The War on World War II: Why False Revisionism Must Be Defeated

[Doc7505]

The War on World War II:​

Why False Revisionism Must Be Defeated​

The War on World War II: Why False Revisionism Must Be Defeated

The living memory of World War II is passing away. In April, the oldest known survivor of Pearl Harbor died at 106 years old. A few weeks ago, a 102-year old veteran who stormed the bea

www.realclearhistory.com

8 Sep 2025 ~~ By Andrew Fowler

The living memory of World War II is passing away. In April, the oldest known survivor of Pearl Harbor died at 106 years old. A few weeks ago, a 102-year old veteran who stormed the beaches of Normandy on D-Day (June 6, 1944) entered his eternal reward.
Sadly, less than one percent of the war’s veterans are still alive. However, more troubling and dark, the increasing deaths of witnesses — those who endured the conflict and its horrors — has been coupled with the rise of revisionist ahistorical conspiracies about the Second World War. Worse, this is increasingly a right-wing phenomenon.
Nearly a year apart from each other, Tucker Carlson interviewed guests Darryl Cooper and David Collum — “amateur” historians — who have erroneously circulated false narratives about the war, contradicting the story that the Allied Powers were entirely morally ‘good.’
Last summer, Cooper ignited a bevy of notoriety and backlash by claiming Winston Churchill was the “chief villain” of World War II for declaring war on Germany after the invasion of Poland. He even provided cover for Adolf Hitler. This August, Collum posited, “The story we got about World War II is all wrong” to which Carlson agreed, and even suggested the Allies should have aligned with the Nazis and fought the Soviet Union.
The interviews were certainly “incendiary” as World War II historian Victor Davis Hanson stated before refuting Collum’s mischaracterizations of the war point-by-point. The year prior, British historian Andrew Roberts, author of Churchill: Walking with Destiny, pummeled Cooper’s “staggering ignorance and disregard for historical fact” against the man who, arguably, saved Western Civilization.


Commentary:
Patton was correct in his belief that after defeating Hitler, we should have kept fighting to defeat Stalin.
That is what caused his death.
The "ignorance" of these revisionists is sinister and evil and deliberate. Sad to see Tucker fall into this rabbit hole.
Surely we all know that there are times that nations make deals that later come to haunt them.
We must all remember that FDR refused to accept Jews escaping the Nazi's in 1939.
Hitler made a deal with Stalin to invade Poland and split it between the two. In 1939 Germany and Russia were allied with Japan and Italy.
Meanwhile, the British Army was nearly destroyed on the beaches of Dunkirk, due to the "lightening War" and French inability yo defend itself and too much reliance on the Maginot Line.
Most today do not know that Hitler offered Britain reasonbe
Then again to paraphrase Napoleon, "History is a series of lies that people have agreed upon."
Politicians and History Professors can sit back ruminate and espouse about war, amd morality.
One could say that Germany, and Japan was less good than the countries they attacked.
But it's the winner of war that decides it's history.
Meanwhile, individuals can decide to be moral or not. Nations are not moral. History proves that if you take the time to read and study it.

 

[Deadstick]

The War on World War II:​

Why False Revisionism Must Be Defeated​

The War on World War II: Why False Revisionism Must Be Defeated

The living memory of World War II is passing away. In April, the oldest known survivor of Pearl Harbor died at 106 years old. A few weeks ago, a 102-year old veteran who stormed the bea

www.realclearhistory.com

8 Sep 2025 ~~ By Andrew Fowler

The living memory of World War II is passing away. In April, the oldest known survivor of Pearl Harbor died at 106 years old. A few weeks ago, a 102-year old veteran who stormed the beaches of Normandy on D-Day (June 6, 1944) entered his eternal reward.
Sadly, less than one percent of the war’s veterans are still alive. However, more troubling and dark, the increasing deaths of witnesses — those who endured the conflict and its horrors — has been coupled with the rise of revisionist ahistorical conspiracies about the Second World War. Worse, this is increasingly a right-wing phenomenon.
Nearly a year apart from each other, Tucker Carlson interviewed guests Darryl Cooper and David Collum — “amateur” historians — who have erroneously circulated false narratives about the war, contradicting the story that the Allied Powers were entirely morally ‘good.’
Last summer, Cooper ignited a bevy of notoriety and backlash by claiming Winston Churchill was the “chief villain” of World War II for declaring war on Germany after the invasion of Poland. He even provided cover for Adolf Hitler. This August, Collum posited, “The story we got about World War II is all wrong” to which Carlson agreed, and even suggested the Allies should have aligned with the Nazis and fought the Soviet Union.
The interviews were certainly “incendiary” as World War II historian Victor Davis Hanson stated before refuting Collum’s mischaracterizations of the war point-by-point. The year prior, British historian Andrew Roberts, author of Churchill: Walking with Destiny, pummeled Cooper’s “staggering ignorance and disregard for historical fact” against the man who, arguably, saved Western Civilization.


Commentary:
Patton was correct in his belief that after defeating Hitler, we should have kept fighting to defeat Stalin.
That is what caused his death.
The "ignorance" of these revisionists is sinister and evil and deliberate. Sad to see Tucker fall into this rabbit hole.
Surely we all know that there are times that nations make deals that later come to haunt them.
We must all remember that FDR refused to accept Jews escaping the Nazi's in 1939.
Hitler made a deal with Stalin to invade Poland and split it between the two. In 1939 Germany and Russia were allied with Japan and Italy.
Meanwhile, the British Army was nearly destroyed on the beaches of Dunkirk, due to the "lightening War" and French inability yo defend itself and too much reliance on the Maginot Line.
Most today do not know that Hitler offered Britain reasonbe
Then again to paraphrase Napoleon, "History is a series of lies that people have agreed upon."
Politicians and History Professors can sit back ruminate and espouse about war, amd morality.
One could say that Germany, and Japan was less good than the countries they attacked.
But it's the winner of war that decides it's history.
Meanwhile, individuals can decide to be moral or not. Nations are not moral. History proves that if you take the time to read and study it.

The War on World War II:​

Why False Revisionism Must Be Defeated​

The War on World War II: Why False Revisionism Must Be Defeated

The living memory of World War II is passing away. In April, the oldest known survivor of Pearl Harbor died at 106 years old. A few weeks ago, a 102-year old veteran who stormed the bea

www.realclearhistory.com

8 Sep 2025 ~~ By Andrew Fowler

The living memory of World War II is passing away. In April, the oldest known survivor of Pearl Harbor died at 106 years old. A few weeks ago, a 102-year old veteran who stormed the beaches of Normandy on D-Day (June 6, 1944) entered his eternal reward.
Sadly, less than one percent of the war’s veterans are still alive. However, more troubling and dark, the increasing deaths of witnesses — those who endured the conflict and its horrors — has been coupled with the rise of revisionist ahistorical conspiracies about the Second World War. Worse, this is increasingly a right-wing phenomenon.
Nearly a year apart from each other, Tucker Carlson interviewed guests Darryl Cooper and David Collum — “amateur” historians — who have erroneously circulated false narratives about the war, contradicting the story that the Allied Powers were entirely morally ‘good.’
Last summer, Cooper ignited a bevy of notoriety and backlash by claiming Winston Churchill was the “chief villain” of World War II for declaring war on Germany after the invasion of Poland. He even provided cover for Adolf Hitler. This August, Collum posited, “The story we got about World War II is all wrong” to which Carlson agreed, and even suggested the Allies should have aligned with the Nazis and fought the Soviet Union.
The interviews were certainly “incendiary” as World War II historian Victor Davis Hanson stated before refuting Collum’s mischaracterizations of the war point-by-point. The year prior, British historian Andrew Roberts, author of Churchill: Walking with Destiny, pummeled Cooper’s “staggering ignorance and disregard for historical fact” against the man who, arguably, saved Western Civilization.


Commentary:
Patton was correct in his belief that after defeating Hitler, we should have kept fighting to defeat Stalin.
That is what caused his death.
The "ignorance" of these revisionists is sinister and evil and deliberate. Sad to see Tucker fall into this rabbit hole.
Surely we all know that there are times that nations make deals that later come to haunt them.
We must all remember that FDR refused to accept Jews escaping the Nazi's in 1939.
Hitler made a deal with Stalin to invade Poland and split it between the two. In 1939 Germany and Russia were allied with Japan and Italy.
Meanwhile, the British Army was nearly destroyed on the beaches of Dunkirk, due to the "lightening War" and French inability yo defend itself and too much reliance on the Maginot Line.
Most today do not know that Hitler offered Britain reasonbe
Then again to paraphrase Napoleon, "History is a series of lies that people have agreed upon."
Politicians and History Professors can sit back ruminate and espouse about war, amd morality.
One could say that Germany, and Japan was less good than the countries they attacked.
But it's the winner of war that decides it's history.
Meanwhile, individuals can decide to be moral or not. Nations are not moral. History proves that if you take the time to read and study it.

Rewriting history in most cases is down to political expediency at any given time, one only needs to look at the war between Russia and Ukraine.

 

[mikegriffith1]

Last summer, Cooper ignited a bevy of notoriety and backlash by claiming Winston Churchill was the “chief villain” of World War II for declaring war on Germany after the invasion of Poland.

Churchill did not declare war on Germany. Neville Chamberlain did. Churchill did not become prime minister until eight months after Germany and Russia invaded Poland.

This August, Collum posited, “The story we got about World War II is all wrong” to which Carlson agreed, and even suggested the Allies should have aligned with the Nazis and fought the Soviet Union.

And he's absolutely right. Nazi Germany, as bad as it was, was not as evil and tyrannical as the Soviet Union, and many Americans at the time thought the same thing. It is odd that people who get upset at the idea that we should have temporarily sided with Germany to defeat the Soviet Union excuse FDR's decision to side with the Soviet Union throughout the war, even though the Soviet Union killed far more people than Nazi Germany killed.

There was no meaningful Russian opposition to Stalin, but there was powerful German opposition to Hitler. We should have withheld all aid from the Soviet Union to enable Germany to defeat it, and then we should have worked with the German opposition to depose Hitler.

A very good case can be made that Hitler would not have invaded France and would not have bombed England if England and France had not given Poland a useless security guarantee and then declared war on Germany after Germany invaded Poland.

 

[Deadstick]

Churchill did not declare war on Germany. Neville Chamberlain did. Churchill did not become prime minister until eight months after Germany and Russia invaded Poland.


And he's absolutely right. Nazi Germany, as bad as it was, was not as evil and tyrannical as the Soviet Union, and many Americans at the time thought the same thing. It is odd that people who get upset at the idea that we should have temporarily sided with Germany to defeat the Soviet Union excuse FDR's decision to side with the Soviet Union throughout the war, even though the Soviet Union killed far more people than Nazi Germany killed.

There was no meaningful Russian opposition to Stalin, but there was powerful German opposition to Hitler. We should have withheld all aid from the Soviet Union to enable Germany to defeat it, and then we should have worked with the German opposition to depose Hitler.

A very good case can be made that Hitler would not have invaded France and would not have bombed England if England and France had not given Poland a useless security guarantee and then declared war on Germany after Germany invaded Poland.

You are just a good old Nazi, if you had got your way the US flag would have been flying over Auschwitz.

 

[mikegriffith1]

You are just a good old Nazi, if you had got your way the US flag would have been flying over Auschwitz.

HUH??? Are you serious??? Or did you intend your comment as reverse-psychology sarcasm to criticize those who would make such a claim in response to my comments?

You would be hard-pressed to find a more anti-Nazi person on the planet than myself. Stalin was twice as bad as Hitler, and the Soviet Union was far more oppressive and murderous than Nazi Germany, as bad as the Third Reich was.

 

[Deadstick]

HUH??? Are you serious??? Or did you intend your comment as reverse-psychology sarcasm to criticize those who would make such a claim in response to my comments?

You would be hard-pressed to find a more anti-Nazi person on the planet than myself. Stalin was twice as bad as Hitler, and the Soviet Union was far more oppressive and murderous than Nazi Germany, as bad as the Third Reich was.

You just confirmed what i said, Stalin was worse than Hitler and the Soviets more murderous than the Nazis, so why didn't Western governments fight with the Nazis against the Soviets? who as far as i know didn't gas millions of Jews, although i know in my Country there was no shortage of some elites who wanted to side with the Nazis some actually lived in Berlin in WW2 putting propaganda out for the Nazis.

 

[mikegriffith1]

You just confirmed what i said, Stalin was worse than Hitler and the Soviets more murderous than the Nazis, so why didn't Western governments fight with the Nazis against the Soviets? who as far as i know didn't gas millions of Jews, although i know in my Country there was no shortage of some elites who wanted to side with the Nazis some actually lived in Berlin in WW2 putting propaganda out for the Nazis.

Oh my heavens. Yes, the Nazis murdered 6 million Jews, but the Stalinists killed 20 million Russians to maintain their grip on power. Nazi Germany, as horrible as it was, was not as oppressive as Stalinist Russia. Western governments didn't aid the Nazis against the Soviets because FDR, heavily influenced by the Soviet spies and sympathizers in his administration, was determined to save the Soviet Union. Quite a few Americans and Europeans questioned the wisdom of this decision, but they could not reverse it.

Simply noting the fact that the Soviets were worse than the Nazis does not make one pro-Nazi. I abhor Hitler and the Nazis, but they were not as bad as Stalin and the Soviets.

 

[martybegan]

Churchill did not declare war on Germany. Neville Chamberlain did. Churchill did not become prime minister until eight months after Germany and Russia invaded Poland.


And he's absolutely right. Nazi Germany, as bad as it was, was not as evil and tyrannical as the Soviet Union, and many Americans at the time thought the same thing. It is odd that people who get upset at the idea that we should have temporarily sided with Germany to defeat the Soviet Union excuse FDR's decision to side with the Soviet Union throughout the war, even though the Soviet Union killed far more people than Nazi Germany killed.

There was no meaningful Russian opposition to Stalin, but there was powerful German opposition to Hitler. We should have withheld all aid from the Soviet Union to enable Germany to defeat it, and then we should have worked with the German opposition to depose Hitler.

A very good case can be made that Hitler would not have invaded France and would not have bombed England if England and France had not given Poland a useless security guarantee and then declared war on Germany after Germany invaded Poland.

Germany with the Resources of Russia and no 2nd front would have probably been impossible to defeat unless we atomic bombed every one of their cities.

And Nazi Germany was worse than the Soviet Union. We did beat the Soviets, it just took 45 years.

 

[martybegan]

Oh my heavens. Yes, the Nazis murdered 6 million Jews, but the Stalinists killed 20 million Russians to maintain their grip on power. Nazi Germany, as horrible as it was, was not as oppressive as Stalinist Russia. Western governments didn't aid the Nazis against the Soviets because FDR, heavily influenced by the Soviet spies and sympathizers in his administration, was determined to save the Soviet Union. Quite a few Americans and Europeans questioned the wisdom of this decision, but they could not reverse it.

Simply noting the fact that the Soviets were worse than the Nazis does not make one pro-Nazi. I abhor Hitler and the Nazis, but they were not as bad as Stalin and the Soviets.

If the Nazis kept winning that 6M number would be closer to 20M by the time they were finished.

Also you have to add in the Poles and other Slavs killed, and the smaller yet still there numbers of those killed in western europe.

 

[otto105]

HUH??? Are you serious??? Or did you intend your comment as reverse-psychology sarcasm to criticize those who would make such a claim in response to my comments?

You would be hard-pressed to find a more anti-Nazi person on the planet than myself. Stalin was twice as bad as Hitler, and the Soviet Union was far more oppressive and murderous than Nazi Germany, as bad as the Third Reich was.

How so?

 

[Deadstick]

Oh my heavens. Yes, the Nazis murdered 6 million Jews, but the Stalinists killed 20 million Russians to maintain their grip on power. Nazi Germany, as horrible as it was, was not as oppressive as Stalinist Russia. Western governments didn't aid the Nazis against the Soviets because FDR, heavily influenced by the Soviet spies and sympathizers in his administration, was determined to save the Soviet Union. Quite a few Americans and Europeans questioned the wisdom of this decision, but they could not reverse it.

Simply noting the fact that the Soviets were worse than the Nazis does not make one pro-Nazi. I abhor Hitler and the Nazis, but they were not as bad as Stalin and the Soviets.

Bullshit!! the Nazis killed many more than six million jews, and where does the 20million Stalin killed come from?

 

[Soupnazi630]

Bullshit!! the Nazis killed many more than six million jews, and where does the 20million Stalin killed come from?

Soviet archives and absolutely true. for a brief period os a few years soviet archives were open to US academics ( and intelligence officers ) after the USSR fell

The deliberate murder of tens of millions by the communists ( mainly Stalin ) is absolute documented fact

Suck it up butterr cup

It is however also a combination of murder deaths from both Lenin and Stalin combined

Sorry boy as you have proven many times over you are massively ignorant about history.

 

[Soupnazi630]

How so?

It was a communists state which by defiinition means a slave state

Yes they massacred far more innocents than the nazis did

Thats how

 

[Soupnazi630]

You are just a good old Nazi, if you had got your way the US flag would have been flying over Auschwitz.

Your a simple ******* liar

Analyzing WWII and recognizing the evils of the USSR is not pro nazi

 

[Cassandro]

The living memory of World War II is passing away.

Which is a good thing from an intellectual standpoint. Individual memories are always myopic and prone to be biased by emotion, which are passed on to immediate progeny.

Just as WW1 can now be discussed rationally, it will take another generation to do the same regarding WW2. History always disproves analyses which rely on "good vs. evil" dichotomies.

 

[martybegan]

It was a communists state which by defiinition means a slave state

Yes they massacred far more innocents than the nazis did

Thats how

To be fair, they had more time to do it, and more land to do it in.

 

[martybegan]

Which is a good thing from an intellectual standpoint. Individual memories are always myopic and prone to be biased by emotion, which are passed on to immediate progeny.

Just as WW1 can now be discussed rationally, it will take another generation to do the same regarding WW2. History always disproves analyses which rely on "good vs. evil" dichotomies.

That is countered by the denial claims people come up with once the living witnesses are all in the ground.

 

[Soupnazi630]

To be fair, they had more time to do it, and more land to do it in.

Yes all true but also irrelevant and really not much longer to do it in

 

[Deadstick]

Which is a good thing from an intellectual standpoint. Individual memories are always myopic and prone to be biased by emotion, which are passed on to immediate progeny.

Just as WW1 can now be discussed rationally, it will take another generation to do the same regarding WW2. History always disproves analyses which rely on "good vs. evil" dichotomies.

Remind me who liberated the death camps including Auschwitz?

 

[otto105]

Remind me who liberated the death camps including Auschwitz?

Russian, Canadian, American and British forces