The only thing I disagree with here is, i don't see any conspiratorial attempt to try and equate the US and despotic, totalitarian countries as being just as bad, or any kind of mass media, conspiratorial attempt to besmirch our (apparently blameless and pure) country. I think the guy just wrote a book on a little explored topic. Ask your self, what's new write about on the subject of WWII? the answer is, not much.
@theexpliotedforlife. That is not necessarily true. US did try to restrict its bombing to industrial and military complex related area in Japan. But the same thing can't be said about Allied and Soviet effort on bombing Germany. Considerable Allied and Soviet bombing on Germany occured for revenge of previous German bombing. So some of these bombing had no direct effort on supporting the Allied and Soviet victory over Germany other than moral boosting by having revenge.
This is a great video! However, the allies had to get their hands dirty fighting the Germans and Japanese. (Yes, I know it seems cold) The only way you could defeat two nations that were as brutal and genocidal as Japan and Germany was to lower yourself to their level. Listen, I'm not saying it was right, but Germany and Japan are no way in hell the victims of World War 2.
Despite being a neo cons, hitchens was always at every single one of David Irvings trials supporting him and his right to free speech, but because of being a neo con, with man Jews, he was always never completely open about his views on ww2.
But its overwhelmingly obvious he could never say it openly, but he was obviously sympathetic to Revisionist.
@CelticAngloPress I'm not sure what you're trying to say because you're making no sense.
First of all, Hitchens denounced being coined as a neo-con; he's simply an independent. His mother was Jewish. He has always spoken freely on the topic of the holocaust and WW2 in general.
If anything, he has consistently been a strong supporter of the fight against revisionism.
Is he now, interesting how a man against it, has suggested reading David Irvings books and shows up and supports him at every single trial he has, and his links with the Neo Cons is overwhelming, seeing as they all rally behind him, and all have Trotskyite roots.
Looks like a duck, sounds like a duck, walks like a duck.....
Apart from that, one can assume you are but the many cult of personality types that worship everything that comes out of his mouth I assume?.
@CelticAngloPress Nope, just another independent that doesn't fit categorization. As for Hitchens and Irving, Hitchens only defended the right to freedom of speech, whether positive speech or hate speech because if you censor any speech, it opens the door for fascist rule, basically. Meaning, where will it stop? Hitchens has called him a revisionist historian, which is what got the critics up in arms...they didn't like him being called a historian.
Do you really think we would spend trillions on war fronts for justice ? Think again, we're all for it for the profit. If we truly believed in justice, the exemptions would have never took place.
@jkim204 Ok so maybe not one of our more shiniet moments BUT remember we just refused to prosecute or whatever we weren't the ones carrying out the experiments ..THAT's ONE BIG DIFFERENCE!!!!!
@ickysdad The reason why this country is so great is because we uphold the universal justice system. Why did we let the Japanese officials go that committed such atrocities? The pure reason is because we saw profit in the medical data. This isn't a common situation for America. America only start wars if they see profit in them. Think about all the wars we have been to after WW2 including Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan.
@jkim204 I fail to see where the US made a profit in any of those wars you mention. We're spending $900,000,000.00 a week in Afghanistan right now ,do you honestly think we're making a profit off of that war? Have you ever thought that we let the Japanese go who conducted those experiments because we thought the Russians might get ahold of the info and use it against us? The Russians did prosecute some of them but I bet it was after they extracted much info out of them.
"He who fights monsters should see to it that he himself does not become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you."
I have to say that I would imagine that if the nazis did win then they probably would have made sure that the defeated allied countries were brought back to prosperity. Its the whole "germany germany everywhere" thing that I think hitler wanted if he won, as in he wanted a perfect german empire.
Otherwise, some great points here and a lot of things that I haven't thought about yet.
Neo Fascists have only one person to blame for setting about a chain of events that would see Fascism oversee its welcome on this Earth after a mere 5 years of Warfare, and that is Adolf Hitler.
Spain was indeed a Fascist regime that survived until the 70's, but it was one that was always destined to fall.
on a larger note, we ought to reject the notion that there is a difference between civilian and military casualties. in a total war, the entire production of a country is vital to the war effort, and unless you hit a person protesting the war, you have made some contribution to your own war effort. americans are also too insulated from the wars they start, which leads them to start more of them.as voters we are responsible for the govt we elect
The fundamental distinction is that Hitler was trying to rebuild his nation and free it from the tyranny of the Jewish media and foreign controlled government and the US was making money and sitting back, then when the war was over they nuked harmless civilians to prove a point. I guess I'm obtuse.
@Xello998 Oh boy where to start..Hitler and the German people themselves were after revenge the Jews were just convienient scapegoats. Oh and just how much did it cost to rebuild Japan and Germany? You think either of those countries would have done so if they had won? There were no harmless citizens in Japan at the time of the A-Bombs the military was planning on sending men and women armed with bamboo spears at the UN forces scheduled for invading Japan. Good thing the war ended.
@ickysdad The fact is the Pacific War was about to end anyway. The Japanese were actively seeking to surrender, making diplomatic overtures to the Soviets to avoid their entry into the war. The atomic bombings were unnecessary but considering the public refusal to accept the Potsdam declaration I consider the nature of the bombings to be...ambiguous. Calling them necessary is certainly far too favorable to our side.
@aluisious then read some good sources. The military was in control and they were determined to keep the war going after Hiroshima,after Nagasaki and after knowing the full details of August Storm. It was only the intervention of Hirohito ,who the military couldn't go against without risking an uprising,that forced them to surrender on August 15. Furthermore Hirohito had already made his mind up on the evening of the 9th before full details of Storm but he had to consolidate his power
All I have to say about dropping the A-Bomb is that even after dropping both bombs and after learning of the Soviet Invasion of Manchuria the Japanese Military still wasn't convinced to surrender ,it was only by Hirohito's will that the war ended and his mind was done made up after he heard of the Nagasaki bomb.
I love Hanson´s comment"if Germany won"? Now you have Africans and Asians(arabs)all over U.K. They are taking over U.K. in few decades. Enjoy!!!!!!!! Hahaaaaaaaaaaa!!!
my question is ,,those ISLANDS were that were full of jap troops ..so what,,,where could they go, and island is a prison, you can..starve them, or just imprison them there, america owned the ocean at this stage, the japanese fleet was at the bottom of the ocean,what the fuck did they have to invade those islands for, the troops were contained.makes no sense. and why not drop a bomb on an uninhabitied part of japan to show what was coming next. ...
I believe that British, as imperialists were far less cruel than other countries like Spain,Portugal or France. However, they still committed shocking atrocities in their colonies.The perpetrators always got off scot free Just google "Jallianwala Bagh Massacre" if you want to know what I mean
I think the Germans were treated very badly both after WW1 and WW2. I believe WW1 was started by the Brits who liked to stick their butt in every situation. I mean, look at the regions these arrogant folk occupied on the pretext of war- Turkey, the Balkans, the Gaza Strip and caused lots of problems everywhere. They were the real warmongers, they should have been the ones to be punished , not the Germans(atleast after WW1).
@siddharthjoshi91 What? WW1 wasn't started by Britain, they were the most powerful country at the time, yes, but war was already declared before Britain got involved in it.
@prac2 Well when fighting somebody who's fighting from the sewer you have to get into the ditches to fight back ,you can't fight somebody fighting from the sewers from a pedastal upon a high bank overlooking the highway which has the ditch sitting next to it and which is still above the level of the sewer at which your enemies are fighting. Leo Durocher once said nice guys finished last and I think God the Allies weren't so nice .
If you sit on your moral pedistal, telling everyone else how to act, then act in a way which is not consistent with what you preach, you become at best a hypocrite or at worst, the same as what you are trying to overthrow.
The U.S military forces have become this: an invading force, changing the rules of engagement. One one hand, they say they are at war, but do not afford prisoners rights under the Geneva convention.
WWII was a moraly just war, however, the fire bombing of Dresden was a war crime.
Iraq was a fabricated war: sure, Sadam did some terrible things to the Kurds, but the U.S has killed more Iraqi's than Saddam. Now they are torturing prisoners, without trial or right of redress and people are saying national security justifies human rights. This is a double standard and makes a mockery of the self imposed status of the U.S.
@prac2 No Dresden was not really a war crime,it was being used as a transportation nexus for moving troops to the Eastern Front,it had AA defences,it had troops stationed there and some war industries. One can argue it was unfair and overkill but since the issues I aforementioned apply it's not a war crime however I agree also the Luftwaffe didn't commit a war crime by bombing Warsaw,Rotterdam or London or while conducting the Blitz.
BTW the National Defense Authorization Act will be passed soon. In one fell swoop it will “suspend the right to due process, the right to a trial by a jury of an accuser’s peers (my note — that should be ‘the accused’s peers’), and the right to habeas corpus.”
The opresive regime is comming to your town soon,,,
It seems no one remembers the 10,000,000 Germans forcibly removed from Prussia after WWII, 2,000,000 of which died, which was clearly an act of retaliatory genocide. Oh, I'm sorry, only Neo-Nazis and racists ever bring that up because those people apparently deserved it for what the Nazis did. My mistake. "Who still talks nowadays of the extermination of the Armenians?" The better question in the present day would be, "Who still remembers the Prussian Genocide?"
@kougermasterz Oh by the way that was done by the Soviets not the Western Allies furthermore when you stroke the fires of hate as Hitler's Germany did towards the Soviets/Poles/Jews then you reap the whirlwind .
@ickysdad The Soviets were still a member of the "Allies". As for the Western Allies (who of course have never been guilty of any crimes ever, the British Empire and the United States were completely innocent (lolcolonialism)), tell the people who lived in Dresden that the West did nothing wrong.
@kougermasterz AS I've said before Dresden had AA guns to fight back with,troops were moving through it, andit had war industries. It had alot more going for it then all the victims at Auschwitz,ect now didn't it? One other big difference as Hitchens says Allied brutality was incidental to their making war whereas Hitler,and German people followed him, made war not to just conquer but to exterminate. BIG DIFFERENCE!
@kougermasterz Oh good lord!!! I think there's a big difference. Have you even watched this video and listened to Hutchins? it's like the difference the killing & raping of your nieghbor's daughter and the killing of the perputrator afterwards .
@inpersonaDK Even if what you say is true a few points and I will double check what you say...Did it have AA guns? Did supplies get transported through it? Were any troops stationed there?
@inpersonaDK There were according to the Germans themselves 127 medium to large factories producing war time goods. A report released by the US ,classified till 1978,shows 110 factories producing aircraft components,poison gas plants,AA and field artillery,optical goods,gears-differentials and Electric guages.It had barracks and munition dumps. It was a junction of Berlin-Prague-Vienna, Munich-Breslau and hamburg-Liepzig Railroad. We've now established it as a wartime center.
@kougermasterz Well why don't the people who were in Dresden during the bombing blame the proper responsible party in the personage of Adolf Hitler? Dresden had factories producing war material,plenty of railcrossroads shipping such material,had defences,had garrison and army HQ ,Need I go on?
@IoEstasCedonta To Prussia over half a century earlier... I suppose it's alright that the European colonists killed 95% of the Native American population; they had, after all, crossed over from Asia... they were colonists too. The Europeans were just second-hand colonists, and I suppose the Turks should go back to Mongolia and the 'stans, and the Hungarians from wherever they came from? The Croats to Russia and the French from Brittany? You are raving.
@vladekm Nope, I'm talking about the fact that germany had to pay for everything after WW1, simply because the french wanted to get back at them for the Franco-Prussian war.
@ivanlagrossemoule And that was the reason for anshluss of Austria, partition of Czechoslovakia, cooperating with Stalin in invasion of Poland and mass genocide. Right. Now I understand your point. Thanks.
@vladekm What does this have to do about the war being unprovoked or not ?
They turned to a leader that would give them back what they had lost. It was a normal reaction to what had happened. Unprovoked is what the US did in the Philippines, or what Stalin did to Poland...
this video should be made available for all the stupid conservatives that read news papers like the dailymail/fail who are hell-bent on defending fascism with their rather unlettered argument that the allies also committed atrocities and why are the nazis the only one to get the blame blah blah blah. Yes the allies committed war crimes but the allies did not start world war 2 and were not the aggressors and I really wish the average 'dailyfailer' would remember this every now and then
even so many years after the wars end, allied crimes are played down to a matter of brutality of war. are you kidding me? not the same? it is the same whatever those 3 guys say. some of the malmedy perpetrators were identified and executes after the war, not a single american was trailed for killing german pow. where is the difference? could someone tell me? why is only the one side paying for its crimes? it makes me sick
America had clear identified aerial spy photos of concentration/extermination camps, camps that were being built, and vital train tracks that were required for transporting Jews..most tracks were solely used for this purpose. These photos existed since 42/43 and regardless of all the bombing raids/operations done by our airforce, none of these were ever hit. Not to mention Coca-Cola quenched the Nazi's, and IBM helped them calculate the number of Jews they killed, while NY Banks held Nazi money.
Debates like these are excellent. The participants speak slowly and calmly throughout. They stay on topic. They raise decent points and they speak eloquently. Whether or not you agree with their opinions or conclusions, this is how television debates should be conducted.
Unfortunately attrocities are always committed in a war, no matter who's fighting it. I think 1 out of every ten person is a sociopath, so you can imagine how many serve in militaries around the world and throughout the history of time. Basically, we humans are imperfect creatures and anything we get involved in has the potential to be either absolutely amazing, or completely disgusting.
No such thing as a war crime if it involved the Nazis, why they didn't shoot them all without question baffles me, NONE of them were innocent they all took part in the savage butchery directly or indirectly
The allies commited unspeakable acts against the Germans, far, far worse than anything Germany did to the allies. Far, far too many to state here. Over 2 million German POWs died in allied captivity and over 6 million German civilians died after WW.II. Not to mention the gang rapes of 100'000's of German women and girls as young as 7 by Russian soldiers, or German babies being snatched from their mother's arms and having their skulls cracked open just because they had blonde hair.
@duracell777 Oh wow, what a come back, did you stay up all night to think of it, or did your mommy tell you what to say? Try coming up with a real arguement or come back next time, until then, trod off to the sandbox and play with your little plastic shovel and pail.
@duracell777 Ah yes, we don't want to hear the truth, the truth told to us by allied soldiers themselves who witnessed first hand what we did. So, instead of accepting that truth, let's plug up our fingers, cover our eyes and scream really loud to ourselves until the truth goes away. That way we can go on believing that grandpa was a great war hero, instead of a coward who murdered unarmed men and raped women and children, just like any child unable to deal with reality would do.
@duracell777 plug up our ears with our fingers that is. Maybe you should actually learn some real history and listen to what first hand witnesses have said unstead of just unquestionly accepting every little thing you've heard by one side. If I'm wrong and I'm lying, then why is it so many WW II veterans themselves admit to what happened? You can't do that though, because your convictions are so weak you can't handle any disagreement to your beliefs.
@Kahndawg How would you defeat the German military without endangering German civilians? To spare civilians would give away tactical intelligence. The Russian soldiers who raped tens of thousands of German women should have been brought to justice like the Nazis and SS. The real question to you is, if you knew about the potential of some of the Russian soldiers to commit war crimes before hand, would you still accept the Russian army as an ally?
@chroniclerofthe70s umm, actually their deaths came AFTER the war had ended and it was 100,000's of women and girls as young as 7 who were gang raped, and many murdered. And the Russians were NEVER brought to justice. In fact, Stalin gave orders to his troops to be as brutal and sadistic as possible. As for accepting the Russian as allies, we didn't care what they did because Americans were commiting atrocities on a large scale as well. Your comment makes no sense.
@Kahndawg The Americans did not commit atrocities such as rape on as large a scale as the Russians are alleged to have committed. Key word 'alleged'. Do you have a source you can provide which supports your claim of 100,000s? If it was estimated, that needs to be specified.
If the Russians weren't our allies (which seems strange, as the Russians were fighting against the Germans)?
Your claim about the Germans being treated worse than the Allies were treated is incorrect, if Russia is included.
Sympathy for the Axis Powers. Thats a new one, but I guess people in this day and age will argue for anything. Personally I think the Allies dealt the Axis Powers a taste of their own medicine and am damn proud that my country, The United States of America, were the tip of the Sword.
@paginipro NOBODY ,is anybodys people ,its all bullshit ,jews are just another religious cult ,with there heads stuck up there ass , its all bullshit ,there is no gods its all crap ,to keep people under control ,read books get smart ,:)
Everything Mr. Hitchens said was accurate, but that does not mean he agrees with Rush Limbaugh. The fact that Allies committed war crimes is not exclusive to the fact that the Allied war effort was morally superior. In any case, Rush is arguing for pride and nationalism against a statement of historical fact, while Hitchens is arguing from a perspective of historical fact.
@LowellMorgan The fact that the allied war effort was morally superior? No, the OPINION that the allied war effort was morally superior. Anyone that claims otherwise is basing their arguments on nothing other than pure assumption and self-righteousness. Whether or not Hitler and the Nazis would have assisted the English or whomever after the war was over is nothing but speculation. I think they would have helped the English. Probably not the Russians. That is solely my opinion and nothing but.
@ColdCypher You're kind of all over the place there. But are you on the record in your opinions that the defense of liberal democracies is not morally superior to fascist imperialism and ethnic cleansing?
@LowellMorgan But we all know that in reality, its not purely representative democracy. The people are managed, not represented by and large. I dont think the fact that a member of the Jersey Shore is an equivalent to an Einstein in the voting booth is either moral nor effective. If anything its destructive. The fact of the matter is, is that people arent equal and that regardless of the system, its still survival of the fittest. The qualities needed change, but its still the same rule.
Did the Allies commit war crimes in the second world war? what a stupid question. Just ask over ten million German civilians what they think about that question. Ask over two million Italian civilians what they think about that. Ask millions of Japanese civilians what they think about that. The Allies forces were not the golden nuggets they have been set out to be. In fact, the things they did during the war were FAR more ghastly than what the Axis powers did.
And you can BET things would have been different with a White victory in WW2: those European nations the Soviets DIDN'T destroy after the Jewish victory wouldn't now be helpless as they are swarmed by dark invaders, raping their women and brutalizing their sons. You scum
We were MUCH worse than the Germans we beat. We literally reverted to Asiatic barbarism. And you can shove the Holocaust propaganda (no evidence of it except the words of some VERY unreliable Chosen Ones) you know where.
no the Americans did not kill thousands of Asians the dutch did it for them.
also the Americans did not go true great expense to help they did it to avoid protest something dad became problematic to the soviet union witch tried to violently control the situation. also America got way more then the infested money back. but yea they were indeed to smart to commit genocidal but that is just burning money anyway. but in the and they did drop two nukes.
crimes of war are determined by certain international laws.they are about people and certain facts,not about whole countries or general behaviors.if someone commits a murder he is not innocent because bundy committed 70.of course if there is such a thing as an international justice the alies commited war crimes.but frankly there isnt.just winners that get rid of losers in a theatrical way
FACT: The first people to start bombing civilian cities were the Allies. Hitler didn't want to do this, and was only forced to start when his own cities were being blasted to pieces under the orders of Churchill.
You can still fight a necessary war without descending into barbarism. Germany could have been won without the dresden bombing which did not add any stategic advantage, same goes for japan, it was nearly vinquished before the atom bombs, it was simply not unecessary.
My comments were actually sarcasm, as it seems according to these two idiots that as long as you aren't killing Jews the everything else is fine.
Nagasaki, Hiroshima, the firestorms at Dresden, Cologne and everywhere else where the allies deliberately attacked many millions of non-combatants are all brushed away as if it was nothing, with all guilt absolved because we didn't kill Jews like the Germans did.
A life, whoever they are, is a life and should be respected as so.
@OrthodoxDarwinist Which country (or countries) attempted the genocide of the German or Japanese race? The bombing of German cities, even when NOT done for tactical reasons (i.e., where it was done as a form of punishment or to damage morale) was a means to an end - the destruction of the Nazi state. Jews were killed because they were Jews; they were the ends and the means.
@OrthodoxDarwinist But I didn't say you did, did I? I asked a question (there was a question mark at the end of the sentence). You said that genocide only counts when it's against Jews. Your next post was banging on about bombing of civilian cities. So, were you not in fact accusing the Allies of genocide? If not, what was your point about genocide supposed to mean? Those questions are on behalf of both of us; me and the voices in my head.
@ArturAxmann Don't be a total tit! If Britain and America had wanted to commit genocide against the Germans they wouldn't have i) fed them (yes, Britain fed the Germans to keep them alive when the war ended) and ii) the Marshall Plan would never have happened. Hate off your stupid soap box and stop insulting the memories of people that fought an evil regime. Germans got thrown out from all over Europe - understandably so, don't you think given the crimes?
@blueray1969 Starvation rations, there were people dying of hunger years after the war. Marshall Plan - method for wellconnected American firms to profit from the result of war. Not to mention UK and France received more ERP funds than Germany - yet today Germany dominates again. I will insult who I please. If crimes were a reason to get thrown out, the British would have been exterminated many times over for their crimes of empire. Today might be close to that, a worthless rotting island.
@ArturAxmann Of course starvation rations! Teh British authorities deliberately set the calorie count for Germans that British people were feeding lower than their own. If Germany had won, they would have treated everyone like they treated the Polish, Greeks and Ukrainians i.e. nothing at all. That treatment was why people didn't look back at the filthy Nazi regime with fondness. You thik Germany shoudl have got more Marshall Funds? Ridiculous.
@blueray1969 Innocents starved via allied policy, treated as the "nothing" you say, murder for the sake of murder, admit it or move on. Stop with your moral relativism. Germany did not need more funds to become again the leader of Europe. UK and France received more funds and are today stagnant or worse. If I wish to see filth, I will also look to the hypocritical and stupid 1945 allies who are responsible for every problem in Europe today.
@ArturAxmann Nonsense. Our social policy is closer to Europe than America. We have come to terms with our imperial past and have apologised for the bad that was done. Millions starved in famines, but in those countries famine was endemic. Britain left parliamentary democracy 9which Germany now has) - Germany left nothing except nice cars and war graves. I have many German friends who know you for what you are - a revisionist loser :). And, we are communicating in English, not German. Loser :)
@blueray1969 Nonsense yourself. Your social policy is suicidal. Britain gives no apology for sins, your nation has paid for nothing. Your nation made murder and theft as bad as the worst Nazi excess but for centuries. The allies stole much from Germany, certainly proft was made. Germany gives more to the worldeconomy than Britain. What do I revise? Put up or shut up, drop your strawman bullshit. You know nothing but English. I dumb myself down for you :)
@ArturAxmann Oh you are right about the empire, a very nasty business although it proved to be much more successful than the German attempt to replicate it. Britain managed to control a quarter of the world, teach them to speak English, invest in the UK and not kill millions of people at the same time. Which is why the Commonwealth still exists and there are worldwide sports that are the most lasting legacy of the Empire. The German Empire of course just leaves a bad taste in your mouth.
@blueray1969 The empire did kill millions, millions in India alone. The commonwealth is a paper entity and serves no purpose. Your sports are boring. You are right in that Germany wished for a similar empire and did not create it, but nothing more. Britain has no right to any kind of moral high ground, and today is a neutered filthy rotting island filled with the worst immigrants, distracted aimless natives, an Orwellian surveillance grid, stupid laws, Americanized total.
@ArturAxmann Ffortunately the Empire was liquidated when it no longer made financial sense :). Or moral sense for that matter - but Britain didn't have to be bombed to f*ck to make the point. Huh?
@blueray1969 Or it collapsed because Britain went broke in debt to Americans for WW2 aid. You have no right to lecture of morals. Britain was not bombed, today only invaded by hordes, the land of endless rotting housing estates, Sharia courts, extra social welfare to Islamic polygamists, cameras everywhere, chavs and layabouts, and no future.
@ArturAxmann You are just quoting well accepted facts that no-one would argue with. Britain lost it''s Emire becasue i) it couldn't afford it (it spent all its money wiping the floor with Germany twice), ii) nationalist opposition grew in the non-white parts of the Empire and iii) there was clear hypocrisy in maintaining an Empire after Britain had fought and won a second world war against an oppressive regime. Thank goodness the empire ended and thank goodness Nazi Germany was ripped apart.
@blueray1969 The empire died because your shit leaders were afraid of competition. Now your nation is an enslaved mass with no future. Some kind of victor, you have no rights and no hope. An oppressive regime, your Orwellian reality. Thank goodness Britain is dead and is little more than an American state.
Wiping the floor? You should thank your god every day for Dunkirk and for American aid.
@ArturAxmann who cares why the Empire died? It should have died many years before because it was morally unjustifiable. Even Germany has morals now.Are you asking me to justify something which I cannot and will not try to? Don't be silly. But it seems you have some axe to grind and feel inferior in some way. I don't know why - if anyone shoudl be ashamed it would be other Germans - of people like you. Peace :)
@blueray1969 The actions of your dead nation in Europe had no morals. You take a false moral high ground here. Inferior? The problems in Europe today are 110% from the "liberators" of 1945 and their defective social influence. There is no freedom nor independence in Europe. I hope before the EU fails it makes Britain even worse than it is now - and this will not be easy as so much of Britain is a hellhole. Have a nice life, good luck, you will need it.
@porty500 War itself is a crime. To partake in one involves guilt. But to lose a war makes the issue of guilt of incidental consequence, an academic issue.
When engaged in war, the first concern is to win it. Only the survivros get to agonize about what they had to do to achieve success. This is especially true when fighting totalitarian socialist regimes like Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union.
@porty500 Not that I'm defending what they say necessarily; but I'm pretty sure they aren't saying killing is okay as long as its not Jews. In fact, I'm 100% sure they specifically aren't saying that at all.
@porty500 You obviously did not listen to what they said and you obviously have no concept of what war actually entails. War is not a game, it cannot be confined to include only "combatants". Who are soldiers? Who supplies their weapons? Who decided to engage in the war? The answer: your so-called "non-combatants". Indeed, some actions, such as Dresden, were unneccesary, however, you are a fool to think that Nag. & Hiro. did not save countless Americans. Plus, how many Jews were at Nanking?
As for not knowing what war entails i belong to a society that goes to Flanders every year to find and dig up lost soldiers of WW1. And every time we find a piece of an old soldier i am well aware of what war entails.
It is idiots like you who believes killing children and women can be justified 'because it saved American lives'. NOTHING justifies killing civilians whether accidental or on purpose.
@porty500 Well that's a nice philosophy to have, but unless you're far more powerful than your enemy you have to fight at least as horribly as they do, they kill your civilians you kill theirs, if you don't you will lose, you'll be putting so much effort into rebuilding cities and they won't, they'll have all their resources for the war effort and you won't. It's that simple. War is sickening. I'm sure there were plenty of avoidable war crimes though.
Why is it that the British, New Zealand and Australian armies could fight WW2 with little to no reports of war crimes yet on the same (western) front both the Canadian and US armies had reports of war crimes on quite a remarkably surprising scale?
It is the armies who dictate dirty fighting, and as history shows the US has always fought dirtiest and preyed on civilians in a way no other nation has, but because of its strength it has remained unchecked.
@porty500 Hiroshima was an army depot in the middle of a vital industrial area, Nagasaki was one of the largest sea ports in southern japan. You have to hit the enemy where it hurts their industry.
There is a incomparable difference between bombing targets in order to win a war and ethnic cleansing.
Yes, but this thread isn't about self defence this is about genocide and the allies committing warcrimes too and the fact that the victors history books just simply brush this side of things under the table.
Every enemy has no respect for your life but that is no excuse to fight dirty. The germans and the UK fought a very clean war, if there is such a thing, yet in just 2 years the US had a string of atrocities to thier name and yet they believed they could judge the nazis....
@porty500 said "The germans and the UK fought a very clean war, " WTF? The Germans? You regard 6 million people murdered and (off the top of my head) Mengele's officially sanctioned "experiments" as a clean war? You have boggled my mind.
Yes, they had a clean war. The germans didn't murder the british soldiers, the british didn't murder the german soldiers. How much simpler must i put it? The Geneva convention was obeyed, the rules of combat enforced.
The US joined in and within months they had committed thier first atrocities killing unarmed german prisoners.
So who exactly are these 6 million the germans murdered in the course of warfare?
You are yet another moron drilled by the state to disregard any or all atrocities by the allied side, instead dragging up the old cliche of how bad the germans were and that no other genocide happened in history.
pol pot, stalin, the decimation of the north american tribes. They make the germans look like rank amateurs my friend.
It must be an intimidating world to live in blinkered to the extent you are... read a few books. Perhaps you might educate yourself, see the light
Seems its alright to kill 180,000 civilians with 1 bomb apparently. Oh thats alright then..... i was worried for a second there that deliberately targeting a city full of Japanese women and children was somewhat immoral. Whew....
Makes the deaths of 1 million Iraqi civilians and 600,000 Afghanistani civilian deaths much more easier to live with......
@porty500 Ofcourse, you shouldn't actually watch the movie and listen to the reasonable arguments, what you should do, is listen to fragments, make up your mind before hearing the rest, and then calling people who actually make reasonable statements idiots. And then post it on youtube. Bravo, well done!
The only thing I disagree with here is, i don't see any conspiratorial attempt to try and equate the US and despotic, totalitarian countries as being just as bad, or any kind of mass media, conspiratorial attempt to besmirch our (apparently blameless and pure) country. I think the guy just wrote a book on a little explored topic. Ask your self, what's new write about on the subject of WWII? the answer is, not much.
standinstann 6 days ago
@theexpliotedforlife. That is not necessarily true. US did try to restrict its bombing to industrial and military complex related area in Japan. But the same thing can't be said about Allied and Soviet effort on bombing Germany. Considerable Allied and Soviet bombing on Germany occured for revenge of previous German bombing. So some of these bombing had no direct effort on supporting the Allied and Soviet victory over Germany other than moral boosting by having revenge.
TKKTism 6 days ago
Video title is misleading. They all agreed that the Allies did commit crimes in war, but were morally superior compared to the Axis.
CyJoZa 1 week ago
Oh Limbaugh you so crazy.
420bluntsmokerxXx 1 week ago
This is a great video! However, the allies had to get their hands dirty fighting the Germans and Japanese. (Yes, I know it seems cold) The only way you could defeat two nations that were as brutal and genocidal as Japan and Germany was to lower yourself to their level. Listen, I'm not saying it was right, but Germany and Japan are no way in hell the victims of World War 2.
theexpliotedforlife 1 week ago
The west did commit war crimes, but not as serious as the axis. There is a difference between genocide and applying war tactic.
Im Swedish, so I dont have any particular view on which side is better.
RawSwedishMeatball 1 week ago
Despite being a neo cons, hitchens was always at every single one of David Irvings trials supporting him and his right to free speech, but because of being a neo con, with man Jews, he was always never completely open about his views on ww2.
But its overwhelmingly obvious he could never say it openly, but he was obviously sympathetic to Revisionist.
Holohoax indeed.
CelticAngloPress 3 weeks ago
@CelticAngloPress I'm not sure what you're trying to say because you're making no sense.
First of all, Hitchens denounced being coined as a neo-con; he's simply an independent. His mother was Jewish. He has always spoken freely on the topic of the holocaust and WW2 in general.
If anything, he has consistently been a strong supporter of the fight against revisionism.
So...what are you trying to say?
BrokenBard 3 weeks ago
@BrokenBard
Is he now, interesting how a man against it, has suggested reading David Irvings books and shows up and supports him at every single trial he has, and his links with the Neo Cons is overwhelming, seeing as they all rally behind him, and all have Trotskyite roots.
Looks like a duck, sounds like a duck, walks like a duck.....
Apart from that, one can assume you are but the many cult of personality types that worship everything that comes out of his mouth I assume?.
CelticAngloPress 3 weeks ago
@CelticAngloPress Nope, just another independent that doesn't fit categorization. As for Hitchens and Irving, Hitchens only defended the right to freedom of speech, whether positive speech or hate speech because if you censor any speech, it opens the door for fascist rule, basically. Meaning, where will it stop? Hitchens has called him a revisionist historian, which is what got the critics up in arms...they didn't like him being called a historian.
BrokenBard 3 weeks ago
Do you really think we would spend trillions on war fronts for justice ? Think again, we're all for it for the profit. If we truly believed in justice, the exemptions would have never took place.
jkim204 3 weeks ago
Talk about letting the Japanese officials go for the medical data..... Check out Unit 731. America = Most corrupted nation.
jkim204 3 weeks ago in playlist Christopher Hitchens (1949 - 2011)
@jkim204 uh huh??? Any good sources???
ickysdad 3 weeks ago
@jkim204 Ok so maybe not one of our more shiniet moments BUT remember we just refused to prosecute or whatever we weren't the ones carrying out the experiments ..THAT's ONE BIG DIFFERENCE!!!!!
ickysdad 3 weeks ago
@ickysdad The reason why this country is so great is because we uphold the universal justice system. Why did we let the Japanese officials go that committed such atrocities? The pure reason is because we saw profit in the medical data. This isn't a common situation for America. America only start wars if they see profit in them. Think about all the wars we have been to after WW2 including Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan.
jkim204 3 weeks ago
@jkim204 I fail to see where the US made a profit in any of those wars you mention. We're spending $900,000,000.00 a week in Afghanistan right now ,do you honestly think we're making a profit off of that war? Have you ever thought that we let the Japanese go who conducted those experiments because we thought the Russians might get ahold of the info and use it against us? The Russians did prosecute some of them but I bet it was after they extracted much info out of them.
ickysdad 3 weeks ago
"He who fights monsters should see to it that he himself does not become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you."
— Friedrich Nietzsche
lopendepaddo 4 weeks ago
I have to say that I would imagine that if the nazis did win then they probably would have made sure that the defeated allied countries were brought back to prosperity. Its the whole "germany germany everywhere" thing that I think hitler wanted if he won, as in he wanted a perfect german empire.
Otherwise, some great points here and a lot of things that I haven't thought about yet.
N64isgreat 4 weeks ago
Man, I miss Hitchens.
Mr62ford 1 month ago 2
Neo Fascists have only one person to blame for setting about a chain of events that would see Fascism oversee its welcome on this Earth after a mere 5 years of Warfare, and that is Adolf Hitler.
Spain was indeed a Fascist regime that survived until the 70's, but it was one that was always destined to fall.
GoddyofWar 1 month ago
on a larger note, we ought to reject the notion that there is a difference between civilian and military casualties. in a total war, the entire production of a country is vital to the war effort, and unless you hit a person protesting the war, you have made some contribution to your own war effort. americans are also too insulated from the wars they start, which leads them to start more of them.as voters we are responsible for the govt we elect
wizardoflawz 1 month ago
The fundamental distinction is that Hitler was trying to rebuild his nation and free it from the tyranny of the Jewish media and foreign controlled government and the US was making money and sitting back, then when the war was over they nuked harmless civilians to prove a point. I guess I'm obtuse.
Xello998 1 month ago
@Xello998 Oh boy where to start..Hitler and the German people themselves were after revenge the Jews were just convienient scapegoats. Oh and just how much did it cost to rebuild Japan and Germany? You think either of those countries would have done so if they had won? There were no harmless citizens in Japan at the time of the A-Bombs the military was planning on sending men and women armed with bamboo spears at the UN forces scheduled for invading Japan. Good thing the war ended.
ickysdad 1 month ago
@ickysdad The fact is the Pacific War was about to end anyway. The Japanese were actively seeking to surrender, making diplomatic overtures to the Soviets to avoid their entry into the war. The atomic bombings were unnecessary but considering the public refusal to accept the Potsdam declaration I consider the nature of the bombings to be...ambiguous. Calling them necessary is certainly far too favorable to our side.
aluisious 3 weeks ago
@aluisious then read some good sources. The military was in control and they were determined to keep the war going after Hiroshima,after Nagasaki and after knowing the full details of August Storm. It was only the intervention of Hirohito ,who the military couldn't go against without risking an uprising,that forced them to surrender on August 15. Furthermore Hirohito had already made his mind up on the evening of the 9th before full details of Storm but he had to consolidate his power
ickysdad 3 weeks ago
@ickysdad Just for giggles, please cite your "good sources."
aluisious 3 weeks ago
@aluisious For one Richard Frank's "Downfall" and also try "The Columbia Guide to Hiroshima and the Bomb" by Michael Kurt.
ickysdad 3 weeks ago
RIP, Mr. Hitchens.
tix333 1 month ago in playlist Christopher Hitchens (1949 - 2011)
All I have to say about dropping the A-Bomb is that even after dropping both bombs and after learning of the Soviet Invasion of Manchuria the Japanese Military still wasn't convinced to surrender ,it was only by Hirohito's will that the war ended and his mind was done made up after he heard of the Nagasaki bomb.
ickysdad 1 month ago
Hitchens was an errand boy of the colonialists.
AkiraBergman 1 month ago in playlist Christopher Hitchens (1949 - 2011)
The only European fascist regime to survive the war was Spain, and it became a liberal democracy by the 1970's
Ape65 1 month ago in playlist Christopher Hitchens (1949 - 2011) 2
@Ape65 And Salazar in Portugal - allegedly killed by a British deckchair in the 70's...
tdp1909 1 month ago in playlist Christopher Hitchens (1949 - 2011)
I love Hanson´s comment"if Germany won"? Now you have Africans and Asians(arabs)all over U.K. They are taking over U.K. in few decades. Enjoy!!!!!!!! Hahaaaaaaaaaaa!!!
m5rule 1 month ago
my question is ,,those ISLANDS were that were full of jap troops ..so what,,,where could they go, and island is a prison, you can..starve them, or just imprison them there, america owned the ocean at this stage, the japanese fleet was at the bottom of the ocean,what the fuck did they have to invade those islands for, the troops were contained.makes no sense. and why not drop a bomb on an uninhabitied part of japan to show what was coming next. ...
andrewkenworthy 2 months ago
it's great to watch hitchens in discussion with other intellectuals
DiVeronica 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I believe that British, as imperialists were far less cruel than other countries like Spain,Portugal or France. However, they still committed shocking atrocities in their colonies.The perpetrators always got off scot free Just google "Jallianwala Bagh Massacre" if you want to know what I mean
siddharthjoshi91 2 months ago
Comment removed
siddharthjoshi91 2 months ago
I think the Germans were treated very badly both after WW1 and WW2. I believe WW1 was started by the Brits who liked to stick their butt in every situation. I mean, look at the regions these arrogant folk occupied on the pretext of war- Turkey, the Balkans, the Gaza Strip and caused lots of problems everywhere. They were the real warmongers, they should have been the ones to be punished , not the Germans(atleast after WW1).
siddharthjoshi91 2 months ago
@siddharthjoshi91 What? WW1 wasn't started by Britain, they were the most powerful country at the time, yes, but war was already declared before Britain got involved in it.
CdrRogue 2 months ago
Hitchens seems to be saying that the ends justify the means. Sorry Hitch, not good enough.
prac2 3 months ago
@prac2 Well when fighting somebody who's fighting from the sewer you have to get into the ditches to fight back ,you can't fight somebody fighting from the sewers from a pedastal upon a high bank overlooking the highway which has the ditch sitting next to it and which is still above the level of the sewer at which your enemies are fighting. Leo Durocher once said nice guys finished last and I think God the Allies weren't so nice .
ickysdad 1 month ago
@ickysdad
If you sit on your moral pedistal, telling everyone else how to act, then act in a way which is not consistent with what you preach, you become at best a hypocrite or at worst, the same as what you are trying to overthrow.
The U.S military forces have become this: an invading force, changing the rules of engagement. One one hand, they say they are at war, but do not afford prisoners rights under the Geneva convention.
prac2 1 month ago
@prac2 just what war are you talking about?
ickysdad 1 month ago
@ickysdad
Sorry, I'm talking about the Iraq war.
WWII was a moraly just war, however, the fire bombing of Dresden was a war crime.
Iraq was a fabricated war: sure, Sadam did some terrible things to the Kurds, but the U.S has killed more Iraqi's than Saddam. Now they are torturing prisoners, without trial or right of redress and people are saying national security justifies human rights. This is a double standard and makes a mockery of the self imposed status of the U.S.
prac2 1 month ago
@prac2 No Dresden was not really a war crime,it was being used as a transportation nexus for moving troops to the Eastern Front,it had AA defences,it had troops stationed there and some war industries. One can argue it was unfair and overkill but since the issues I aforementioned apply it's not a war crime however I agree also the Luftwaffe didn't commit a war crime by bombing Warsaw,Rotterdam or London or while conducting the Blitz.
ickysdad 1 month ago
@ickysdad
BTW the National Defense Authorization Act will be passed soon. In one fell swoop it will “suspend the right to due process, the right to a trial by a jury of an accuser’s peers (my note — that should be ‘the accused’s peers’), and the right to habeas corpus.”
The opresive regime is comming to your town soon,,,
prac2 1 month ago
@prac2 if it passed Supreme Court scrutiny.
ickysdad 1 month ago
@ickysdad
In your opinion, do you think it will?
prac2 1 month ago
@prac2 Yes I really do.
ickysdad 1 month ago
It seems no one remembers the 10,000,000 Germans forcibly removed from Prussia after WWII, 2,000,000 of which died, which was clearly an act of retaliatory genocide. Oh, I'm sorry, only Neo-Nazis and racists ever bring that up because those people apparently deserved it for what the Nazis did. My mistake. "Who still talks nowadays of the extermination of the Armenians?" The better question in the present day would be, "Who still remembers the Prussian Genocide?"
kougermasterz 3 months ago 21
@kougermasterz forcibly removed nut murdered. The Germans followed Hitler and the Nazi's.
ickysdad 1 month ago
@kougermasterz Oh by the way that was done by the Soviets not the Western Allies furthermore when you stroke the fires of hate as Hitler's Germany did towards the Soviets/Poles/Jews then you reap the whirlwind .
ickysdad 1 month ago
@ickysdad The Soviets were still a member of the "Allies". As for the Western Allies (who of course have never been guilty of any crimes ever, the British Empire and the United States were completely innocent (lolcolonialism)), tell the people who lived in Dresden that the West did nothing wrong.
kougermasterz 1 month ago 6
@kougermasterz AS I've said before Dresden had AA guns to fight back with,troops were moving through it, andit had war industries. It had alot more going for it then all the victims at Auschwitz,ect now didn't it? One other big difference as Hitchens says Allied brutality was incidental to their making war whereas Hitler,and German people followed him, made war not to just conquer but to exterminate. BIG DIFFERENCE!
ickysdad 1 month ago
@ickysdad Dead is dead. In the end, what difference is there?
kougermasterz 1 month ago
@kougermasterz Oh good lord!!! I think there's a big difference. Have you even watched this video and listened to Hutchins? it's like the difference the killing & raping of your nieghbor's daughter and the killing of the perputrator afterwards .
ickysdad 1 month ago
@ickysdad Dresden didn't have any war industries. At the end of the war it was over populated with refugees.
inpersonaDK 1 month ago
@inpersonaDK Even if what you say is true a few points and I will double check what you say...Did it have AA guns? Did supplies get transported through it? Were any troops stationed there?
ickysdad 1 month ago
@inpersonaDK There were according to the Germans themselves 127 medium to large factories producing war time goods. A report released by the US ,classified till 1978,shows 110 factories producing aircraft components,poison gas plants,AA and field artillery,optical goods,gears-differentials and Electric guages.It had barracks and munition dumps. It was a junction of Berlin-Prague-Vienna, Munich-Breslau and hamburg-Liepzig Railroad. We've now established it as a wartime center.
ickysdad 1 month ago
@kougermasterz Well why don't the people who were in Dresden during the bombing blame the proper responsible party in the personage of Adolf Hitler? Dresden had factories producing war material,plenty of railcrossroads shipping such material,had defences,had garrison and army HQ ,Need I go on?
ickysdad 3 weeks ago
@kougermasterz or ireland so england has never been innocent in its intire history
kingpharaohtsar 2 weeks ago
@kingpharaohtsar Nobody's innocent. Nobody.
kougermasterz 2 weeks ago
@kougermasterz thats the idear
kingpharaohtsar 2 weeks ago
@kougermasterz FROM Prussia? TO Prussia, FROM the countries they were only in as INVADERS. 10,000,000 COLONISTS, sent packing.
IoEstasCedonta 1 month ago
@IoEstasCedonta To Prussia over half a century earlier... I suppose it's alright that the European colonists killed 95% of the Native American population; they had, after all, crossed over from Asia... they were colonists too. The Europeans were just second-hand colonists, and I suppose the Turks should go back to Mongolia and the 'stans, and the Hungarians from wherever they came from? The Croats to Russia and the French from Brittany? You are raving.
kougermasterz 1 month ago
@kougermasterz
sorry, i only got my brain raped when attending school... so i never heard of it...
lopendepaddo 4 weeks ago
@kougermasterz Oh yes. Start an unprovoked war, kill and relocate millions, fuck up half of Europe. Then complain about retaliation.
vladekm 3 weeks ago
@vladekm Unprovoked war ? Really ?
ivanlagrossemoule 2 weeks ago
@ivanlagrossemoule You surely are not referring to the Gliwitz incident are you?
vladekm 2 weeks ago
@vladekm Nope, I'm talking about the fact that germany had to pay for everything after WW1, simply because the french wanted to get back at them for the Franco-Prussian war.
ivanlagrossemoule 2 weeks ago
@ivanlagrossemoule And that was the reason for anshluss of Austria, partition of Czechoslovakia, cooperating with Stalin in invasion of Poland and mass genocide. Right. Now I understand your point. Thanks.
vladekm 2 weeks ago
@vladekm What does this have to do about the war being unprovoked or not ?
They turned to a leader that would give them back what they had lost. It was a normal reaction to what had happened. Unprovoked is what the US did in the Philippines, or what Stalin did to Poland...
ivanlagrossemoule 2 weeks ago
@ivanlagrossemoule What do you mean by "What does this have to do?".
Your claim: Germany started the war because of the oppression brought on them by the French endorsed treaty of Versaille.
My question: What does the French oppression has to do with Austria, Czechoslovakia and Poland?
vladekm 2 weeks ago
I like how there are two Christopher Hitchens'.. lol 2:17
yamenhawit 3 months ago
All three spoke rationally and level-headed. Good interview!
butanerios 3 months ago
this video should be made available for all the stupid conservatives that read news papers like the dailymail/fail who are hell-bent on defending fascism with their rather unlettered argument that the allies also committed atrocities and why are the nazis the only one to get the blame blah blah blah. Yes the allies committed war crimes but the allies did not start world war 2 and were not the aggressors and I really wish the average 'dailyfailer' would remember this every now and then
jurgenschwarzgruber1 3 months ago
Hanson asked": What Europe and Asia would look like before and after German regime?" After we have muslim immigration.
m5rule 3 months ago
The jwes have ben blamed for many things in history so dont say this is bad what the germans did in ww2
MrKiller475 3 months ago
even so many years after the wars end, allied crimes are played down to a matter of brutality of war. are you kidding me? not the same? it is the same whatever those 3 guys say. some of the malmedy perpetrators were identified and executes after the war, not a single american was trailed for killing german pow. where is the difference? could someone tell me? why is only the one side paying for its crimes? it makes me sick
therealbamlee 4 months ago
America had clear identified aerial spy photos of concentration/extermination camps, camps that were being built, and vital train tracks that were required for transporting Jews..most tracks were solely used for this purpose. These photos existed since 42/43 and regardless of all the bombing raids/operations done by our airforce, none of these were ever hit. Not to mention Coca-Cola quenched the Nazi's, and IBM helped them calculate the number of Jews they killed, while NY Banks held Nazi money.
SirGeorge8600 4 months ago
Debates like these are excellent. The participants speak slowly and calmly throughout. They stay on topic. They raise decent points and they speak eloquently. Whether or not you agree with their opinions or conclusions, this is how television debates should be conducted.
deathtopenguin5 4 months ago
Comment removed
133maxiboy 6 months ago
Unfortunately attrocities are always committed in a war, no matter who's fighting it. I think 1 out of every ten person is a sociopath, so you can imagine how many serve in militaries around the world and throughout the history of time. Basically, we humans are imperfect creatures and anything we get involved in has the potential to be either absolutely amazing, or completely disgusting.
xtremejohnny69 6 months ago
@scullyy ok a few were human
captainbannana69 6 months ago
No such thing as a war crime if it involved the Nazis, why they didn't shoot them all without question baffles me, NONE of them were innocent they all took part in the savage butchery directly or indirectly
captainbannana69 6 months ago
@captainbannana69 I'm sure the people trying to help jews were quite innocent.
scullyy 6 months ago
The allies commited unspeakable acts against the Germans, far, far worse than anything Germany did to the allies. Far, far too many to state here. Over 2 million German POWs died in allied captivity and over 6 million German civilians died after WW.II. Not to mention the gang rapes of 100'000's of German women and girls as young as 7 by Russian soldiers, or German babies being snatched from their mother's arms and having their skulls cracked open just because they had blonde hair.
Kahndawg 7 months ago
@Kahndawg You fail.
duracell777 6 months ago
@duracell777 Oh wow, what a come back, did you stay up all night to think of it, or did your mommy tell you what to say? Try coming up with a real arguement or come back next time, until then, trod off to the sandbox and play with your little plastic shovel and pail.
Kahndawg 6 months ago
@Kahndawg I dont feel the need, you are wrong just wanted to let you know
duracell777 6 months ago
@duracell777 Ah yes, we don't want to hear the truth, the truth told to us by allied soldiers themselves who witnessed first hand what we did. So, instead of accepting that truth, let's plug up our fingers, cover our eyes and scream really loud to ourselves until the truth goes away. That way we can go on believing that grandpa was a great war hero, instead of a coward who murdered unarmed men and raped women and children, just like any child unable to deal with reality would do.
Kahndawg 6 months ago
@duracell777 plug up our ears with our fingers that is. Maybe you should actually learn some real history and listen to what first hand witnesses have said unstead of just unquestionly accepting every little thing you've heard by one side. If I'm wrong and I'm lying, then why is it so many WW II veterans themselves admit to what happened? You can't do that though, because your convictions are so weak you can't handle any disagreement to your beliefs.
Kahndawg 6 months ago
@Kahndawg How would you defeat the German military without endangering German civilians? To spare civilians would give away tactical intelligence. The Russian soldiers who raped tens of thousands of German women should have been brought to justice like the Nazis and SS. The real question to you is, if you knew about the potential of some of the Russian soldiers to commit war crimes before hand, would you still accept the Russian army as an ally?
chroniclerofthe70s 6 months ago
@chroniclerofthe70s umm, actually their deaths came AFTER the war had ended and it was 100,000's of women and girls as young as 7 who were gang raped, and many murdered. And the Russians were NEVER brought to justice. In fact, Stalin gave orders to his troops to be as brutal and sadistic as possible. As for accepting the Russian as allies, we didn't care what they did because Americans were commiting atrocities on a large scale as well. Your comment makes no sense.
Kahndawg 6 months ago
@Kahndawg The Americans did not commit atrocities such as rape on as large a scale as the Russians are alleged to have committed. Key word 'alleged'. Do you have a source you can provide which supports your claim of 100,000s? If it was estimated, that needs to be specified.
If the Russians weren't our allies (which seems strange, as the Russians were fighting against the Germans)?
Your claim about the Germans being treated worse than the Allies were treated is incorrect, if Russia is included.
57worldwide 6 months ago
Sympathy for the Axis Powers. Thats a new one, but I guess people in this day and age will argue for anything. Personally I think the Allies dealt the Axis Powers a taste of their own medicine and am damn proud that my country, The United States of America, were the tip of the Sword.
sjgilley 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"Man's inhumanity to man makes countless thousands mourn."
lewars1912 7 months ago
The neocon stooge from the Hoover Institution did not have the balls to have on someone to counter the other neocon stooges.
RPenta 7 months ago
jews aren't god's people , logicians are,see it here = theoreticalphysics.webs.com
paginipro 7 months ago
@paginipro NOBODY ,is anybodys people ,its all bullshit ,jews are just another religious cult ,with there heads stuck up there ass , its all bullshit ,there is no gods its all crap ,to keep people under control ,read books get smart ,:)
badslabber 7 months ago
Everything Mr. Hitchens said was accurate, but that does not mean he agrees with Rush Limbaugh. The fact that Allies committed war crimes is not exclusive to the fact that the Allied war effort was morally superior. In any case, Rush is arguing for pride and nationalism against a statement of historical fact, while Hitchens is arguing from a perspective of historical fact.
LowellMorgan 8 months ago 19
@LowellMorgan The fact that the allied war effort was morally superior? No, the OPINION that the allied war effort was morally superior. Anyone that claims otherwise is basing their arguments on nothing other than pure assumption and self-righteousness. Whether or not Hitler and the Nazis would have assisted the English or whomever after the war was over is nothing but speculation. I think they would have helped the English. Probably not the Russians. That is solely my opinion and nothing but.
ColdCypher 6 months ago
@ColdCypher You're kind of all over the place there. But are you on the record in your opinions that the defense of liberal democracies is not morally superior to fascist imperialism and ethnic cleansing?
LowellMorgan 6 months ago
@LowellMorgan But we all know that in reality, its not purely representative democracy. The people are managed, not represented by and large. I dont think the fact that a member of the Jersey Shore is an equivalent to an Einstein in the voting booth is either moral nor effective. If anything its destructive. The fact of the matter is, is that people arent equal and that regardless of the system, its still survival of the fittest. The qualities needed change, but its still the same rule.
ColdCypher 6 months ago
@LowellMorgan naa america funded hitler and mussolini the elites wanted war cause they made lots of money off it
fallenempireoverdrve 6 months ago
Did the Allies commit war crimes in the second world war? what a stupid question. Just ask over ten million German civilians what they think about that question. Ask over two million Italian civilians what they think about that. Ask millions of Japanese civilians what they think about that. The Allies forces were not the golden nuggets they have been set out to be. In fact, the things they did during the war were FAR more ghastly than what the Axis powers did.
Vovk3 8 months ago
@Vovk3
And don't even get me started on the holohoax bullshit.
Vovk3 8 months ago
@Vovk3 You must be trying to be intentionaly obtuse.
IamtheBurceDickenson 7 months ago
@IamtheBurceDickenson
I already am obtuse. :(
Vovk3 7 months ago
at 2:22 they have the guy's name wrong, now we'll never know who it is.
qwertyuiopdan1 8 months ago
And you can BET things would have been different with a White victory in WW2: those European nations the Soviets DIDN'T destroy after the Jewish victory wouldn't now be helpless as they are swarmed by dark invaders, raping their women and brutalizing their sons. You scum
SMGrawks 8 months ago
@SMGrawks Racist much?
maxergud 8 months ago
We were MUCH worse than the Germans we beat. We literally reverted to Asiatic barbarism. And you can shove the Holocaust propaganda (no evidence of it except the words of some VERY unreliable Chosen Ones) you know where.
SMGrawks 8 months ago
5:11 awkward lean-in
cotchery 8 months ago
@yerk3 the ottoman empire and if you like the number zero kiss a Koran
ThePfcman 8 months ago
no the Americans did not kill thousands of Asians the dutch did it for them.
also the Americans did not go true great expense to help they did it to avoid protest something dad became problematic to the soviet union witch tried to violently control the situation. also America got way more then the infested money back. but yea they were indeed to smart to commit genocidal but that is just burning money anyway. but in the and they did drop two nukes.
weswes666 8 months ago
crimes of war are determined by certain international laws.they are about people and certain facts,not about whole countries or general behaviors.if someone commits a murder he is not innocent because bundy committed 70.of course if there is such a thing as an international justice the alies commited war crimes.but frankly there isnt.just winners that get rid of losers in a theatrical way
mskidi 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
men are smart
saltemann 9 months ago
FACT: The first people to start bombing civilian cities were the Allies. Hitler didn't want to do this, and was only forced to start when his own cities were being blasted to pieces under the orders of Churchill.
OrthodoxDarwinist 9 months ago
Thanks, Youtube, for the 2-minute commercial on this 6-minute video.
theDyingWhale 9 months ago
@orgasmicide2
You can still fight a necessary war without descending into barbarism. Germany could have been won without the dresden bombing which did not add any stategic advantage, same goes for japan, it was nearly vinquished before the atom bombs, it was simply not unecessary.
Ijustasking 10 months ago
@Ijustasking the japanese just served as lab rats for the atom boms.
fenix144 9 months ago
YOUR crimes never are worse than the opposition you beat when u are the victor.
Scharfschutzen1 10 months ago
@orgasmicide2
My comments were actually sarcasm, as it seems according to these two idiots that as long as you aren't killing Jews the everything else is fine.
Nagasaki, Hiroshima, the firestorms at Dresden, Cologne and everywhere else where the allies deliberately attacked many millions of non-combatants are all brushed away as if it was nothing, with all guilt absolved because we didn't kill Jews like the Germans did.
A life, whoever they are, is a life and should be respected as so.
porty500 10 months ago 21
@porty500
Haven't you heard? Genocide only really counts if it is Jews, anyone else is fair-game.
OrthodoxDarwinist 9 months ago
@OrthodoxDarwinist
Apparently so. And special thanks must go to Hollywood for constantly reminding us of this fact.
porty500 9 months ago
@OrthodoxDarwinist Which country (or countries) attempted the genocide of the German or Japanese race? The bombing of German cities, even when NOT done for tactical reasons (i.e., where it was done as a form of punishment or to damage morale) was a means to an end - the destruction of the Nazi state. Jews were killed because they were Jews; they were the ends and the means.
blueray1969 9 months ago
@blueray1969
I never said anything what-so-ever about people trying to commit genocide against the Germans or the Japanese.
You are essentially arguing with something you just made up yourself.... which is surely a form of schizophrenia,, lol.
OrthodoxDarwinist 9 months ago
@OrthodoxDarwinist But I didn't say you did, did I? I asked a question (there was a question mark at the end of the sentence). You said that genocide only counts when it's against Jews. Your next post was banging on about bombing of civilian cities. So, were you not in fact accusing the Allies of genocide? If not, what was your point about genocide supposed to mean? Those questions are on behalf of both of us; me and the voices in my head.
blueray1969 9 months ago
@blueray1969
No I wasn't accusing the Allies of genocide, sorry if you got that impression but that's not what I was saying.
OrthodoxDarwinist 9 months ago
@OrthodoxDarwinist I see, thanks for clarifying. That's how it read.
blueray1969 9 months ago
@blueray1969 The bombing of German cities was murder for the sake of murder.
There were many plans for genocide, study the desires of Amicoward Morgenthau. See how many innocents died AFTER VE-Day.
Someone coming from the Orwellian shithhole IRUK has no right to lecture of genocide by others
ArturAxmann 9 months ago
@ArturAxmann Don't be a total tit! If Britain and America had wanted to commit genocide against the Germans they wouldn't have i) fed them (yes, Britain fed the Germans to keep them alive when the war ended) and ii) the Marshall Plan would never have happened. Hate off your stupid soap box and stop insulting the memories of people that fought an evil regime. Germans got thrown out from all over Europe - understandably so, don't you think given the crimes?
blueray1969 9 months ago
@blueray1969 Starvation rations, there were people dying of hunger years after the war. Marshall Plan - method for wellconnected American firms to profit from the result of war. Not to mention UK and France received more ERP funds than Germany - yet today Germany dominates again. I will insult who I please. If crimes were a reason to get thrown out, the British would have been exterminated many times over for their crimes of empire. Today might be close to that, a worthless rotting island.
ArturAxmann 9 months ago
@ArturAxmann Of course starvation rations! Teh British authorities deliberately set the calorie count for Germans that British people were feeding lower than their own. If Germany had won, they would have treated everyone like they treated the Polish, Greeks and Ukrainians i.e. nothing at all. That treatment was why people didn't look back at the filthy Nazi regime with fondness. You thik Germany shoudl have got more Marshall Funds? Ridiculous.
blueray1969 9 months ago
@blueray1969 Innocents starved via allied policy, treated as the "nothing" you say, murder for the sake of murder, admit it or move on. Stop with your moral relativism. Germany did not need more funds to become again the leader of Europe. UK and France received more funds and are today stagnant or worse. If I wish to see filth, I will also look to the hypocritical and stupid 1945 allies who are responsible for every problem in Europe today.
ArturAxmann 9 months ago
@ArturAxmann Nonsense. Our social policy is closer to Europe than America. We have come to terms with our imperial past and have apologised for the bad that was done. Millions starved in famines, but in those countries famine was endemic. Britain left parliamentary democracy 9which Germany now has) - Germany left nothing except nice cars and war graves. I have many German friends who know you for what you are - a revisionist loser :). And, we are communicating in English, not German. Loser :)
blueray1969 9 months ago
@blueray1969 Nonsense yourself. Your social policy is suicidal. Britain gives no apology for sins, your nation has paid for nothing. Your nation made murder and theft as bad as the worst Nazi excess but for centuries. The allies stole much from Germany, certainly proft was made. Germany gives more to the worldeconomy than Britain. What do I revise? Put up or shut up, drop your strawman bullshit. You know nothing but English. I dumb myself down for you :)
ArturAxmann 9 months ago
@ArturAxmann Oh you are right about the empire, a very nasty business although it proved to be much more successful than the German attempt to replicate it. Britain managed to control a quarter of the world, teach them to speak English, invest in the UK and not kill millions of people at the same time. Which is why the Commonwealth still exists and there are worldwide sports that are the most lasting legacy of the Empire. The German Empire of course just leaves a bad taste in your mouth.
blueray1969 9 months ago
@blueray1969 The empire did kill millions, millions in India alone. The commonwealth is a paper entity and serves no purpose. Your sports are boring. You are right in that Germany wished for a similar empire and did not create it, but nothing more. Britain has no right to any kind of moral high ground, and today is a neutered filthy rotting island filled with the worst immigrants, distracted aimless natives, an Orwellian surveillance grid, stupid laws, Americanized total.
ArturAxmann 9 months ago
@ArturAxmann Ffortunately the Empire was liquidated when it no longer made financial sense :). Or moral sense for that matter - but Britain didn't have to be bombed to f*ck to make the point. Huh?
blueray1969 9 months ago
@blueray1969 Or it collapsed because Britain went broke in debt to Americans for WW2 aid. You have no right to lecture of morals. Britain was not bombed, today only invaded by hordes, the land of endless rotting housing estates, Sharia courts, extra social welfare to Islamic polygamists, cameras everywhere, chavs and layabouts, and no future.
ArturAxmann 9 months ago
@ArturAxmann You are just quoting well accepted facts that no-one would argue with. Britain lost it''s Emire becasue i) it couldn't afford it (it spent all its money wiping the floor with Germany twice), ii) nationalist opposition grew in the non-white parts of the Empire and iii) there was clear hypocrisy in maintaining an Empire after Britain had fought and won a second world war against an oppressive regime. Thank goodness the empire ended and thank goodness Nazi Germany was ripped apart.
blueray1969 9 months ago
@blueray1969 The empire died because your shit leaders were afraid of competition. Now your nation is an enslaved mass with no future. Some kind of victor, you have no rights and no hope. An oppressive regime, your Orwellian reality. Thank goodness Britain is dead and is little more than an American state.
Wiping the floor? You should thank your god every day for Dunkirk and for American aid.
Britain is dead. You committed suicide.
ArturAxmann 9 months ago
@ArturAxmann who cares why the Empire died? It should have died many years before because it was morally unjustifiable. Even Germany has morals now.Are you asking me to justify something which I cannot and will not try to? Don't be silly. But it seems you have some axe to grind and feel inferior in some way. I don't know why - if anyone shoudl be ashamed it would be other Germans - of people like you. Peace :)
blueray1969 9 months ago
@blueray1969 The actions of your dead nation in Europe had no morals. You take a false moral high ground here. Inferior? The problems in Europe today are 110% from the "liberators" of 1945 and their defective social influence. There is no freedom nor independence in Europe. I hope before the EU fails it makes Britain even worse than it is now - and this will not be easy as so much of Britain is a hellhole. Have a nice life, good luck, you will need it.
ArturAxmann 9 months ago
@porty500 War itself is a crime. To partake in one involves guilt. But to lose a war makes the issue of guilt of incidental consequence, an academic issue.
When engaged in war, the first concern is to win it. Only the survivros get to agonize about what they had to do to achieve success. This is especially true when fighting totalitarian socialist regimes like Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union.
DrCruel 7 months ago
Comment removed
lewars1912 7 months ago
@porty500 Not that I'm defending what they say necessarily; but I'm pretty sure they aren't saying killing is okay as long as its not Jews. In fact, I'm 100% sure they specifically aren't saying that at all.
eirefrance 6 months ago
@porty500 You obviously did not listen to what they said and you obviously have no concept of what war actually entails. War is not a game, it cannot be confined to include only "combatants". Who are soldiers? Who supplies their weapons? Who decided to engage in the war? The answer: your so-called "non-combatants". Indeed, some actions, such as Dresden, were unneccesary, however, you are a fool to think that Nag. & Hiro. did not save countless Americans. Plus, how many Jews were at Nanking?
Sawds305 6 months ago
@Sawds305
You're talking rubbish mate and you know it.
As for not knowing what war entails i belong to a society that goes to Flanders every year to find and dig up lost soldiers of WW1. And every time we find a piece of an old soldier i am well aware of what war entails.
It is idiots like you who believes killing children and women can be justified 'because it saved American lives'. NOTHING justifies killing civilians whether accidental or on purpose.
porty500 6 months ago
@porty500 Ghandi....is that you?
hmanxy 5 months ago
@porty500 Well that's a nice philosophy to have, but unless you're far more powerful than your enemy you have to fight at least as horribly as they do, they kill your civilians you kill theirs, if you don't you will lose, you'll be putting so much effort into rebuilding cities and they won't, they'll have all their resources for the war effort and you won't. It's that simple. War is sickening. I'm sure there were plenty of avoidable war crimes though.
ninjatoothpaste 6 months ago
@ninjatoothpaste
Absolutely not true.
Why is it that the British, New Zealand and Australian armies could fight WW2 with little to no reports of war crimes yet on the same (western) front both the Canadian and US armies had reports of war crimes on quite a remarkably surprising scale?
It is the armies who dictate dirty fighting, and as history shows the US has always fought dirtiest and preyed on civilians in a way no other nation has, but because of its strength it has remained unchecked.
porty500 6 months ago
@porty500 3:20 to 3:50
capatheist 6 months ago
@porty500 Hiroshima was an army depot in the middle of a vital industrial area, Nagasaki was one of the largest sea ports in southern japan. You have to hit the enemy where it hurts their industry.
There is a incomparable difference between bombing targets in order to win a war and ethnic cleansing.
NoWitnessesNoRegrets 4 months ago
@NoWitnessesNoRegrets
Japan was on its knees. The allies gave it 6 weeks until it ground to a halt.
It had no raw materials, no oil, no munitions and little to no navy.
This was a case of the US flexing its muscles and showing the soviets what they were in for should they turn aggressive.No more, no less.
porty500 4 months ago
@porty500 "with all guilt absolved because we didn't kill Jews like the Germans did." The Jews were totally innocent; they never attacked the Germans.
"A life, whoever they are, is a life and should be respected as so."
That's a lovely thought but when you are attacked by an enemy who has no respect for your life, lovely thoughts will get you killed.
lewisner 4 months ago
@lewisner
Yes, but this thread isn't about self defence this is about genocide and the allies committing warcrimes too and the fact that the victors history books just simply brush this side of things under the table.
Every enemy has no respect for your life but that is no excuse to fight dirty. The germans and the UK fought a very clean war, if there is such a thing, yet in just 2 years the US had a string of atrocities to thier name and yet they believed they could judge the nazis....
porty500 4 months ago
@porty500 said "The germans and the UK fought a very clean war, " WTF? The Germans? You regard 6 million people murdered and (off the top of my head) Mengele's officially sanctioned "experiments" as a clean war? You have boggled my mind.
lewisner 4 months ago
@lewisner
Yes, they had a clean war. The germans didn't murder the british soldiers, the british didn't murder the german soldiers. How much simpler must i put it? The Geneva convention was obeyed, the rules of combat enforced.
The US joined in and within months they had committed thier first atrocities killing unarmed german prisoners.
So who exactly are these 6 million the germans murdered in the course of warfare?
porty500 4 months ago
@porty500 said "So who exactly are these 6 million the germans murdered in the course of warfare?"
Enough. Goodbye.
lewisner 4 months ago
@lewisner
You are yet another moron drilled by the state to disregard any or all atrocities by the allied side, instead dragging up the old cliche of how bad the germans were and that no other genocide happened in history.
pol pot, stalin, the decimation of the north american tribes. They make the germans look like rank amateurs my friend.
It must be an intimidating world to live in blinkered to the extent you are... read a few books. Perhaps you might educate yourself, see the light
porty500 4 months ago
Comment removed
butanerios 3 months ago
Seems its alright to kill 180,000 civilians with 1 bomb apparently. Oh thats alright then..... i was worried for a second there that deliberately targeting a city full of Japanese women and children was somewhat immoral. Whew....
Makes the deaths of 1 million Iraqi civilians and 600,000 Afghanistani civilian deaths much more easier to live with......
Isn't winning fun?
porty500 10 months ago
@porty500 THESE IRAQIS NEEDED TO DIE. SADDAM HUSSEIN WAS THE WORST WAR CRIMINAL OF THE 20TH CENTURY. duhhhh, shall I add.
fenix144 9 months ago
@fenix144
So Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge were what?
Stalin and his 50 million victims were?....
Hitler was a nice guy perhaps? He didn't contribute to the start of WW2?
Good to see the brains of the outfit decided to post......... thanks for the opinion Einstein....
porty500 6 months ago
@porty500 clearly you missed the sarcasm.
fenix144 6 months ago
@porty500 THESE IRAQIS NEEDED TO DIE. SADDAM HUSSEIN WAS THE WORST WAR CRIMINAL OF THE 20TH CENTURY. duhhhh, shall I add.
fenix144 9 months ago
@porty500 Ofcourse, you shouldn't actually watch the movie and listen to the reasonable arguments, what you should do, is listen to fragments, make up your mind before hearing the rest, and then calling people who actually make reasonable statements idiots. And then post it on youtube. Bravo, well done!
KryzMasta 5 months ago