The Jewish Question

[Luketopia]

I'm Jewish, ask me my opinion on this.

[Agymnum]

I'm Jewish, ask me my opinion on this.

Okay... What's your opinion?

[North Stradia]

I agree with your sentiments. I think the Holocaust happened because it was allowed to happen.

Oh, this'll be good.

The Third Reich really made no real attempt to keep it a secret.

They lied repeatedly and consistently to their own people about what the camps were for, and the only people who were in a position to know were generally sympathetic to the idea in the first place.

I believe it was allowed to happen because the United States, as a whole, wanted nothing to do with the problems of Europe and Britain and the Soviet Union stood idly by because there was no economical gain for them.

The Holocaust didn't even actually start in full until 1942, when all the countries you named were already fighting, regardless of isolationism and economics.. There was discrimination (getting worse all the time), but the Nazis only decided on extermination as the strategy at Wannsee in '42.
So there goes that point.

This does not excuse the Third Reich for what they did, but there is an old Roman saying: "Opportunity makes the thief." Personally, I think "The Holocaust" was just another holocaust, and not even the worst of them.
Take American and the Indians for example, or the Japanese and south-eastern Asia. Hell, Russia and its own people. Stalin probably had more the six or seven times the amount of people killed than did Hitler.

Not really relevant, and I'd love to see sources for those Stalin statistics. Six fucking times? Seven? That's 60-70 MILLION people.

Mao - 40 - 50 million. Stalin - 10 to 20 million.

[Souseiseki]

They lied repeatedly and consistently to their own people about what the camps were for, and the only people who were in a position to know were generally sympathetic to the idea in the first place.

pretty sure that back during wwi they entente also made shit up about a lot of super terrible evil things the enemy were doing that turned out to be utter bollocks, so that probably didn't help the world in general with the whole idea

[Schwabenreich]

Oh, this'll be good.

They lied repeatedly and consistently to their own people about what the camps were for, and the only people who were in a position to know were generally sympathetic to the idea in the first place.


The Holocaust didn't even actually start in full until 1942, when all the countries you named were already fighting, regardless of isolationism and economics.. There was discrimination (getting worse all the time), but the Nazis only decided on extermination as the strategy at Wannsee in '42.
So there goes that point.

Not really relevant, and I'd love to see sources for those Stalin statistics. Six fucking times? Seven? That's 60-70 MILLION people.

Mao - 40 - 50 million. Stalin - 10 to 20 million.

40 - 50 is a low estimate for Mao isn't it? and I thought 20 million was a low estimate for Stalin too. Though I'm assuming you're including the deaths to starvation in those tallies.

[The Tiger Kingdom]

Not really relevant, and I'd love to see sources for those Stalin statistics. Six fucking times? Seven? That's 60-70 MILLION people.

Mao - 40 - 50 million. Stalin - 10 to 20 million.[/quote]
That's not 6-7 times. That's somewhere between 1-1.5 times, maybe.
And Mao (even though no one brought him up) was more a function of incompetence and party ideology LEADING to death, rather than extermination as a policy. To say nothing of the fact that China has a vastly larger population.
A holocaust is not just a whole bunch of people dying. It is a whole bunch of people being deliberately murdered.

[Luketopia]

I'm Jewish, ask me my opinion on this.

Okay... What's your opinion?

The Germans, they are the man culprits upon this. And of course, the Americans. Most of the holocausts medical experiments were learned from what was done in "america" and many of the captured nazi scientists from operation paperclip who were war-criminals went unpunished. That was utter bullshit in my opinion.

[Souseiseki]

there is already a stalin vs hitler thread where they have no doubt combed the numbers time and time again please don't do that stupid shit here this is a thread for blaming mao for the holocaust

[The Tiger Kingdom]

They lied repeatedly and consistently to their own people about what the camps were for, and the only people who were in a position to know were generally sympathetic to the idea in the first place.

pretty sure that back during wwi they entente also made shit up about a lot of super terrible evil things the enemy were doing that turned out to be utter bollocks, so that probably didn't help the world in general with the whole idea

That's an excellent point. During WW1, all sorts of horrific stories were made up about the Germans: crucifying Belgian nuns and children, massacring civilians, burning churches, all of it utter bullshit or wildly exaggerated at best.
And so when similar stories started coming out about the camps, many people suspected the same was the case.

[Forsher]

Basically, to what extent can we allocate guilt for the Holocaust on those who were not Nazis or actual Nazi collaborators?

I say, we can give a reasonable lump of guilt to the likes of Britain and the US.Certainly, things got a lot worse but the Nuremburg Laws weren't exactly a secret.

The Nuremburg laws weren't the Holocaust.

I'm not saying they were. I am saying they are a sign that there is a problem here. This I thought was clear from, "Things got a lot worse."

The unwillingness to to grant Jews asylum also speaks volumes. The result of the Evian Conference more.

This is a bit more difficult to explain. Honestly, I think that the Americans and Brits of the time could literally just not fathom the depths to which Hitler would sink. They got that Jews were being discriminated against, but they never expected the end result of what would happen - there was no real parallel to it even in the depravity of WW1. They made the mistake of thinking the Nazis were sane, and many millions paid for it. It was a mistake, not a decision, to leave the Jews to die.

So, you think they read as more or less as another, "Expel all the Jews," for which there was precedent?

Then there's the wider view of things. The way WWI ended is undeniably a contributing factor behind the existence of the Third Reich and that was down to the victors.

No, that was still down to the Germans, even if the Allies screwed with them in the terms. Just because the Allies treated them unfairly harshly (to the German point-of-view anyway) doesn't excuse Nazi Germany rising from the ashes.
They could NOT have been murderous psychos, you know.

I disagree. The Treaty of Versailles has been essentially described as a dog with no teeth. It wants to be nasty but in the end it just didn't back it up. It was pretty ordinary in terms of harshness but it was very unfair. The Germans weren't responsible for WWI and we are taught that this was a clause that really got to the Germans. An undercurrent of resent, ripe for the tapping,

The Third Reich didn't have to be murderous, but it really did need something like the Treaty of Versailles.

The weakness of the League of Nations and appeasement all come into it as well.

Indeed.

The Nazis thought that the other powers wouldn't like what they were doing, they subdued anti-Semitism for the 1936 Olympics. So, at least, we cannot say that didn't care.

It's true, that. I still would have loved to see Hitler's face when he heard Jesse Owens won.

I've got this book, it contrasts a Nazi salute with the Black Power one from a later Olympics. Just for fun.

This is not to say that the Nazis weren't responsible for the Holocaust.
It is to say that the other powers of the day aren't blameless.

I suggest you modify how exactly you're saying what you're saying. Let me put to you my view of the matter:
The Nazis and their lapdog scumfuck collaborators were entirely "to blame" for the Holocaust. They made the camps, they put the Jews (and all those other groups) in, and they murdered them, of their own free will.
The rest of the world made an extraordinarily tragic mistake in that they didn't read the signs of what was coming properly and act quickly enough to prevent it. They were too idealistic and optimistic, and in the end, it was too late.
It seems the only thing that truly drove it home was finding the camps and seeing for ourselves. Nobody wanted to assume that was going on without proof in their faces.

I did not intend to hit the ball so that it broke the vase. I truly didn't. But I hit it and so it is my fault.

A more accurate analogy would be, John hit the ball that broke the vase but George chose where to play which made that possible.

Jewish question? I don't think that a question regarding peoples should exist.
The Jews should have all inalienable rights as do all mankind.

Isn't the topic.

What did you expect? it'd be interesting to know.

I was kind of thinking it was gonna be a thread about how the jewish question should have been handled if at all. I mean, I think Germany should have just acknowledged jews are a fine people and fine citizens and what not, but it'd be nice to have seen people discuss the alternatives such as their poorly thought out and quickly abandoned plan to send them to Madagascar.

I also suspected it might have been about the post war jews, and how they should have been treated, such as whether they should have been invited into British Palestine, and whether Britain should have pulled out when ethnic violence occured.

Instead I got the unexpected but perfectly legitimate topic questioning how responsible non-nazi peoples were in treating jews and the role of others in the holocaust. Nothing wrong with that, just not what I expected.

All those are very interesting topics indeed. I'm surprised we don't see more of them here.

To be honest, The Jewish Question raises bells in my head but it is vague which is why I thought it would make a reasonable title.

[The Tiger Kingdom]

Okay... What's your opinion?

The Germans, they are the man culprits upon this. And of course, the Americans.

Oh Christ.

Most of the holocausts medical experiments were learned from what was done in "america"

Source that shit.

and many of the captured nazi scientists from operation paperclip who were war-criminals went unpunished. That was utter bullshit in my opinion.

There were a handful, yes. That was wrong.
That does not equal "Americans should be blamed for the slaughter of six million fucking people because a few of them didn't get punished enough after the fact". To say nothing of the fact that most of the scientists the Americans and Soviets retrieved were in aeronautic research and had no control over the camps themselves. Some of them were aware of them. That doesn't even remotely fucking translate to "American guilt".
Do you even understand what you're saying?

[Luketopia]

The Germans, they are the man culprits upon this. And of course, the Americans.

Oh Christ.

Most of the holocausts medical experiments were learned from what was done in "america"

Source that shit.

and many of the captured nazi scientists from operation paperclip who were war-criminals went unpunished. That was utter bullshit in my opinion.

There were a handful, yes. That was wrong.
That does not equal "Americans should be blamed for the slaughter of six million fucking people because a few of them didn't get punished enough after the fact". To say nothing of the fact that most of the scientists the Americans and Soviets retrieved were in aeronautic research and had no control over the camps themselves. Some of them were aware of them. That doesn't even remotely fucking translate to "American guilt".
Do you even understand what you're saying?

Yes, I do understand. Clearly, you're not the one who is understanding what I'm saying.

Code: Select all

[quote]During the Nuremberg trials, several of the Nazi doctors and scientists who were being tried for their human experiments claimed that the inspiration for their studies had come from studies that they had seen performed in the United States.[10][47] In 1945, as part of Operation Paperclip, the United States government recruited 1,600 Nazi scientists, many of whom had performed human experimentation in Nazi concentration camps. The scientists were offered immunity from any war crimes they had committed during the course of their work for the Nazi government, in return for doing similar research for the United States government. Many of the Nazi scientists continued their human experimentation when they arrived in the United States.[164][examples needed][/quote]

[Agymnum]

Oh Christ.

Source that shit.

There were a handful, yes. That was wrong.
That does not equal "Americans should be blamed for the slaughter of six million fucking people because a few of them didn't get punished enough after the fact". To say nothing of the fact that most of the scientists the Americans and Soviets retrieved were in aeronautic research and had no control over the camps themselves. Some of them were aware of them. That doesn't even remotely fucking translate to "American guilt".
Do you even understand what you're saying?

Yes, I do understand. Clearly, you're not the one who is understanding what I'm saying. http://catholicexchange.com/what-the-na ... d-from-us/ << is my source.

Not that I support eugenics or anything, but using a site that has religious bias doesn't make good evidence. The fact "Catholic" is in the side address should be a dead giveaway that the information has the potential to be biased.

[The Tiger Kingdom]

The Nuremburg laws weren't the Holocaust.

I'm not saying they were. I am saying they are a sign that there is a problem here. This I thought was clear from, "Things got a lot worse."

I guess what I'm saying is that the Allies immediately not declaring war/forcing legal changes on Germany when the Nuremburg Laws came out in 35 does not translate into "ignoring the Holocaust".

The unwillingness to to grant Jews asylum also speaks volumes. The result of the Evian Conference more.

This is a bit more difficult to explain. Honestly, I think that the Americans and Brits of the time could literally just not fathom the depths to which Hitler would sink. They got that Jews were being discriminated against, but they never expected the end result of what would happen - there was no real parallel to it even in the depravity of WW1. They made the mistake of thinking the Nazis were sane, and many millions paid for it. It was a mistake, not a decision, to leave the Jews to die.

So, you think they read as more or less as another, "Expel all the Jews," for which there was precedent?
[/quote]
I think they likely saw that as the worst that could happen, yes.

Then there's the wider view of things. The way WWI ended is undeniably a contributing factor behind the existence of the Third Reich and that was down to the victors.

No, that was still down to the Germans, even if the Allies screwed with them in the terms. Just because the Allies treated them unfairly harshly (to the German point-of-view anyway) doesn't excuse Nazi Germany rising from the ashes.
They could NOT have been murderous psychos, you know.

I disagree. The Treaty of Versailles has been essentially described as a dog with no teeth. It wants to be nasty but in the end it just didn't back it up. It was pretty ordinary in terms of harshness but it was very unfair. The Germans weren't responsible for WWI and we are taught that this was a clause that really got to the Germans. An undercurrent of resent, ripe for the tapping,

The Third Reich didn't have to be murderous, but it really did need something like the Treaty of Versailles.

German militarism was a HUGE part of WW1. The prime cause, even.
The Kaiser desperately wanted a war with Russia, because it would win them space, glory, whatever, and they knew they could win. This is on the record, clearly, you can look it up if you like. He accepted that this would entail war with France. They did not anticipate Britain or America coming in.
So they were essentially OK with starting a war that would involve 4/5ths the actual players that ended up coming in. The world was much calmer and more peaceful in 1914 before Ferdinand died than it was in 1908 or 1911. No one really saw a war coming after all the minor crises they'd weathered, except the Kaiser, who was itching for a scrap.
And yes, either they should've had a treaty that was fair, or they should've enforced the one they had. Versailles sucked.
But it still doesn't excuse the Nazis.

This is not to say that the Nazis weren't responsible for the Holocaust.
It is to say that the other powers of the day aren't blameless.

I suggest you modify how exactly you're saying what you're saying. Let me put to you my view of the matter:
The Nazis and their lapdog scumfuck collaborators were entirely "to blame" for the Holocaust. They made the camps, they put the Jews (and all those other groups) in, and they murdered them, of their own free will.
The rest of the world made an extraordinarily tragic mistake in that they didn't read the signs of what was coming properly and act quickly enough to prevent it. They were too idealistic and optimistic, and in the end, it was too late.
It seems the only thing that truly drove it home was finding the camps and seeing for ourselves. Nobody wanted to assume that was going on without proof in their faces.

I did not intend to hit the ball so that it broke the vase. I truly didn't. But I hit it and so it is my fault.

A more accurate analogy would be, John hit the ball that broke the vase but George chose where to play which made that possible.
[/quote]
Ehhh...
It's still all down to the Nazis, though. There were a million ways 20s Germany could've turned out that didn't involved mass murder.

[Luketopia]

Yes, I do understand. Clearly, you're not the one who is understanding what I'm saying. http://catholicexchange.com/what-the-na ... d-from-us/ << is my source.

Not that I support eugenics or anything, but using a site that has religious bias doesn't make good evidence. The fact "Catholic" is in the side address should be a dead giveaway that the information has the potential to be biased.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unethical_ ... nal_policy << go down to there, and read this.

During the Nuremberg trials, several of the Nazi doctors and scientists who were being tried for their human experiments claimed that the inspiration for their studies had come from studies that they had seen performed in the United States.[10][47] In 1945, as part of Operation Paperclip, the United States government recruited 1,600 Nazi scientists, many of whom had performed human experimentation in Nazi concentration camps. The scientists were offered immunity from any war crimes they had committed during the course of their work for the Nazi government, in return for doing similar research for the United States government. Many of the Nazi scientists continued their human experimentation when they arrived in the United States.[164][examples needed]

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

Not that I support eugenics or anything, but using a site that has religious bias doesn't make good evidence. The fact "Catholic" is in the side address should be a dead giveaway that the information has the potential to be biased.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unethical_ ... nal_policy << go down to there, and read this.

During the Nuremberg trials, several of the Nazi doctors and scientists who were being tried for their human experiments claimed that the inspiration for their studies had come from studies that they had seen performed in the United States.[10][47] In 1945, as part of Operation Paperclip, the United States government recruited 1,600 Nazi scientists, many of whom had performed human experimentation in Nazi concentration camps. The scientists were offered immunity from any war crimes they had committed during the course of their work for the Nazi government, in return for doing similar research for the United States government. Many of the Nazi scientists continued their human experimentation when they arrived in the United States.[164][examples needed]

As most of the information regarding Operation Paperclip is still classified, there's no way of really saying if the purpose of it was for that stated in Wikipedia. According to this, the main interest was for weapons.

Of particular interest were scientists specialising in aerodynamics and rocketry (such as those involved in the V-1 and V-2 projects), chemical weapons, chemical reaction technology and medicine.

Although medicine was included, it doesn't seem to have been it's main purpose.

Now I'm not denying that the US extricated these scientists and brought them to US soil.

[The Tiger Kingdom]

Oh Christ.

Source that shit.

There were a handful, yes. That was wrong.
That does not equal "Americans should be blamed for the slaughter of six million fucking people because a few of them didn't get punished enough after the fact". To say nothing of the fact that most of the scientists the Americans and Soviets retrieved were in aeronautic research and had no control over the camps themselves. Some of them were aware of them. That doesn't even remotely fucking translate to "American guilt".
Do you even understand what you're saying?

Yes, I do understand. Clearly, you're not the one who is understanding what I'm saying.

Code: Select all

[quote]During the Nuremberg trials, several of the Nazi doctors and scientists who were being tried for their human experiments claimed that the inspiration for their studies had come from studies that they had seen performed in the United States.[10][47] In 1945, as part of Operation Paperclip, the United States government recruited 1,600 Nazi scientists, many of whom had performed human experimentation in Nazi concentration camps. The scientists were offered immunity from any war crimes they had committed during the course of their work for the Nazi government, in return for doing similar research for the United States government. Many of the Nazi scientists continued their human experimentation when they arrived in the United States.[164][examples needed][/quote]

Ok, let's go through this.
1) Your source is overtly religious and thus potentially biased.
2) Same with Wikipedia. Note "examples needed".
3) That article was written by a man named Charles Colson. That should ring a bell with some people - he was one of Nixon's hatchet men, who loved trying to figure out ways to fuck over people who went on talk shows and insulted Nixon (he loved the idea of firebombing houses of "enemies list people" from what I recall). He wrote that column about 5 months before he died at a very old age.
What does this lead to? He's not very reliable.
4) Again, excusing those criminals was wrong. That does not equal guilt in the Holocaust, that is guilt for not punishing guilty men. You don't understand what you're saying.
America was not "guilty of the Holocaust" (IE the murder of millions of people) because they let some people off who shouldn't have been.
the Nazis pulled the fucking triggers, let the gas flow, and built the camps. It's all on them. No one made them do that.

[Luketopia]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unethical_ ... nal_policy << go down to there, and read this.

As most of the information regarding Operation Paperclip is still classified, there's no way of really saying if the purpose of it was for that stated in Wikipedia. According to this, the main interest was for weapons.

Of particular interest were scientists specialising in aerodynamics and rocketry (such as those involved in the V-1 and V-2 projects), chemical weapons, chemical reaction technology and medicine.

Although medicine was included, it doesn't seem to have been it's main purpose.

Now I'm not denying that the US extricated these scientists and brought them to US soil.

I'm not focusing on that. I'm focusing on this

During the Nuremberg trials, several of the Nazi doctors and scientists who were being tried for their human experiments claimed that the inspiration for their studies had come from studies that they had seen performed in the United States.[10][47]

, because Mr. I'M TOO LAZY TO READ EVERYTHING ABOUT MEDICAL EXPERIMENTATION wanted a source.

[Luketopia]

Yes, I do understand. Clearly, you're not the one who is understanding what I'm saying.

Code: Select all

[quote]During the Nuremberg trials, several of the Nazi doctors and scientists who were being tried for their human experiments claimed that the inspiration for their studies had come from studies that they had seen performed in the United States.[10][47] In 1945, as part of Operation Paperclip, the United States government recruited 1,600 Nazi scientists, many of whom had performed human experimentation in Nazi concentration camps. The scientists were offered immunity from any war crimes they had committed during the course of their work for the Nazi government, in return for doing similar research for the United States government. Many of the Nazi scientists continued their human experimentation when they arrived in the United States.[164][examples needed][/quote]

Ok, let's go through this.
1) Your source is overtly religious and thus potentially biased.
2) Same with Wikipedia. Note "examples needed".
3) That article was written by a man named Charles Colson. That should ring a bell with some people - he was one of Nixon's hatchet men, who loved trying to figure out ways to fuck over people who went on talk shows and insulted Nixon (he loved the idea of firebombing houses of "enemies list people" from what I recall). He wrote that column about 5 months before he died at a very old age.
What does this lead to? He's not very reliable.
4) Again, excusing those criminals was wrong. That does not equal guilt in the Holocaust, that is guilt for not punishing guilty men. You don't understand what you're saying.
America was not "guilty of the Holocaust" (IE the murder of millions of people) because they let some people off who shouldn't have been.
the Nazis pulled the fucking triggers, let the gas flow, and built the camps. It's all on them. No one made them do that.

Nope, you're wrong. You're pulling the "Wikipedia isn't true dude, Adolf Hitler didn't die on April 30th dude. Wikipedia says he did, but Wikipedia lies so he still alive man" wildcard. Too bad for you that it actually just made you look stupid and just made you lose all credibility in this arguement. You do not know anything about this subject, LEAVE.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

As most of the information regarding Operation Paperclip is still classified, there's no way of really saying if the purpose of it was for that stated in Wikipedia. According to this, the main interest was for weapons.



Although medicine was included, it doesn't seem to have been it's main purpose.

Now I'm not denying that the US extricated these scientists and brought them to US soil.

I'm not focusing on that. I'm focusing on this

During the Nuremberg trials, several of the Nazi doctors and scientists who were being tried for their human experiments claimed that the inspiration for their studies had come from studies that they had seen performed in the United States.[10][47]

, because Mr. I'M TOO LAZY TO READ EVERYTHING ABOUT MEDICAL EXPERIMENTATION wanted a source.

Well, The Tiger Kingdom seems to have read your source and stated that the Wiki article has a few flaws.

In any case, as I stated, since the info regarding this operation is still mainly classified, we don't really know if what is stated in Wikipedia actually happened. It might have, mind you. But then again, it might have not.

[Agymnum]

Nope, you're wrong. You're pulling the "Wikipedia isn't true dude, Adolf Hitler didn't die on April 30th dude. Wikipedia says he did, but Wikipedia lies so he still alive man" wildcard. Too bad for you that it actually just made you look stupid and just made you lose all credibility in this arguement. You do not know anything about this subject, LEAVE.

Cool it. We understand you have feelings about the situation, but you don't need to get personal and insult people.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

Ok, let's go through this.
1) Your source is overtly religious and thus potentially biased.
2) Same with Wikipedia. Note "examples needed".
3) That article was written by a man named Charles Colson. That should ring a bell with some people - he was one of Nixon's hatchet men, who loved trying to figure out ways to fuck over people who went on talk shows and insulted Nixon (he loved the idea of firebombing houses of "enemies list people" from what I recall). He wrote that column about 5 months before he died at a very old age.
What does this lead to? He's not very reliable.
4) Again, excusing those criminals was wrong. That does not equal guilt in the Holocaust, that is guilt for not punishing guilty men. You don't understand what you're saying.
America was not "guilty of the Holocaust" (IE the murder of millions of people) because they let some people off who shouldn't have been.
the Nazis pulled the fucking triggers, let the gas flow, and built the camps. It's all on them. No one made them do that.

Nope, you're wrong. You're pulling the "Wikipedia isn't true dude, Adolf Hitler didn't die on April 30th dude. Wikipedia says he did, but Wikipedia lies so he still alive man" wildcard. Too bad for you that it actually just made you look stupid and just made you lose all credibility in this arguement. You do not know anything about this subject, LEAVE.

Here, read this. These are the records of the Office of the Secretary of Defense, pertaining to Operation Paperclip. That probably has less bias than Wiki or the Catholic source you used.

[Protectors of the Temple]

Nope, you're wrong. You're pulling the "Wikipedia isn't true dude, Adolf Hitler didn't die on April 30th dude. Wikipedia says he did, but Wikipedia lies so he still alive man" wildcard. Too bad for you that it actually just made you look stupid and just made you lose all credibility in this arguement. You do not know anything about this subject, LEAVE.

Cool it. We understand you have feelings about the situation, but you don't need to get personal and insult people.

True that! I lost family in the holocaust but you dont see me ranting like that!

[DogDoo 7]

As I always said, "The Shoah must go on!"

Anyway, the "Jewish State" should be moved to Germany. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xVGeR4r5hbk

[Ralkovia]

Ok, let's go through this.
1) Your source is overtly religious and thus potentially biased.
2) Same with Wikipedia. Note "examples needed".
3) That article was written by a man named Charles Colson. That should ring a bell with some people - he was one of Nixon's hatchet men, who loved trying to figure out ways to fuck over people who went on talk shows and insulted Nixon (he loved the idea of firebombing houses of "enemies list people" from what I recall). He wrote that column about 5 months before he died at a very old age.
What does this lead to? He's not very reliable.
4) Again, excusing those criminals was wrong. That does not equal guilt in the Holocaust, that is guilt for not punishing guilty men. You don't understand what you're saying.
America was not "guilty of the Holocaust" (IE the murder of millions of people) because they let some people off who shouldn't have been.
the Nazis pulled the fucking triggers, let the gas flow, and built the camps. It's all on them. No one made them do that.

Nope, you're wrong. You're pulling the "Wikipedia isn't true dude, Adolf Hitler didn't die on April 30th dude. Wikipedia says he did, but Wikipedia lies so he still alive man" wildcard. Too bad for you that it actually just made you look stupid and just made you lose all credibility in this arguement. You do not know anything about this subject, LEAVE.

Please bullshit. America can't be blamed for everything. It's policy was like that of the rest of the World. Seeded in ignorance. Germany and its collaborators carry nearly all the blame. Can the rest of the World be blamed for not accepting a mass of poor immigrants coming from a despised minority? sure. But they had no idea. I don't think America would have turned the Jews away had they known what this would lead to.

I lost my entire extended family. My great grandfather and his family were the last survivors of the extermination camp Maly Trostenets. My grandfather had to dig up the corpses of his friends so the Nazis could burn the evidence away.