I don't know if that's true, and it's irrelevant anyway: if the heart attack is caused by someone intentionally hitting you with his car, it hardly exculpates the guy driving the car. But if he was driving for his life, and that does seem to be true, it at the very least negates their claims that "he drove into people to kill".
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.
OK, you're retarded.
What the hell are you even talking about?
What seems to be confusing you?
Wasn't that Daily Stormer fellow taken off the entire internet, because he mocked that sainted figure who got killed at Charlottesville after the driver may or may not have gotten panicked by people threatening him?
You only need one functioning eye to see what is going on.
This is worse - but also less hilarious - than the 'sure my daughter's dead, but at least we have tacos' guy.
Can you link me to that? I'm very interested.
how can you blame people condemning your child's killer, while not even condemning the killer?! And even running defense for the killer.
The only real crime is opposition to the regime.
These people are obviously whacked.
My favorite examples of brainwashing is when it's normal people. Like Cannon Hinnant's mother, whose first inclination was to assure us that her 5-year-old son hadn't said anything 'racist' to the guy who murdered him.
If a grown white man murders a 5-year-old black boy, the white man is a racist. If a grown black man murders a 5-year-old white boy, the white boy is a racist.
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.
Because the pragmatism is to the benefit of the politicians and to the detriment of the people, not just in Germany and Russia, but America as well. I'm not sure what ordinary Americans are getting out of the fact that their country is the hegemon and bullies the rest of us.
Most Europeans do not know that Hitler declared war on the US, and think that they 'liberated' us out of goodwill or something.
Japan would have been nuked even if it army had been squeaky clean, which obviously it was not.
The nukes were not 'revenge'. They were an exercise of power. An attestation to the fact that the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must, just like the Japanese did in China.
'Revenge for Pearl Harbor' was just what 'fighting for democracy' is to the current war. It's the, no disrespect, motivation for the stupid people. In both cases, maintaining American hegemony is the motivation for the ruling class, which would have existed with or without Pearl Harbor.
Imagine for a moment that the US 'kicked the Russians when they were down'. Meaning, aid the Germans to extend their dominion to the Urals.
Germany controlled Europe from France, through Norway, Switzerland, Greece, and was allied with Italy, Spain, Hungary and Romania. Basically, the entire post World War II 'NATO alliance' sans the UK.
This is formidable power. Now add to that the industrial capacity and agricultural riches that were poorly exploited by communism and collectivizaton. Add to that the power of Japan and how it was (at that moment flailing at) conquering China and planning to take European colonies in Asia.
Just put the hypothetical Nazi victory in Russia vs. the postwar USSR and its satellites on a map. I'm not sure how you think that would have been less of a threat to US hegemony. Add to that: the actually rich and industrialized parts of Europe were controlled by Germany, and they did not have a self-defeating economic system (or at least less of one) to implode.
That is the only explanation for the US and UK's actions. The only role that Nazi politics played was that it was more expansionistic and thus triggered the balancing coalition that ultimately ended it.
That I've encountered it in several WW2 books.
I didn't mean that the average man on the street is likely to know it.
We are a DEMOCRACY, donchakno?
This quote is very well-known, he may be forgiven for using a screenshot.
That is pretty monstrous, though a gaffe in the Kinsey sense of accidentally telling the truth.
"kill as many as possible" seems to be the US regime line in many places, including Ukraine-Russia.
The problem is that no one where I live watches American debates, let alone normies.
They read the lying newspapers and then ask "Trump is in trouble, isn't he?"
Something Trump has been consistently able to do, while Harris has consistently failed to be able to hype herself and every anti-Trump line has already been said.
But he is a CONVICTED FELON!
She's bad at multi-candidate debates and Trump is very good at it.
She might be good at 1-on-1 debates, esp. as a prosecutor. The problem is that everyone likes to lull himself into overconfidence, Trump not being the least of them (though if it's true he's using Tulsi as a debate foil, that is great).
Fellah
Just out of curiosity, are you part of that weird pro-Ukraine group?
They all are skewed somewhat to anti-Trump, but if you compare the anti-Trump bias in regular polls - it's no more than a few percentage points. Also, I think there is a bias in who watches debates. I think it's more likely to be anti-Trump.
I'm worried that Trump will lose the debate, because of Harris's prosecutorial background. I know people here think he won every single debate, but in terms of general audiences, polls claim he lost all 5 debates vs. Democrats he participated in.
On the other hand, that does confirm what people say, namely that debates don't matter.
Same people who have always done it: the deep state.
That’s absolutely a huge part of it, more so in the past than today (which has chosen to suppress the memory of past glory in order to fixate obsessively on alleged shame) - the Narrative(s) told about this time are far more widespread than the realities
Both shame and pride can be used to keep the people down. Look at how shame is instrumentalized in Germany and the United States. It's funny, because the German state now demands unquestioning obedience from its subjects based on the fact that the German people with mostly unquestioning obedience followed the Nazis. Obviously, we're very far from trying to learn any useful lessons, rather than trying to manipulate people.
Things like fake talmud quotes or purposefully taking things out of context are poisonous, doubly so because there is so much real crime and corruption to expose.
That is actually not what I meant, but yes, when you presented those quotes from the Talmud I thought "here we go again, it's probably fake as hell". But it turned out you actually had the goods, which was a surprise.
What I mean, in terms of World War 2, is that "Churchill was a psychopath" is not a particularly useful statement. Not just because he was a politician, and if he wasn't less psychopathic than average, he certainly wasn't more so. But it doesn't actually accomplish anything, even you manage to persuade someone of that, which is unlikely.
World War 2 was a colossal failure on the part of the 'allies', both France/England and the USSR. Why on earth would you let them spin that into something positive? There were numerous times at which the Nazis could have been stopped, from the Rhineland takeover to the invasion of Czechoslovakia, with very little bloodshed. If you say the Nazis are bad, and I do grant that, then why would you get any credit for belatedly and at the cost of tens of millions of lives getting rid of them, rather than when it could have been done without much cost?
Incompetence is far more unforgivable than evil. They don't care about their leaders killing a million Iraqis, why should they care about how many Bomber Harris killed? They don't care about Nazi atrocities either. They'd cheer for Nazis if the media told them to, and they do... see Ukraine.
There really is something to be said for “not stooping to their level”.
It's like with the pro-Trump people who thought they could riot because BLM did so. Turns out, BLM can only do so because the ruling class is unanimously on its side. If you do 1/1000 of what they did, they'll come down mercilessly on you: see Jan 6.
There's not much pride left in any Western country, except for things that ain't so.
I can't say I see much of the 'colonialism' narrative in Europe. Maybe the UK, and even there it's not even close to the German, American and Canadian stories.
The fact that you can claim that tree roots are mass graves and get away with it in Canada speaks volumes.
Speaking of that, I've found it highly effective to criticize woke policies to people who are on the left, by simply not referring to those policies as 'left-wing'. People get defensive when they think you attack or criticize their tribe. But if you talk with them like "sensible people are against X", they can be with you.
But apart from persuasion, people here seem to think that when I point out that "a lot of leftists aren't X", I'm "defending" them. As if you don't need to have an accurate view of your opposition, and that hyperbole in any way serves your cause. They can afford to demonize us because they are in power, and they don't need to persuade us, just the people in their influence that we are Bad.
And same for me, of course. Hell, I bought into a lot of the very crap that I now find abhorrent, and I think that is why I have a somewhat better understanding of what leads people to believe such things than people who have always seen feminism/BLM for what it is.