They weren't nitpicking. They were straight up lying in some cases.
For example, the guy claimed that Germans did not plan for the large numbers of POWs that they would capture in the USSR, and that these ended up dying. Now, this isn't right, because the Germans wanted the population of the USSR dead anyway (see General Plan Ost).
They claimed that he was talking about the Holocaust, which is false. They also claimed that it is wrong that the Germans often started murdering people because of overpopulation and because they couldn't feed them, which is acknowledged by mainstream historians.
They don't care about that guy. They want to discredit Tucker, who is a threat to the ruling class.
Now, this isn't right, because the Germans wanted the population of the USSR dead anyway (see General Plan Ost).
Stop spreading that bullshit. Germany didn't even have enough settlers to properly resettle her eastern territories lost after WW1, which were partially ethnically cleansed by Poland, let alone the vast territories of the USSR. Operation Barbarossa was a preemptive strike against the bolshevik threat not an invasion to gain territory.
They also claimed that it is wrong that the Germans often started murdering people because of overpopulation and because they couldn't feed them, which is acknowledged by mainstream historians.
Stop spreading that bullshit. Germany didn't even have enough settlers to properly resettle her eastern territories lost after WW1, which were partially ethnically cleansed by Poland, let alone the vast territories of the USSR.
Who talked about 'resettling', let alone during a war? Fact is, the Germans wanted to starve the inhabitants of the USSR and brutalized them - as well as Soviet POWs.
Operation Barbarossa was a preemptive strike against the bolshevik threat not an invasion to gain territory.
If you start trying to justify Hitler, which is what they are suggesting (or even tricking you into), you play into their game. But Hitler isn't even the topic. I actually think it's a mistake to declare Churchill the "most warlike" and then have to talk about Hitler. Well, it gets clicks. But it's not a useful discussion.
It was an opinion thread. That's what the C/N missed most.
Who talked about 'resettling', let alone during a war? Fact is, the Germans wanted to starve the inhabitants of the USSR and brutalized them - as well as Soviet POWs.
Resettle was the wrong word but the context should have made it pretty clear what I was talking about. Germany did not have enough (willing) settlers to settle her own eastern territories again let alone the USSR. So fuck off with your Generalplan Ost which was imagined by a singular irrelevant individual who held never any position of actual power and was never taken seriously.
Several hundred thousand Soviets fought on the German side as volunteers. At least 350.000 volunteers from all over Europa fought in the German army. Curious, isn't it?
Who talked about 'resettling', let alone during a war? Fact is, the Germans wanted to starve the inhabitants of the USSR and brutalized them - as well as Soviet POWs.
Of course they did. Just as they used deadly masturbation machines, electrified belts, catapults, rollercoasters, hacked Belgian children's hands off in WW1, made lampshades out of skin, used Jews to make soap and so on.
OK, you're retarded.
It is retarded to believe that a nation with no strategic reserves, vastly outgunned, outnumbered and underequipped in every aspect, starts a war to take over Europe and genocide half its population. But I guess you also believe that England and France just wanted to protect Poland despite watching her get spitroasted and not lifting a finger because that would have meant declaring war on the Soviets as well despite the fact that Germany would have collapsed within months if not weeks if they had acted. Instead Poland was immediately sold out to the Soviets alongside half of Europe and the world was thrown into a so called Cold War that drowned Asia, Africa and South America in blood.
Let me tell you a secret. Germany's secret to military success in WW2 wasn't her imaginary all powerful war machine with its legions of super soldiers. It was the mindbogglingly incompetence of her enemies.
What seems to be confusing you?
How about giving me an example besides WW2 propaganda?
But hey. Fortunately the entire German leadership was murdered, the Nuremberg Trial didn't give a shit about evidence, confessions were forced through torture and the last living member of the German government who was imprisoned since 1941 conveniently Epstein'd himself when he was about to be released despite being so old and frail that he wasn't physically able to hang himself.
But I'm sure the mainstream narrative is truthful. Mask on my friend and don't forget to get your next booster else you're gonna murder your Grandma with your hugs.
For example, the guy claimed that Germans did not plan for the large numbers of POWs that they would capture in the USSR, and that these ended up dying. Now, this isn't right, because the Germans wanted the population of the USSR dead anyway (see General Plan Ost).
I think we agree, but let me say:
The treatment of POWs isn't what the thread was about. Not even starvation of Europe. The thread is about a fat drunk named Winston Churchill.
Oh there was a ton of just spew about him. A lot of it was simply slander that is common these days like "Nazi." Others were more insidious. The Wikipedia problem is annoying.
The attempts to deboonk that guy were pathetic. They wanted to nitpick irrelevant facts without addressing the broader narrative.
Mostly they just called everyone and anyone a Nazi though. It was on par with TD.win reactions to a Proud Boys rally.
They weren't nitpicking. They were straight up lying in some cases.
For example, the guy claimed that Germans did not plan for the large numbers of POWs that they would capture in the USSR, and that these ended up dying. Now, this isn't right, because the Germans wanted the population of the USSR dead anyway (see General Plan Ost).
They claimed that he was talking about the Holocaust, which is false. They also claimed that it is wrong that the Germans often started murdering people because of overpopulation and because they couldn't feed them, which is acknowledged by mainstream historians.
They don't care about that guy. They want to discredit Tucker, who is a threat to the ruling class.
Stop spreading that bullshit. Germany didn't even have enough settlers to properly resettle her eastern territories lost after WW1, which were partially ethnically cleansed by Poland, let alone the vast territories of the USSR. Operation Barbarossa was a preemptive strike against the bolshevik threat not an invasion to gain territory.
What the hell are you even talking about?
Who talked about 'resettling', let alone during a war? Fact is, the Germans wanted to starve the inhabitants of the USSR and brutalized them - as well as Soviet POWs.
OK, you're retarded.
What seems to be confusing you?
If you start trying to justify Hitler, which is what they are suggesting (or even tricking you into), you play into their game. But Hitler isn't even the topic. I actually think it's a mistake to declare Churchill the "most warlike" and then have to talk about Hitler. Well, it gets clicks. But it's not a useful discussion.
It was an opinion thread. That's what the C/N missed most.
Resettle was the wrong word but the context should have made it pretty clear what I was talking about. Germany did not have enough (willing) settlers to settle her own eastern territories again let alone the USSR. So fuck off with your Generalplan Ost which was imagined by a singular irrelevant individual who held never any position of actual power and was never taken seriously.
Several hundred thousand Soviets fought on the German side as volunteers. At least 350.000 volunteers from all over Europa fought in the German army. Curious, isn't it?
Of course they did. Just as they used deadly masturbation machines, electrified belts, catapults, rollercoasters, hacked Belgian children's hands off in WW1, made lampshades out of skin, used Jews to make soap and so on.
It is retarded to believe that a nation with no strategic reserves, vastly outgunned, outnumbered and underequipped in every aspect, starts a war to take over Europe and genocide half its population. But I guess you also believe that England and France just wanted to protect Poland despite watching her get spitroasted and not lifting a finger because that would have meant declaring war on the Soviets as well despite the fact that Germany would have collapsed within months if not weeks if they had acted. Instead Poland was immediately sold out to the Soviets alongside half of Europe and the world was thrown into a so called Cold War that drowned Asia, Africa and South America in blood.
Let me tell you a secret. Germany's secret to military success in WW2 wasn't her imaginary all powerful war machine with its legions of super soldiers. It was the mindbogglingly incompetence of her enemies.
How about giving me an example besides WW2 propaganda?
But hey. Fortunately the entire German leadership was murdered, the Nuremberg Trial didn't give a shit about evidence, confessions were forced through torture and the last living member of the German government who was imprisoned since 1941 conveniently Epstein'd himself when he was about to be released despite being so old and frail that he wasn't physically able to hang himself.
But I'm sure the mainstream narrative is truthful. Mask on my friend and don't forget to get your next booster else you're gonna murder your Grandma with your hugs.
I think we agree, but let me say:
The treatment of POWs isn't what the thread was about. Not even starvation of Europe. The thread is about a fat drunk named Winston Churchill.
I'm aware. Just giving an example of where they were blatantly lying about that Daryl fellow.
Oh there was a ton of just spew about him. A lot of it was simply slander that is common these days like "Nazi." Others were more insidious. The Wikipedia problem is annoying.