indifferent to it all. Talks a lot about the kids being executed and has a lot of images that aren't real pleasant.

There are a few interviews with actual soldiers that did a lot of executions. They're not German though. Most of them were conscripted euro-trash and supervised by Nazi's.

Well, I've been reading about WWII practically my entire adult life and I've read auto-biographies (some published after their executions or by their wives), specifically, Jodl, Keitel and Speer. Nowhere did I read about the scripts (other than translations) or torture by any of them. That said, if this is another attempt to dispel the kook notion Death Camps didn't kill that many jews, then don't bother.

Have you done much reading about how the German women were treated by the Russians after the war?

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2002/may/01/news.features11

yes i have, particularly since tracing family lineage to westphalia and pomerania, right in front of the russians march to berlin. For whatever reason to justify it, germany attacked their one time ally russia, and started the whole thing prior to the russians taking retribution. I have thought of it from the russian perspective, and can understand their wanting blood.

I had in laws who were there when it was going on.

Many of them got out when the Soviet Union took control of the place. I used to listen to them talking about it.

The German occupation was a nuisance. Being made a part of the Soviet Union was hopelessness.

As I've mentioned before,..my father in law was a Polish POW. My mother in law was taken from Belarus and sent to a German work farm. My father in Law ended up at the same work farm.

Know where they went after the war?

They stayed at the German work farm as long as possible,...which was several months.

They had to hide when the authorities came around or they would have been sent to a displaced person's camp and then sent back to their home countries. My Father in Law would have been under the Soviets if he had gone back to Poland and my Mother in Law stood the possibility of being killed by the Russians for being a collaborator if she had allowed herself to be sent back to Russia.

Both of them preferred staying with the German couple who owned the work farm. The German couple knew the situations they were facing and allowed them to stay. My in laws stayed in touch with them for many years and considered them close friends.

Stuff like that is what I heard from all of my old in laws who were there when it was going on.

Most Americans don't know of things like that.

So your second hand anecdotal experience with some old pollocks supersedes everything else?

Do you even know WTF you’re debating?

Post war Europe was Mad Max land. A big part of the place had been blown to hell and gone. Nobody knew what to do with all of the displaced persons,..so many of them just roamed the countryside trying to keep fed,..and food was scarce.

Russians running around raping all of the German women.

My in laws were provided a safe haven at the work farm where they spent the war.

All things considered,..it was a good deal.

By the way,...when the allies landed on D-Day they were met by quite a few Russians mixed in with the Germans.

More than a few Russians had had enough of the Bolsheviks.

It's pretty evident that the Jews and the Communists have succeeded, once again, in forming opinions of some of these "experts" on the Fire.

It's pretty evident that the Jews and the Communists have succeeded, once again, in forming opinions of some of these "experts" on the Fire.

Now you start with the tired old dog pekker gnat routine.

Got no time for it,..have a nice day.

the truth and not their own bullshit

Netflix movie

You can't make this stuff up.

Seriously.

You can't make this stuff up.

Seriously.

Good obedient goy.

If you like to read:

Seriously.

I had in laws who were there when it was going on.

Many of them got out when the Soviet Union took control of the place. I used to listen to them talking about it.

The German occupation was a nuisance. Being made a part of the Soviet Union was hopelessness.

The problem with people like you is that you're so easily deceived, you can't stop yourself from falling down the rabbit holes. That's why you're all constantly changing the narrative or redirecting from your original point.

Look at Bristoe's posts in this thread. He's so obsessed with the Jew angle that he has convinced himself Germany had no fault in WWII. That the Nazi's were harmless because his Pollock in-laws said so.

You're no better than communists. You willingly blind yourselves from fact.

Perhaps it's you that is gullible and brainwashed.

You 'can' break free from your lifelong conditioning with some work though.

Well said!

I took a quick look at Bristoes primary source, the source he uses as a crutch whenever he’s on his pro-nazi anti-Jewish rant, where he goes when he’s reaching to provide backup to his bullshit ......www.unz.com. 😂😂😂😂

All you need to know about his foundation of “knowledge” is right there. I thought it was satire but unfortunately there’s people that buy into that while eschewing first hand accounts and documentaries. I’d say you can’t make this shlt up but apparently they do on the unz. LMFAO

Seriously?

A week ago you two fugking morons were convinced Bill Hader could shape shift into Al Pacino and Arnold Schwarzengger based on his incredible "talent."

Go to a dinner party for fugk sake. And read something that isn't a YouTube video.

Facts really can’t be ignored. Britain and France declared war on Germany for invading Poland in compliance with their treaty with Poland while ignoring that Stalin also invaded Poland in violation of their treaty with Poland. Then, six years later and after 50 to a 100 million deaths, they willingly allowed Stalin to gobble up Poland and institute 45 years of unparralleled despotism, political persecution, and mass death. The Soviets didn’t even close down Auschwitz or lots of the other camps. They simply kept them open and filled them with political prisoners of the Communist regime.

You can attempt to explain them, qualify them, or insist that things are more complex. But at the heart of the matter, the things stated above are facts.

Deflave, just go here and watch the two first videos I posted in that thread. They are crucial for this discussion, and will convince you.

Well said!

I took a quick look at Bristoes primary source, the source he uses as a crutch whenever he’s on his pro-nazi anti-Jewish rant, where he goes when he’s reaching to provide backup to his bullshit ......www.unz.com. 😂😂😂😂

All you need to know about his foundation of “knowledge” is right there. I thought it was satire but unfortunately there’s people that buy into that while eschewing first hand accounts and documentaries. I’d say you can’t make this shlt up but apparently they do on the unz. LMFAO

Seriously?

A week ago you two fugking morons were convinced Bill Hader could shape shift into Al Pacino and Arnold Schwarzengger based on his incredible "talent."

Go to a dinner party for fugk sake. And read something that isn't a YouTube video.

The only videos on that page are posted by Trumpster.

Are those the ones you mean?

I made it pretty clear that if Hitler went east, nobody would have given a fugk.

He chose not to. His people supported it.

If you wanna pick a fight two times in a row, you better be capable of winning. Especially if you already got your ass stomped the first go around.

Needless to say, the 1,000 Year Reich missed the mark by a smidge and the only person at fault for that, is Germany.

And you made it pretty clear that you don’t have a clue what you’re talking about. HITLER WENT EAST. POLAND IS EAST OF GERMANY.

And Britain and France declared war on him AFTER HE WENT EAST.

Our setting must not mesh.

I see you posted two videos on page two but both links are broken. You posted another on page four of Austrian's welcoming Germany but that's only three minutes long.

By the way, Ron Unz,..that guy who manages The Unz Review, is Jewish.

No, you must watch the two that YouTube has deleted. It's crucial to your understanding of this question.

LMAO.

Is this the point in the conversation where I have to travel to The Temple in Los Angeles and tithe 48%?

WTF dude?

LOL. I'm making a point. YouTube and Google are being purged.

Easy with the all caps, no reason to stop being a lady.

My point is that if he continued to go east, and only east, nobody would have gave a fugk.

The problem with people like you is that you're so easily deceived, you can't stop yourself from falling down the rabbit holes. That's why you're all constantly changing the narrative or redirecting from your original point.

Look at Bristoe's posts in this thread. He's so obsessed with the Jew angle that he has convinced himself Germany had no fault in WWII. That the Nazi's were harmless because his Pollock in-laws said so.

You're no better than communists. You willingly blind yourselves from fact.

But, you're not.

I don't disagree that those are leftish leaning machines. They ban good videos all the time.

So you still haven't shown me anything that proves any of your ideals or points.

When you get right down to it, there's not a lot of difference between the Nazis going into an area and killing Russian civilians, and the British bombing Dresden.
Of course, it can be said that the Germans started it by bombing London.

Any way you look at it, the civilian population of Europe suffered big time during WW2, mostly at the hands of the Soviets and Germans, but also to a lesser degree,
by the Allies as well. But, it was war, and that's what happens in a war.

You and Birdwatcher should get an apartment together.

But, you're not.

I don't disagree that those are leftish leaning machines. They ban good videos all the time.

So you still haven't shown me anything that proves any of your ideals or points.

Some quotes regarding the Nuremberg Trials.

"The fact that the Nazi leaders are criminals has already been established [by their having been accused by this body]. The task of the Tribunal is only to determine the measure of guilt of each particular person and mete out the necessary punishment -- the sentences."

- Judge Iola T. Nikitchenko (vice-chairman of the Supreme Court of the USSR), announced at the opening of the Nuremberg Trial.

"The entire atmosphere here is unwholesome ... Lawyers, clerks, interpreters and researchers were employed who became Americans only in recent years, whose backgrounds were imbedded in Europe's hatreds and prejudices ... Most of the evidence in the trials was documentary, selected from the large tonnage of captured records. The selection was made by the prosecution. The defense had access only to those documents which the prosecution considered material to the case ... the trials were to have convinced the Germans of the guilt of their leaders. They convinced the Germans merely that their leaders lost the war to tough conquerors."

- Charles F. Wennerstrum, Iowa Supreme Court justice serving as presiding judge in the Nuremberg trial of German generals

"Jackson [Chief US prosecutor] is away conducting his high-grade lynching party in Nuremberg ... This is a little too sanctimonious a fraud to meet my old-fashioned ideas ... I wonder how some of those who preside at the trials would justify some of the acts of their own governments if they were placed in the status of the accused."

- US Supreme Court Chief Justice Harlan Fiske Stone

"The Nuremberg trials are so repugnant to the Anglo-Saxon principles of justice that we must forever be ashamed of that page in our history ... The Nuremberg farce represents a revenge policy at its worst."

- US Representative Lawrence H. Smith of Wisconsin

"As a representative of the American people I desire to say that what is taking place in Nuremberg, Germany, is a disgrace to the United States... A racial minority, two and a half years after the war closed, are in Nuremberg not only hanging German soldiers but trying German businessmen in the name of the United States."

- Congressman John Rankin of Mississippi

"The trial of the vanquished by the victors cannot be impartial no matter how it is hedged about with the forms of justice ... About this whole judgment there is the spirit of vengeance, and vengeance is seldom justice. The hanging of the eleven men convicted will be a blot on the American record which we will long regret. In these trials we have accepted the Russian idea of the purpose of trials -- government policy and not justice -- with little relation to Anglo-Saxon heritage. By clothing policy in the forms of legal procedure, we may discredit the whole idea of justice in Europe for years to come."

- US Senator Robert A. Taft

"The Nuremberg trial constitutes a real threat to the basic conceptions of justice which it has taken mankind thousands of years to establish."

- NYU Law Professor, Milton R. Konvitz

"I thought at the time and still think that the Nuremberg trials were unprincipled. Law was created ex post facto to suit the passion and clamor of the time."

- Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas

"I thought the trials in general bordered upon international lunacy. I thought it particularly unfortunate, inappropriate, ill-conceived and dupably injudicious that the United States should have been cast in the leading role as prosecutors and implementators of the trials of German participants or principals."

- US Rear Admiral H. Lamont Pugh, former Navy Surgeon General and Commanding Officer of the National Naval Medical Center

“I am frankly opposed to this war criminal stuff. It is not cricket, and is Semitic."

- US General George S. Patton

For additional reading, I suggest David Irving's Nuremberg, The Last Battle.

When interviewed years after the war German ace Gunther Rahl in response to all the horrors of the war said;

"War is nasty business"

now Gunther and his high scoring fellow German ace, Erich Hartmann were regularly invited to the UK and USA
by allied veteran pilots in good fellowship. Erich got invited so often that he regularly turned the sincere invitations
down as he got older.

Of course there are those that had no sympathy for any German serviceman or even civilian for that matter,
according to some they were all 'terrible Nazis' and the only good one was a dead one...ie; Dresden got what it deserved
as did other German cities {and Japanese cities as well]

guys like Gunther and Erich and many other germans allowed the German war machine to advance and create
swathe of immense suffering and destruction, AND since such efforts supported and allowed the Ensatzgruppen
to operate then surely they were no better..?..they were all part of the one big nasty German war machine objective.

But some say to only punish the Einsatzgruppen head honchos, ..some say punish the whole EinsatzGruppen , ...some say
extend that to the various German armies that supported the Einstazgruppen,..some say screw the whole German nation
and obliterate their whole military and their civilian peoples.

I tend to take more the perspective of those allied pilot vets I mentioned above who sincerely befriended some of the most
efficient and combat ruthless Axis warriors of the war ... and Ben Ferencz who selectively prosecuted the Einsatzgruppen.

but because I think more like Ben Ferencz and RoninPhx considers such mindsets belonging to dipSchitts
Then we can deduce Ron believes Ben was a dipSchitt. ..some might even say Ben was part nazi sympathiser
for letting all those Einsatzgruppen villains of the hook.

The world would be a so much better place if it was run Rons way.... .. unfortunately that's just the kind of mindset
that tends to spawn dictators ,despots and tyrants.

boy y ou really like to twist words around, don't you, but you are still just a small peckered dipshit.
and just for the record i never said ben was a dipshit, i left that honor for you.

Starman, i am not sure which one of the perenial dipshi*s you are that hang around this forum, but the dipshi*t part is correct.
you ought to stay off commenting on this stuff, if you can't see the difference of a nazi walking across the bodies of the wounded and dieing,
given them the head shot, or extermination of 90% or better of a group of people with no respect for man woman and child

you really are a sick sick individual

WTF?

If Germany had surrendered, Dresden would not have been bombed. Bombing those civilians had nothing to do with who they were.

The death squads in Russia were targeting Jewish civilians because of who they were, in areas then subjugated by the Germans.

There were Russians manning theAtlantic Wall in June of 1944, IIRC there were even Koreans. And as Spielberg depicted in Private Ryan there were also Chzecks ( the two guys outside the pillbox trying to surrender).

It is doubtful that their being in the German army in 1944 had much of anything to do with their ideology.

And your point is stupid because Britain and France had already declared war on him.

Did it ever occur to you that maybe.... Hitler and his Staff put more than 12 minutes of thought into this idea.

Maybe?

Kinda... "Read the room" type of endeavor?

Maybe?

Feel free to type it all out JoeBob.

I’ll make you look like the dumb fugk you are tomorrow.

Take your time.

This is well documented. I guess you can start with David Irving's book on the subject.

When it comes to history and facts, my money is on Travis.



Even though I can't figure out when he has time to read and watch all those movies when he's drunk all the time....

You might want to google the word strategic.

If you like to read:

https://www.unz.com/proberts/the-lies-about-world-war-ii/

World War II was initiated by the British and French declaration of war on Germany, not by a surprise blitzkrieg from Germany. The utter rout and collapse of the British and French armies was the result of Britain declaring a war for which Britain was unprepared to fight and of the foolish French trapped by a treaty with the British, who quickly deserted their French ally, leaving France at Germany’s mercy.

Germany’s mercy was substantial. Hitler left a large part of France and the French colonies unoccupied and secure from war under a semi-independent government under Petain. For his service in protecting a semblance of French independence, Petain was sentenced to death by Charles de Gaulle after the war for collaboration with Germany, an unjust charge.

In Britain, Churchill was out of power. He figured a war would put him back in power. No Britisher could match Churchill’s rhetoric and orations. Or determination. Churchill desired power, and he wanted to reproduce the amazing military feats of his distinguished ancestor, the Duke of Marlborough, whose biography Churchill was writing and who defeated after years of military struggle France’s powerful Sun King, Louis XIV, the ruler of Europe.

In contrast to the British aristocrat, Hitler was a man of the people. He acted for the German people. The Versailles Treaty had dismembered Germany. Parts of Germany were confiscated and given to France, Belgium, Denmark, Poland, and Czechoslovakia. As Germany had not actually lost the war, being the occupiers of foreign territory when Germany agreed to a deceptive armistice, the loss of approximately 7 million German people to Poland and Czechoslovakia, where Germans were abused, was not considered a fair outcome.

Hell,...Great Britain built its empire by sailing around the world and conquering cultures that barely had the means to fight back. Basically, they were global bullies.

It got too big for its britches when Churchill decided to involve England in Germany's squabble,...had to beg weapons from America.

It’s America. You’re entitled to be as wrong as he is.

Facts really can’t be ignored. Britain and France declared war on Germany for invading Poland in compliance with their treaty with Poland while ignoring that Stalin also invaded Poland in violation of their treaty with Poland. Then, six years later and after 50 to a 100 million deaths, they willingly allowed Stalin to gobble up Poland and institute 45 years of unparralleled despotism, political persecution, and mass death. The Soviets didn’t even close down Auschwitz or lots of the other camps. They simply kept them open and filled them with political prisoners of the Communist regime.

You can attempt to explain them, qualify them, or insist that things are more complex. But at the heart of the matter, the things stated above are facts.

I just love the way everyone in this thread has to cluck cluck and virtue signal their disapproval of someone who strays from the narrative.

It used to be that Hitler killed a bunch of Jews in the course of the war. And I don’t for one second doubt that he did. I’m convinced that he did. But if you watch the History Channel or some other approved purveyor of official truth these days that is morphing and has morphed into teaching that the only reason Hitler went to war was because of his hatred of Jews.

Make Hitler and all Germans racist who want nothing more than to kill Jews. Make it so that the entire reason for the war was to kill Jews. Then call everyone a racist for anything. Don’t like immigration. You’re a racist. Think Muslims might want to kill some of us? You’re a racist. Are you white? You’re a racist. And if your a racist? Who else was a racist? Hitler that’s who. You’re like Hitler. And Hitler was the most evil man ever who just wanted to kill everyone who wasn’t white, so you must want that too since you are a racist and all racist are like Hitler.

TRH,

As far as those quotes are concerned I don't disagree with any of them. Everybody knows that those Neuremberg trials were just a big bullschit grandstanding and used as red meat for the Europeans. But, schit happens. Victors, spoils, yada, yada. But you'll never see me defending those trials. You'll also never find my admonishing our bringing SS officer's to the CONUS to work for us.

As far as that YouTube video... I don't where to start man. I gave it an honest to goodness 40 minutes and I'll finish it up tomorrow but that is one gigantic piece of fugking garbage.

For one thing it takes place during the time of contrarians realizing they can sell copies of their bullschit "expose" at gun shows for $40 a pop. For another it's conducted by a teenaged late bloomer that appears to be doing a 60's era impression of a diamond salesman.

He's interviewing tour guides. Do you know what tour guides do? Or get paid? They're not subject matter experts.

If you think that "supervisor" is some sort of authority on the ins and outs of the alleged holocaust, how can you discount all the other countless interviews of people that actually lived through the holocaust? This is a contradiction and makes you look foolish. You're admonishing thousands of accounts while accepting an un-vetted source from 1992 with a bad haircut and horrific shirt.

The lids were there, they weren't there... WTF? That kid isn't qualified to examine aerial footage. Do you have any idea how much qualified people are paid to review aerial footage from that era?

"lookout lids?" Uhhhh, that's not a thing my friend. I've been in bunkers. Never seen a "lookout lid". But if I ever did the first question out of my mind would be "Who is the dumb sumbtich up there taking the lid off and on so we can see if the bombers are coming?"

Sweet fugkin' Christ. I am an objective person and I don't mind reviewing other people's material but you need to cook up something better than that piece of garbage. That ain't evidence. That's comedy.

Good post. While we hung the Nazis after the war was over, we willingly turned a blind eye to what "our" side had done, and still do.

It was no different in the War Between the States. In the border states, partisans fighting under the Confederate flag were executed when caught, while those fighting for the Union, who were just as guilty as those on the other side when it came to targeting civilians, were not. Just as in WW2, the winners wrote the history and decided what was fact what was not.

I made it pretty clear that if Hitler went east, nobody would have given a fugk.

He chose not to. His people supported it.

If you wanna pick a fight two times in a row, you better be capable of winning. Especially if you already got your ass stomped the first go around.

Needless to say, the 1,000 Year Reich missed the mark by a smidge and the only person at fault for that, is Germany.

Facts really can’t be ignored. Britain and France declared war on Germany for invading Poland in compliance with their treaty with Poland while ignoring that Stalin also invaded Poland in violation of their treaty with Poland. Then, six years later and after 50 to a 100 million deaths, they willingly allowed Stalin to gobble up Poland........

In a nutshell. And BTW, my views on jews is well documented here. Just as they are for my opinion of Germans and to those who insist the Holocaust didn't happen, either have an agenda or lack the intellectual acumen to recognize the German's ability to accomplish a task.

If the Holocaust was that Jews, among many others, suffered, and were held captive, and mistreated by Germans,

"MISTREATED", the new definition of mass extermination, torture and hideous scientific experiments... rich..

Let Keith Carradine lay it out for you: Here

PS Just kidding. Not actually Keith Carradine.

Sorry. I don’t have time to play chess with a pigeon like you.

I just love the way everyone in this thread has to cluck cluck and virtue signal their disapproval of someone who strays from the narrative.

WW II is the edifice upon which our entire modern world is built. If you question the official narrative, you question the foundation of everything today. As I see and learn how increasingly rotten and deceitful everything is in this world today, I increasingly have to examine official histories of the past.

I don’t buy it hook line and sinker. WW II is becoming a bit like the Civil War. Instead of time healing wounds and allowing more thorough and thoughtful research, things have hardened into accepted opinions and orthodoxy that stifle anything that even could conceivably threaten the orthodoxy.

And I’ve seen it change in my life. It used to be that Hitler killed a bunch of Jews in the course of the war. And I don’t for one second doubt that he did. I’m convinced that he did. But if you watch the History Channel or some other approved purveyor of official truth these days that is morphing and has morphed into teaching that the only reason Hitler went to war was because of his hatred of Jews.

Make Hitler and all Germans racist who want nothing more than to kill Jews. Make it so that the entire reason for the war was to kill Jews. Then call everyone a racist for anything. Don’t like immigration. You’re a racist. Think Muslims might want to kill some of us? You’re a racist. Are you white? You’re a racist. And if your a racist? Who else was a racist? Hitler that’s who. You’re like Hitler. And Hitler was the most evil man ever who just wanted to kill everyone who wasn’t white, so you must want that too since you are a racist and all racist are like Hitler.

The brainwashing is strong with this one, Obi Wan.

Of course before the whole thing started, everybody KNEW that the USA would throw its weight in the ring.

I mean Lindbergh spoke for a whole nation when he was chomping at the bIt with war fever.....

So England and France, just twenty-one years after losing a whole generation of young men in the Great War, should have declared war on Germany AND Russia. Of course, being psychic, they knew going in what the scale of the conflict would actually turn out to be (Blitzkreig a surprise? Naah, that’s prob’ly Jewish propaganda) Of course, the voting public in both Britain and France would have fully supported the biggest war possible, so declaring war on Russia too would have received overwhelming public support.

Likewise the Allies WANTED Russia to take Poland after WWII because obviously we otherwise could have beaten Russia easily, Europe really wasn’t in that bad of a mess and the American, French and British people would have jumped right in and supported starting up another major war that could cost countless more lives.

People like yourself are one of the main reasons people can't have rational discourse about the Holocaust in 2019.

I took the time to listen to your source and explained to you why it's laughed at and even not allowed to be published. It's idiotic. And when you reference it as fact, it makes you look idiotic.

You're welcome.

Thank god for bitchute, since Jewtube doesn't want people to learn the truth and got rid of 100s of 1000s of vids on these matters recently.

Everyone, start using bitchute.

I love that you have time to type out this emotionally driven garbage.

Who on here said Hitler invaded Poland for the sole purpose of hunting Jews?

Why do you think ANYTHING shouldn’t be allowed to be published and that it is a good thing if it isn’t?

Damned good question. Not very American.

So was Churchill pm when England declared war on Germany? Think this out before you answer..

Are you sure you have the right name there? Charles Lindberg called for restraint to the point that he was considered a pacifist and the Army refused to take him back. He changed his position after the war started and certainly did his part within those limitations but to say he was chomping at the bit is not accurate. A very good read on Lindberg that included a lot of his Post-Paris flight life is The Aviators by Winston Groom. It's also about Rickenbacher and Jimmy Doolittle and while I've read both their autobiographies it had some other good insights.

It just goes to show that they weren’t all that high minded as today’s propaganda would have you believe. Britain was simply following its centuries old policy of opposing the strongest continental power. They didn’t care about Poland, yet they continually put Poland up to the fight and encouraged its intransigence regarding the Danzig corridor.

Well this is progress, in just one exchange we’ve recognized the role of internal politics in the foreign policy of a free nation.

“Britain” wasn’t a single entity deciding anything. In fact their Prime Minister at the time tried to appease Germany and likely would have stayed in office had Germany complied to any degree at all. Churchill at that time was a voice crying in the wilderness, and even when he got in office “Britain”, as reflected in those elected officials who were pacifists, very nearly folded and came to terms after the fall of France.

Having grown up in an England that was still England, I can state that WHY Churchill prevailed came from plain ol’ English pride and reluctance to admit defeat among the common people, even in the face of long odds.

“Encouraging Polish intransigence?” That’s right, the Poles brought it on themselves by acting in their own interests, likewise those encouraging Poland musta KNOWN Hitler was gonna invade

Why do you think ANYTHING shouldn’t allowed to be published and that it is a good thing if it isn’t?

Let Keith Carradine lay it out for you: Here

PS Just kidding. Not actually Keith Carradine.

No one, but the way you hammer anyone who questions the official approved narrative puts you in league with those who do.

This whole thread is about guys hammering the guy on here who questions the Holocaust. The Holocaust is all anyone talks about when they talk about WW II now. And it was a fricking sideshow. It was insignificant in the course of the war and fewer people died in it by a long shot than did in the last year of the war.

I have no idea WTF you're babbling about at this point.

This thread was about a documentary regarding Nazi Death Squads. Some people want to claim they didn't exist.

They did.

Ok, TRH, Bristoe and JoeBob be like:

1. Allies are the real aggressors.
2. Churchill is a meanie.
3. Hitler isn't such a bad guy, he's sexy and very articulate!
4. The Jews deserved everything they had comin to them, except it never really happened, cuz a terribly made video says so.
5. Germans were yodeling pacifists leading up to the war.
6. Only German civilians were targeted in the war.
7. Poland was really half German, half Russian anyway - treaties be damned!

That about right?

Hell they'll throw you in jail in Europe for disagreeing with the Holocaust narrative.

The commies won.

The funniest thing is that they're arrogant about it.

Ok, TRH, Bristoe and JoeBob be like:

1. Allies are the real aggressors.
2. Churchill is a meanie.
3. Hitler isn't such a bad guy, he's sexy and very articulate!
4. The Jews deserved everything they had comin to them, except it never really happened, cuz a terribly made video says so.
5. Germans were yodeling pacifists leading up to the war.
6. Only German civilians were targeted in the war.
7. Poland was really half German, half Russian anyway - treaties be damned!

That about right?

You have to be when your entire belief system is conspiracy theories stacked on conspiracy theories.

[



This whole thread is about guys hammering the guy on here who questions the Holocaust. The Holocaust is all anyone talks about when they talk about WW II now. And it was a fricking sideshow. It was insignificant in the course of the war and fewer people died in it by a long shot than did in the last year of the war.

Why do you say I deny the Holocaust? I explicitly have said that believed it happened.

Agree with your "hammering" analogy, suffice to say anybody who denied the Holocaust ever happened or characterizes mass exterminations, torture, mass murder and human experiments as "mistreating" SHOULD be hammered. Agreed on the sideshow issue. Had we loved the jews as much as we do now because its fashionable, we and every other country would not have kept that infamous ship full of jews from seeking asylum. Maybe the meskins can try that angle to get in if we build the wall.

Does it matter? You know what they say about feathers and flocks!

Well I posted a documentary about strategic bombing also.

Did you watch that?

Well I posted a documentary about strategic bombing also.

Did you watch that?

Did you watch this one?

Spoken like a real NAZI.

WWII was a product of the screwjob foisted on Germany at Versailles. Part of that was the whole Polish issue, specifically the Danzig Corridor which was an abomination. The allies were too stupid to realize Germans aren't like the french and even refused to help the Weimar Republic. The reparations were so egregious, they were to last into the 1980s..

The result was Hitler was able to capture a justified German nationalism and revenge for Versailles. All the frogs did was build that ridiculous Maginot line (proving once again their FEAR of the Germans that lasts to this day) and let Hitler take back the Rhineland, Austria and adding insult to cowardice and along with the Brits, let them have the Sudetenland. The jews were just a convenient (and to a certain extent justifiable) scapegoat to blame.

It's fun to argue "what ifs", all colored by our biases. Some say had Hitler just gone east WWII would not have happened. Maybe so, but anybody with a modicum of intelligence (thus leaving some here out of the discussion) think that we (US, the Brits, French, etc) could have lived in a world with an ever more powerful Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan, well you're just plain stupid. And yes in the end, we just swapped the Nazis for the Soviets and spent another fifty years fighting the Cold War. But to say that Churchill WANTED war simply for personal glory, I find so insulting as to slug somebody in the face.

You do know that defending Germans in WW2 is throwing a lot in the Nazi pot?

I hope you also realize that Nazi's were socialists just like Commies are, they just keep changing their names when people figure out what lies behind the veil. I for one am smiling at the fact that they have fertilized the European and Russian farmlands during that war.

I never quite understood the fascination some of you have for Nazi's and the erections you get for justifying their actions. Don't waste your time trying to find the post where I demonstrate any support for the ckocksuckers, there isn't one.

What conspiracy theory do I believe in and have articulated in this thread?

Seriously, why is it that the deaths of six million people are pretty much the focus of every discussion and every newly published material about a war where AT LEAST 55 million CIVILIANS died?

Hell, in the US we don’t even talk about India in the war very much and they lost around 3 million people in it. China lost 25 or 30 million. You will rarely see anything about those countries unless it is about the Rape of Nanking. The war in India and China would be the largest conflict in human history with the most casualties by itself and yet, we focus on six million people almost exclusively.

What are you talking about? Which one?

Exactly.

So why is World War II different from practically every other war where people can rationally discuss the motivations and decisions of the various leaders on the various sides without being labeled all sorts of names. After all, most of us here were born after it happened and in another 50 years or so there will be very few alive who even knew a WW II veteran at some point in their lives. So why the vitriol?

I think you know why.

So why is World War II different from practically every other war where people can rationally discuss the motivations and decisions of the various leaders on the various sides without being labeled all sorts of names. After all, most of us here were born after it happened and in another 50 years or so there will be very few alive who even knew a WW II veteran at some point in their lives. So why the vitriol?

You labeled me, incorrectly.

Anyone can read into whatever they want in this country or wherever they are, I don't really care. But I don't have to listen to them or take anything they say at face value - at least for now.

I have no vitriol.

This thread started out with interesting material and questions to follow the OP and then a few turn it into a Jew hating, Nazi sympathizing schittshow.

If you really believe the only material left to study about WW2 is limited to the holocaust, you're obviously willfully being ignorant. That is defined as stupidity. I believe it is the duty of those around such stupidity to kindly offer a rebuking or worse...been that way forever since Genesis.

Shalom!

If you will tell me which one, I’ll tell you.

So why is World War II different from practically every other war where people can rationally discuss the motivations and decisions of the various leaders on the various sides without being labeled all sorts of names. After all, most of us here were born after it happened and in another 50 years or so there will be very few alive who even knew a WW II veteran at some point in their lives. So why the vitriol?

EINSATSGRUPPEN - The Nazi Death Squads

There's vitriol surrounding every war.

WWII has more than others because Germany documented so much of it, so well.

There are loads of false information regarding the Holocaust and I do think it's important to educate your kids and others about those in accuracies. But you can do so without throwing a bunch of nonsense into the air and blathering like an idiot.

You mean people that view things objectively and know history?

Yeah. You sound like a blathering idiot to us.

Especially when you haven’t even read the thread you’re blathering all over.

One of my WV high school teachers was in the US Army unit that liberated Dachau. One day in 1956 he spent two hours with our class, detailing the horrors of that place. He had dozens of photographs. Yep, some SS camp guards died there:


There exists a scumbag Hitler/Nazi admiring bunch of neo-Nazis called the Institute For Historical Review who are attempting to put a pretty face on Hitler and his murderous Nazis. They whine about US GIs killing SS troops while giving the murderous SS a pass on their atrocities.

The IHR says there were no crematoriums or gas chambers.

You’re really not much of a history guy or thinker.

Sure you have vitriol because you can’t even accurately or honestly respond to the question. You have to throw up the straw man that I said that the only material left to study is limited to the Holocaust. I never said that. I said that increasingly the Holocaust dominates every single discussion of WW II, that many newly written works revolve around it, and that popular organs of accepted thought such as the History Channel increasingly would have you believe that the only reason for the war was because Hitler wished to kill Jews.

One of my WV high school teachers was in the US Army unit that liberated Dachau. One day in 1956 he spent two hours with our class, detailing the horrors of that place. He had dozens of photographs. Yep, some SS camp guards died there:


There exists a scumbag Hitler/Nazi admiring bunch of neo-Nazis called the Institute For Historical Review who are attempting to put a pretty face on Hitler and his murderous Nazis. They whine about US GIs killing SS troops while giving the murderous SS a pass on their atrocities.

The IHR says there were no crematoriums or gas chambers.

You remind me of a teenage girl that personalizes everything her boyfriend talks about.

Alright!

I'm guessing this is your question; I'm not sure, as it doesn't end in a ?:

"So why is World War II different from practically every other war where people can rationally discuss the motivations and decisions of the various leaders on the various sides without being labeled all sorts of names."

I answered with this:

"This thread started out with interesting material and questions to follow the OP and then a few turn it into a Jew hating, Nazi sympathizing schittshow.
If you really believe the only material left to study about WW2 is limited to the holocaust, you're obviously willfully being ignorant. That is defined as stupidity. I believe it is the duty of those around such stupidity to kindly offer a rebuking or worse...been that way forever since Genesis."

I also said this:

"Anyone can read into whatever they want in this country or wherever they are, I don't really care. But I don't have to listen to them or take anything they say at face value - at least for now."

Then the second part of what you said, which btw had nothing to do with the OP, was this:

"After all, most of us here were born after it happened and in another 50 years or so there will be very few alive who even knew a WW II veteran at some point in their lives."

AAAAANNNNNNd you followed up with this:

"I said that increasingly the Holocaust dominates every single discussion of WW II, that many newly written works revolve around it, and that popular organs of accepted thought such as the History Channel increasingly would have you believe that the only reason for the war was because Hitler wished to kill Jews."

Which has nothing to do with the OP and demonstrates you were REALLY doing this:

"This thread started out with interesting material and questions to follow the OP and then a few turn it into a Jew hating, Nazi sympathizing schittshow." (I said that - which actually did answer the question!)



So, even though the point you're really trying to make, which has nothing to do with the OP, is that the Jews are rewriting WW2 history to fit the holocaust narrative.

So, I stand corrected and realize you're pusssy is really sore that I left your point off the list from the others creating a schittshow. I'll make the correction so you can now be happy about being a part of the Bande:

Ok, TRH, Bristoe and JoeBob be like:

1. Allies are the real aggressors.
2. Churchill is a meanie.
3. Hitler isn't such a bad guy, he's sexy and very articulate!
4. The Jews deserved everything they had comin to them, except it never really happened, cuz a terribly made video says so.
5. Germans were yodeling pacifists leading up to the war.
6. Only German civilians were targeted in the war.
7. Poland was really half German, half Russian anyway - treaties be damned!
8. Them filthy Jews are rewriting history

Feel better now?


Oh, since I can't help myself, you do have a major problem with the Jewish Revisionism theory: We also fought the Imperial Japanese in that war and as far as I know there is a TON of footage regarding such information that the "holocausters" have yet to rewrite!

Yep!

Geh dich ficken!

The news media, owned and run lock, stock, and barrel, by the Jews and the Communists have succeeded in making one thing, and one thing only, the focal point of WW2.........the supposed death of 6 million Jews, aka the Holocaust. Nothing else matters.

The news media, owned and run lock, stock, and barrel, by the Jews and the Communists have succeeded in making one thing, and one thing only, the focal point of WW2.........the supposed death of 6 million Jews, aka the Holocaust. Nothing else matters.

The fact that the 6 million number is probably too high, matters not.

The fact that untold millions of other people died at the hands of people that were supposed to be our allies, matters not.

The fact that "our" side was every bit as dishonest and deceiving about events that happened, matters not.

There is too much evidence, fully documented, that shows that Jews were targeted by the Nazis for extermination.....sorry TRH, they were....but so were many other groups of people. The Nazis were ruthless, but not as much as the Soviets, who's record of putting people to death makes the Germans look like amateurs. Yet, because we won, the truth about civilian deaths has been hidden so as to allow the Jews to make sure that "theirs" is the only one that matters......and many of you fools on here have swallowed their story as the whole truth and nothing but.

Arguably the most disastrous decision in recent world history was Wilson’s to enter WW I. Because of the American Declaration, the Germans knew that their only hope was to win before American troops arrived in enough numbers to swing the tide. The only way for them to do that was to knock Russia out of the war and bring those troops to the West. So, they put Lenin on a train to Russia just a few days after America declared war.

Possibly without America getting in the war there would have been no Communist Russia, no revolutions sweeping Europe, Germany could have held on for a negotiated peace, and the entire century since would have been completely different and better.

james, i find myself agreeing with you through the months more times than not.
Uncle stalin was as much evil incarnate as was hitler.
The soviets did it the easy way, they just starved a bunch of people. The ukraine starts just a few miles away from my grandmother's place of birth in slovakia.

Ron, the only point I've tried to make in my posts on this thread has been that the Nazis were not the only criminals in WW2. Stalin's, and later on Mao's, policies that led to the deaths of millions of innocent peoples, resulted in far more deaths than the Germans could muster. But, because of the Jew's insistence that the Holocaust must be the only one that matters, the world cares very little about anything else.

No Jew ever insisted that the Holocaust is the only one that matters.
The lies being told over and over about the Holocaust do matter.
That others did the same thing is no defense.

Another must see, barred from YouTube: Here

One serious question, TRH:

Do you teach and/or promote in any way your personal Holocaust denier, antisemitic opinions and reference these sources where you get your information to your young students in or outside of school hours?

No Jew ever insisted that the Holocaust is the only one that matters.
The lies being told over and over about the Holocaust do matter.
That others did the same thing is no defense.

Source?

TRH,

Your first video, and your adamant stance that it is credible, removes all credibility.

Asking this question gain, TRH... https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbt...cs/13890924/re-germany-wwii#Post13890924

It's merely a citation to a book written in the 1980s containing a statement by a British sergeant who admits to torturing a confession from Rudolf Höss, and threatening reprisals against his family should he refuse to confess operating a death camp. You don't need to consider me a credible source for that to be persuasive.

No one even claims there were homicidal gas chambers at Dachau.

TRH, I find myself in agreement with you often and I think you’re a gentleman of the first order. Your statement above is beyond inaccurate and it highlights how little understanding you have on this subject. While it’s true that Dachau wasn’t an “extermination camp” in the way that Auschwitz-Birkenau was that doesn’t mean that there wasn’t gas chambers at Dachau.

I’ve been to Dachau I’ve walked the grounds, I’ve been in Barake X. I’ve seen the ovens and I walked through the showers that masqueraded as gas chamber there. I saw the tubes that they used to drop the Zylon B into the chambers and I have photographic proof that there was ABSOLUTELY a gas chamber at Dachau. The propaganda that you use as a resource for your knowledge on this subject leaves much to be desired and makes your credibility <on this topic> highly suspect.

If any were gassed at Dachau it wasn’t many. Only 31,951 people died at Dachau with 15,000 of those being from November 1944 to the end of the war.

Oh ok all if forgiving then. lets pretend this didn't happen then or lets just downplay it. Of all the atrocities of Hitler's Third Reich, Treblinka is one of the most mind-boggling. Historians estimate that about 900,000 Jews were murdered at this concentration camp in Nazi-occupied Poland over a mere 16 months

If any were gassed at Dachau it wasn’t many. Only 31,951 people died at Dachau with 15,000 of those being from November 1944 to the end of the war.

Yeah because they shipped most if not all of them to Poland to be executed. I truly don't understand you, you downplay oh only 31,951 died at this camp so yeah the Germans weren't that bad. Then you run off at the mouth with the whole the allies killed more civilians on there bombing runs. WTF is wrong with you.. the allies were not systematically lining people up and shipping them off to be gassed.

Look up the phrase TOTAL WAR.

JoeBob, I agree that “it wasn’t many” that were gassed, hung, shot or otherwise murdered at Dachau, it wasn’t the type of camp that Treblinka was but it is a good and living representation of the atrocities that happened albeit on a much smaller and more “civilized” scale. 😉

I can tell you that being there was an extraordinarily moving experience for me and I don’t have any personal affection for Jews, gypsies or homosexuals.. My affections are for humanity and to that extent I’m not ashamed to admit that I cried. No innocent person of any religion or persuasion should suffer the kind inhumanity that those camps brought down upon them.

Oftentimes when discussing this atrocity we focus on those that died there and forget about those that survived. Those that were raped, starved and tortured or those that survived the horrors of their experiments are considered “lucky”. The pain that the living and dead suffered is beyond my comprehension as is my ability to understand how one human being can to do such grotesque things to another human being. God forbid you were a child with a twin brother or sister, your short life would likely end slowly and painfully.

I’ve been there. It’s a few miles from Munich.

JoeBob, Your attempt at drawing a moral equivalence between bombing and the systematic extermination of millions of men, women and children in gas chambers or firing squads or the smashing of infants against a light post is ridiculous. Jorge addressed the strategic goal of the bombing campaign. I’m sure that if “we” had the choice back then we would’ve preferred that the only deaths would’ve been those of enemy combatants. In a “perfect war” there’d be no civilian casualties but there’s no such thing. We didn’t want to kill innocent French civilians, we weren’t at war with France but dropping bombs in our attempt to soften the German defenses in prelude to our landing in Normandy meant that many civilians died. That’s the terrible thing about war, innocent people die. The death of civilians in war is inevitable and is, in and of itself, not a war crime. Targeting ONLY innocent civilians, civilians in the “care and custody” of the military is a crime and the Germans turned that into an art form.

I have no idea WTF you're babbling about at this point.

This thread was about a documentary regarding Nazi Death Squads. Some people want to claim they didn't exist.

They did.

Ron, the only point I've tried to make in my posts on this thread has been that the Nazis were not the only criminals in WW2. Stalin's, and later on Mao's, policies that led to the deaths of millions of innocent peoples, resulted in far more deaths than the Germans could muster. But, because of the Jew's insistence that the Holocaust must be the only one that matters, the world cares very little about anything else.

Auschwitz, 437,402 Hungarian Jews were killed between May 14th and July 8th, 1944. Yeah those Germans were just a bunch of fun loving guys looking to have a great time..

See, it’s stuff like this that allows the disinformation to creep in. Dachau was not an extermination camp for Jews. It was a concentration camp for political prisoners. The extermination camps were in the East. Dachau was just outside Munich. There were only (yeah I know) 32,000 documented deaths at Dachau. The Jews found at Dachau at the end of the war were transferred from the East ahead of the advancing Russians and the mounds of bodies were because those poor malnourished wretches from the East succumbed to a cholera and typhoid epidemic.

That is all documented and easily proved. And it also provides fodder for Holocaust deniers who can say that there never were any extermination camps when you throw around Dachau as an example of an extermination camp. The real extermination camps for the most part, were liberated by the Russians who hardly mentioned them at the time.

I don't see the sense of comparing the allied bombing campaign to the attempted extermination of the Jews. While bombing cities is abhorrent, it is the way wars are conducted. Genocide, on the other hand, is in no way a component of warfare---and especially within your own borders. Definitely not apples to apples.

The evidence was in black and white and signed. The Germans were meticulous record keepers and their attention to detail sealed their fate. Literally tons of documents that spelled it out plainly and accounted for virtually every victim were more than enough evidence to convict the accused. A confession is NOT required for conviction, the millions of pages of documents were more than enough evidence for a conviction. None of those on trial ever denied that it happened or denied their role in it they merely used the “I was ordered to do it” defense. None of the accused expressed any remorse but rather they said they’d do it again “to my own sister if ordered”.

Why? Is it more moral to drop a bomb on a baby than to shoot him or gas him? Dead is dead right?

That does not merit a serious response. I'm pretty sure you understand English better than that.

While bombing cities is abhorrent, it is the way wars are conducted. Genocide, on the other hand, is in no way a component of warfare--
-and especially within your own borders. Definitely not apples to apples.

Why? Is it more moral to drop a bomb on a baby than to shoot him or gas him? Dead is dead right?

So killing isn’t part of war?

LMAO.

Now you don't speak english?

So killing isn't part of genocide?

Genocide is just war by another name.

Genocide is just war by another name.

Targeting ONLY innocent civilians, civilians in the “care and custody” of the military is a crime

and the Germans turned that into an art form.

Asking this question gain, TRH... https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbt...cs/13890924/re-germany-wwii#Post13890924

they have trouble saying that they believe the Allies had a higher moral standing and good reason to bomb- incinerate
women and children in European and Japanese cities, ..even the French cities with no German occupation.

Most of us have grown up believing that WW2 was not just the Allies versus the Axis, but good against evil. While we've all heard about the bad things the Germans and the Japanese did, and make no mistake about it, they did, we've been led to believe that our side was like the knight in shining armor, who rode to the rescue. While the history books are full of what the Axis powers did to innocent civilians, there's nary a word about anything the Allies did, and there are reasons for that.

We can blame the Germans for killing Jews and anyone else they didn't like, and say it was wrong. But, we just can't bring ourselves to say that our practice of "strategic" bombing resulted in the killing of thousands of civilians who were every bit as innocent as those civilians the Nazis were killing.

My biggest complaint about all of this has been the fact that the sins of Stalin and the Soviets have been swept under the rug, because they were on our side, and are rarely mentioned, while we are constantly reminded that we can't say anything negative about the Holocaust. There are a good many posters on here who will jump all over anyone who questions the account of the Holocaust, yet remain totally mum about ole Joe Stalin and what he did.......and it is pretty well documented that we KNEW what he was doing.

This is one of those things that we all have differing opinions about, as to what did or didn't happen, and whether it can be considered right or wrong. I don't see anyone changing anyone else's mind.