WW2 politics, and leading up to the War and beyond...

[Chap]

Again: What is it that you think we should be taking away from this interview that has not been already said or agreed upon by all the historians you've been reading and studying for the last 40 years?

If it's nothing special, please just tell us that.

I think your question is a very reasonable one, and I do hope Markk will (finally) answer it.

But may I suggest that it might have been differently worded in a way that left no room for an ambiguity that I am sure you did not intend? How about:

What is it that you think we should be taking away from this interview that has not been already said or agreed upon for the last 40 years by all the historians you've been reading and studying?

You will see what I did there ...

[Morley]

Absolutely, Chap. And you're quite right.

[Markk]

L Hö/S
To the Reichssicherheitshauptamt
Office IV B 4
to the attention of SS-Obersturmbannführer Eichmann
Berlin

Dear Comrade Eichmann,
Attached please find a memorandum summarizing various meetings at the local Reichsstatthalterei. I would appreciate your occasional feedback on it. Some of the things sound fantastic, but in my opinion, they are entirely feasible.

SS-Sturmbannführer

1 Enclosement

L Hö/S Posen, 16 July 1941

Memo

Re.: Solution of the Jewish Question

During meetings at the Reichsstatthalterei, the issue of the Jewish question in the Reichsgau Wartheland was brought up by various parties. The following solution is proposed there:

1. All Jews of the Warthegau will be taken to a camp for 300,000 Jews, which will be constructed in the closest proximity possible to the coal transport route in the form of barracks, and will include barracks-style facilities for economic activities, tailoring, shoemaking, etc.
2. All Jews of the Warthegau will be brought to this camp. Able-bodied Jews can be assembled into work units as needed and pulled out of the camp.
3. According to SS-Brigadeführer Albert, such a camp can be guarded with significantly fewer police forces than is currently the case. Additionally, the risk of epidemics, which repeatedly threatens the surrounding population in Litzmannstadt and other ghettos, is minimized.
4. There is a danger this winter that the Jews may not all be able to be fed. It is seriously worth considering whether the most humane solution is not to eliminate the Jews, as far as they are not capable of working, by some quick-acting agent. In any case, this would be more pleasant than letting them starve.
5. Furthermore, the proposal was made to sterilize all Jewish women in this camp who are still expecting children, so that with this generation, the Jewish problem is indeed completely solved.
6. The Reichsstatthalter has not yet commented on this matter. There is the impression that Government President Übelhör does not want the ghetto in Litzmannstadt to disappear, as he seems to be making quite a profit from it. As an example of how one can profit from Jews, I was informed that the Reich Ministry of Labor pays RM 6 from a special fund for every Jew employed in work, but the Jew costs only 80 Pfg.

SS-Sturmbannführer

https://holocausthistory.site/letter-of ... july-1941/

I have changed the bold to emphasize what lays bare the entire point of what the Germans were doing to the Jews. Context is important. You can isolate one statement and try to twist it any way you want, but put it back in context and your ruse is revealed.

The Nazis and other antisemites believed there was a "Jewish Problem." That problem was the existence of Jews and what they wrongly believed precipitated from their existence. Antisemites believe that the Jews are a source of great evil. What is their solution to this "problem"? Eliminate the Jews. Genocide.

The line in this letter about sterilizing all Jewish women who are still expecting children says it all. Horrific.

There are no excuses or defenses for this. It is evil.

Copper is not making excuses, he is pointing to and speaking of the history of the war.

Changing the bold is changing the context of what Cooper paraphrased in the podcast. But if you want, the letter shows the uncertainties and parts of the evolution of the Jewish Question leading up to the Nazi Final Solution for it, which is why, it was phrased as being "final."

The Jewish Question in regard to Europe, goes back to the 19th century and was a debate in the Nazi party even before Hitler was a member of the party. Hitler did not "invent" the Jewish Question, or the Nazi party, he built on it and put it in to reality as he saw it in his short "career" as one of the most evil dictators ever.

[Kishkumen]

Copper is not making excuses, he is pointing to and speaking of the history of the war.

Cooper is involved in a deceptive enterprise of minimizing the horror of the Holocaust for an eager audience of people who are seeking to absolve the Nazis of their monstrously evil acts.

Changing the bold is changing the context of what Cooper paraphrased in the podcast. But if you want, the letter shows the uncertainties and parts of the evolution of the Jewish Question leading up to the Nazi Final Solution for it, which is why, it was phrased as being "final."

Yes, I was very open about my choice to change the bold font on purpose to show that Jewish women were being sterilized in order to end the Jewish race. There is no uncertainty except in your and I suppose Cooper's imagination, as well as in the minds of other Nazi apologists.

The Jewish Question in regard to Europe, goes back to the 19th century and was a debate in the Nazi party even before Hitler was a member of the party. Hitler did not "invent" the Jewish Question, or the Nazi party, he built on it and put it in to reality as he saw it in his short "career" as one of the most evil dictators ever.

Well, duh!

[Chap]

...

The Jewish Question in regard to Europe, goes back to the 19th century and was a debate in the Nazi party even before Hitler was a member of the party. Hitler did not "invent" the Jewish Question, or the Nazi party, he built on it and put it in to reality as he saw it in his short "career" as one of the most evil dictators ever.

Well, duh!

Yup. Who'd a thunk it?

If Cooper had not told us, we'd never have known.

by the way, "The Jewish Question in regard to Europe" might even be said to go back a long, long way before the 19th century ... but I don't want to confuse Markk, so I won't go into the details (things like bits of cities called 'Old Jewry' with no Jews in them, and so on and so forth. Oh yes, and orthodox Jews don't like to spend the night in the British city of York, for Certain Reasons. Etc.)

[Markk]

Cooper's point was at the beginning of the war they were not ready for all the POWs and Jews. When they invaded Poland the Germans, basically overnight, had 3 million Jews to deal with. And again they had six camps. They took around 400k Polish POWs. They took 2 million French POWs in the Battle for France 6 months or so later. Then Barbarossa, they had by early 1942 3.5 Million Russian POWs.

These sentences, to justify Cooper's claims of "millions of millions of POWs and so forths" that there wasn't enough food for, are vacuous and pointless.

Just focusing on the bolded sentence, It appears that there were 3.3 million Jews in Poland when the Nazis invaded, and the total population of Poland was around 30 million. Why, after invading Poland, did they suddenly have 3 million Jews to "deal with", rather than 30 million Poles to deal with?

Because I was talking about the Germans had a lot to deal with after invading Poland and then the Soviet Union. At the time they only had around 6 camps, and they by wars end had over 1000. If you want to add Poles, Slovak Jews, Gypsies, Romanian Jews, Russian Jews, Ukrainian Jews, Boskovic's, Communists, Ukrainian freedom fighters, and the others as a whole..., fine, it just shows how scattered they really were; and ironically why the the 1000 year Rich, lasted only 10 or so years.

They had many plans. They deported, starved, beat, confined in ghettos and camps, shot, killed by exposure, and in 1942 mass gassing. As you are finding out here, there were a lot of different plans, with no exclusive plan, for the Jewish Question.

They weren't even prepared for winter fighting. They weren't prepared with oil and gas production. They really weren't prepared for a mechanized war with the US. They weren't prepared to fight a two front war. Logistically they failed big time. They failed in underestimating Russian resistance, and in my opinion maybe the biggest thing they were not prepared for was the US entering the war on the second front, and the lend lease act.

Think about it.... generally from June of 39 up until the Battle of Stalingrad in 41-42 they were on the offensive, after that it was a defensive battle retreating to Berlin.

You are trying to make a two paragraph, a 1 minute spoken opinion, that is supported by history, into something it just isn't, for political reasons.

[Markk]

Your knowledge in limited here then, and I am not griping I am trying to have a discussion. However you yourself wrote this..."You know, from all the history you’ve read, that the Nazis had the extermination planned from the beginning. Cooper is suggesting otherwise."
Then you correctly wrote...
You’re right to correct me. The Nazi plans for dealing with the Jews evolved over time, becoming more and more radicalized as the war progressed. However, none of their plans had anything to do with being humane, as Cooper suggested. Gassing someone is not a humane solution to the problem of shooting them.
If you have been reading what I, and Doc, has written, expulsion was very real up until '41 and even beyond in a few cases.....I read somewhere the other day that around 66k Jews were allowed to deport from Germany in Hitler's early reign.
It doesn't matter Morley, it is an interesting dig, and it is history, and it is not like we are all experts here, there is so much to learn. You don't have to agree with Cooper, I certainly don't on everything, but if you listened to his podcasts, and gave him a chance, you would understand what he spoke in a different light.

This is a misdirect and a rehash. It's not an answer to my question. And you're wrong, it does matter. You pointed folks to the interview, asked that everyone listen to it, and requested that everyone give Cooper a fair hearing.

Many of us want to know why. What point was Cooper making that has not already been made by historians? What was it that you wanted us to learn? Folks read, listened, researched, and gave their reactions. Your reply is always, gee, they must not have actually watched the interview because they didn't come away with--umm, what?! You either won't say or don't know.

You say it's not a soft peddling of the Holocaust. You also maintain that it's not the suggestion that Churchill was "the true villain of WWII" and Hitler and the Nazis were not so bad as they're painted. You acknowledge that historians agree that the run-up to the Final Solution evolved over time. Given all that, I'm not sure what it is that you want everyone to take away from this. You say Cooper has something unique o say, but you won't type out a sentence to tell us what it is.

Why are you being so coy about this?

Again: What is it that you think we should be taking away from this interview that has not been already said or agreed upon by all the historians you've been reading and studying for the last 40 years?

If it's nothing special, please just tell us that.

Lol....you first brought up Cooper in regard to what he said about the Nazis not being prepared, after Gad said Cooper was a Nazi Apologist, which is a lie and you even conceded he was not later. viewtopic.php?p=2897737#p2897737

And in regard to Churchill, I said Coopers statement was nonsense, read the OP. viewtopic.php?p=2897667#p2897667

You have no idea what you even said and asked, or what I wrote...and are just making stuff up.

Shall I say it one more time that Cooper was saying that the Germans were not prepared to deal with the Pow's......etc. etc.

Morley:
You acknowledge that historians agree that the run-up to the Final Solution evolved over time. Given all that, I'm not sure what it is that you want everyone to take away from this. You say Cooper has something unique o say, but you won't type out a sentence to tell us what it is.

Lol...really? I "acknowledged" that...simply classic. I thought I was the one telling you that, and showing "proof texts" and links showing it was supported by history...and that you and others were acknowledging it as I show the different ways it did expand?

How many examples of the Germans not having a clear exclusive plan, and examples of how they were not prepared before you realize all I have been doing is typing examples, simply classic.

Where did I say that Cooper had something unique to say?

Again: What is it that you think we should be taking away from this interview that has not been already said or agreed upon by all the historians you've been reading and studying for the last 40 years?

If it's nothing special, please just tell us that.

You can take away what you want. What I hope you take away form what he said in the podcast is that he is not a Nazi apologist, or is him saying the Nazis not prepared is outside the pale.

In regards to what I am saying, I hope you can learn things you don't know, and offer up something other that vain accusations you can't support.

[canpakes]

These sentences, to justify Cooper's claims of "millions of millions of POWs and so forths" that there wasn't enough food for, are vacuous and pointless.

Just focusing on the bolded sentence, It appears that there were 3.3 million Jews in Poland when the Nazis invaded, and the total population of Poland was around 30 million. Why, after invading Poland, did they suddenly have 3 million Jews to "deal with", rather than 30 million Poles to deal with?

Because I was talking about the Germans had a lot to deal with after invading Poland and then the Soviet Union.

Those poor Nazis. War is so unfair.

At the time they only had around 6 camps, and they by wars end had over 1000. If you want to add Poles, Slovak Jews, Gypsies, Romanian Jews, Russian Jews, Ukrainian Jews, Boskovic's, Communists, Ukrainian freedom fighters, and the others as a whole..., fine, it just shows how scattered they really were; and ironically why the the 1000 year Rich, lasted only 10 or so years.

They had many plans. They deported, starved, beat, confined in ghettos and camps, shot, killed by exposure, and 1942 mass gassing.

Wait. They had many plans, but they were unprepared and had no plans?

How many plans would they have needed to be called, ‘prepared’? One more? Three? A baker’s dozen? I think maybe the last one; those guys were fond of ovens.

As you are finding out here, there were a lot of different plans, with no exclusive plan, for the Jewish Question.

I’m thinking that most or all of the plans pretty much had the same final step: kill the prisoner.

They weren't even prepared for winter fighting.

Cool factoid: one of the things credited with slowing the German assault and turning the tide towards the Russians was that the Germans were bogged down by their hundreds of extremely slow bulk sunscreen lotion tankers.

They weren't prepared with oil and gas production. They really weren't prepared for a mechanized war with the US. They weren't prepared to fight a two front war. Logistically they failed big time. They failed in underestimating Russian resistance, and in my opinion maybe the biggest thing they were not prepared for was the US entering the war on the second front, and the lend lease act.

Maybe they should’ve taken a break from making all of those many plans of how to deport, starve, beat, confine in ghettos and camps, shoot, kill by exposure, and gas their prisoners, and instead taken a few minutes to make many plans for the rest of their war objectives.

Think about it.... generally from June of 39 up until the Battle of Stalingrad in 41-42 they were on the offensive, after that it was a defensive battle retreating to Berlin.

You are trying to make a two paragraph, a 1 minute spoken opinion, that is supported by history, into something it just isn't, for political reasons.

Cooper should have planned to not try to be an apologist for an accidental holocaust by Nazis having so many plans.

[Chap]

They really weren't prepared for a mechanized war with the US. They weren't prepared to fight a two front war. Logistically they failed big time. They failed in underestimating Russian resistance, and in my opinion maybe the biggest thing they were not prepared for was the US entering the war on the second front, and the lend lease act.

Let's see ... Hitler attacked the Soviet Union in June 1941.

The Japanese attacked Pearl Harbour on December 7, 1941. Shortly after that, Germany declared war on the USA. Although Hitler did not know the precise details of the Japanese plans, he knew that Japan (with whom he had a pact) would eventually attack the USA, and when he got the news of the attack he was delighted. However, on December 6 the Soviets had already begun a counterattack that stopped the German advance on Moscow.

US troops did not engage German soldiers in combat until November 1942, when US solders formed part (and only a part) of the successful Allied invasion of North Africa.

By November 1942, the Soviets had already successfully pushed back against another German attack launched in June 1942, which led ultimately to the disastrous crushing of German forces at Stalingrad in February 1943. Stalin complained bitterly to the British and Americans that their action in North Africa was far too small-scale to help him against the great mass of German troops his army was fighting, and eventually defeating.

America made a great contribution to defeating Hitler, and many brave Americans died. Their legacy deserves respect. It is sad when people like Markk write about all this in the ignorant childish way they do.

[Morley]

This is a misdirect and a rehash. It's not an answer to my question. And you're wrong, it does matter. You pointed folks to the interview, asked that everyone listen to it, and requested that everyone give Cooper a fair hearing.

Many of us want to know why. What point was Cooper making that has not already been made by historians? What was it that you wanted us to learn? Folks read, listened, researched, and gave their reactions. Your reply is always, gee, they must not have actually watched the interview because they didn't come away with--umm, what?! You either won't say or don't know.

You say it's not a soft peddling of the Holocaust. You also maintain that it's not the suggestion that Churchill was "the true villain of WWII" and Hitler and the Nazis were not so bad as they're painted. You acknowledge that historians agree that the run-up to the Final Solution evolved over time. Given all that, I'm not sure what it is that you want everyone to take away from this. You say Cooper has something unique o say, but you won't type out a sentence to tell us what it is.

Why are you being so coy about this?

Again: What is it that you think we should be taking away from this interview that has not been already said or agreed upon by all the historians you've been reading and studying for the last 40 years?

If it's nothing special, please just tell us that.

Lol....you first brought up Cooper in regard to what he said about the Nazis not being prepared, after Gad said Cooper was a Nazi Apologist, which is a lie and you even conceded he was not later. viewtopic.php?p=2897737#p2897737

And in regard to Churchill, I said Coopers statement was nonsense, read the OP. viewtopic.php?p=2897667#p2897667

You have no idea what you even said and asked, or what I wrote...and are just making stuff up.

Shall I say it one more time that Cooper was saying that the Germans were not prepared to deal with the Pow's......etc. etc.

No, you shouldn't. You've said it. I agree. Everyone agrees.

I mention it because you've given this as the reason we should pay attention to this interview. But since everyone acknowledged this early on--and it's commonly agreed upon history--this can't be the reason you were so anxious that everyone should engage with Copper. Don't you agree?

Morley:
You acknowledge that historians agree that the run-up to the Final Solution evolved over time. Given all that, I'm not sure what it is that you want everyone to take away from this. You say Cooper has something unique o say, but you won't type out a sentence to tell us what it is.

Lol...really? I "acknowledged" that...simply classic. I thought I was the one telling you that, and showing "proof texts" and links showing it was supported by history...and that you and others were acknowledging it as I show the different ways it did expand?

How many examples of the Germans not having a clear exclusive plan, and examples of how they were not prepared before you realize all I have been doing is typing examples, simply classic.

Yeah, you acknowledged it. However, in the early portions of the discussion, you acted like it was some amazing discovery that Cooper had made. My point in mentioning it again was only to indicate that this can't be the reason that you wanted us to familiarize ourselves with this interview.

Where did I say that Cooper had something unique to say?

Okay, now we get to it. Thank you.

I had assumed that you did think that Cooper was looking at history a different way, that he was saying things that nobody else dared to say. Now you intimate that perhaps he wasn't and didn't?

If that's what you're saying, I certainly agree with you. Like you, I found nothing new in his approach or content. That said, if there was something there, I certainly didn't want to miss it.

Again: What is it that you think we should be taking away from this interview that has not been already said or agreed upon by all the historians you've been reading and studying for the last 40 years?

If it's nothing special, please just tell us that.

You can take away what you want. What I hope you take away form what he said in the podcast is that he is not a Nazi apologist, or is him saying the Nazis not prepared is outside the pale.

I'm not sure I that that's what I took away. And I'm not sure that's really why you wanted everyone to watch the video. Why would I have previously thought that Cooper--some dude that I didn't know from Adam--was a Nazi apologist? How are you going to change my mind about an opinion I didn't have?

I'd heard of this interview before and had pretty much brushed it off. You urging me to watch it introduced me to what a crackpot Cooper really is.

As you know, even after first looking at the video, I was prepared to shrug off charges that Cooper is a Nazi apologist. Ironically, as I read what you and others here have had to say, and as I reread what Cooper says, I'm now pretty sure he's at least Nazi-adjacent.

or is him saying the Nazis not prepared is outside the pale.

And here you go again, with how you want everyone to know Cooper's "the Nazis weren't prepared" thing. You chided me for postulating that you might have thought this was some special opinion that Cooper had developed. Now it's --again-- one of the things you want everyone to take away from the interview. Did historians already know this or is this a special Cooperian contribution to history? Did you already know this, or was this the revelation you treat it as being?

I agree that the Nazis were not prepared, but that they always had evil in mind--from the beginning to the end. They were just not always certain about how they were going to accomplish it. They wanted to rid the reich of Jews; they wanted to displace the Slavs; they wanted to get rid of gays and gypsies. They even wanted to control art and the media. But yes, their plans about how they were going to do these things changed over time. These, along with taking over Europe, are huge tasks. I don't think anyone is surprised with the idea that the Nazis weren't always prepared.

In regards to what I am saying, I hope you can learn things you don't know, and offer up something other that vain accusations you can't support.

Pray tell, Markk: What have I vainly accused you off? If it's true, let me look at it and maybe apologize.