Brilliant second world war books.

And let me reassure you BritinAfrica and Monty, there are many of men and people who served in the Wehrmacht that regarded the Fuhrer as a great man.
You would be foolish and naive to believe yourself to be in the majority.
 
And let me reassure you BritinAfrica and Monty, there are many of men and people who served in the Wehrmacht that regarded the Fuhrer as a great man.
You would be foolish and naive to believe yourself to be in the majority.

Yes there were, however, I suggest you talk to Der Alte (Opa to the troops), he fought as a young officer for Hitler. Neither would those poor buggers at Stalingrad think he was a great man.

When I was at school in the middle 50's and early 60's WW2 was still in peoples minds, most of our male teachers were ex military. We studied the RAF bombing of Germany including Dresden as well as the Royal Navy attack on the French fleet. Am I ashamed of either? No I am not, I don't like what happened at Dresden, but why should I feel ashamed for a decision made by Bomber Harris?

As for Germany's peace proposals, would you believe a word Adolf said especially after Munich and "Peace in our time?" I wouldn't trust the bugger as far as I could throw him.
 
Last edited:
I followed the link and it's David Irving's website. I didn't know him so I did some research and found out that he is not a "clean" historian.

There are no comletely neutral historians. Everyone (including all of us) are biased to some degree, but there is ample evidence that his research is (partly) based on falsified or propaganda documents.

He was even put in jail in Austria for glorification of the Third Reich.

As he wasn't a witness either I don't have a high regard of his work.

But that's my opinion.
 
"Two books stand out in English from the vast literature on the second world war. Chester Wilmot's, The struggle for Europe published in 1952 and David Irving's, Hitler's war. John Keegan, Times literary supplement 1980.
 
I followed the link and it's David Irving's website. I didn't know him so I did some research and found out that he is not a "clean" historian.

There are no comletely neutral historians. Everyone (including all of us) are biased to some degree, but there is ample evidence that his research is (partly) based on falsified or propaganda documents.

He was even put in jail in Austria for glorification of the Third Reich.

As he wasn't a witness either I don't have a high regard of his work.

But that's my opinion.

I agree with you in part, no one is neutral and yes he does tend to slant his argument toward the German side however this is not necessarily a bad thing.

He is a very good historian and without people telling the German side of the story we are left with the Allied story which in many cases is as much propaganda as anything the Third Reich managed to produce.

I tend to find that with Irving the key is to halve his "Germans killed" and double his "Killed by Germans" numbers and you end up in about the right spot.

I honestly do not understand his desire to play down the Holocaust but I am prepared to listen to reasonable arguments over exact numbers killed as most literature puts the total at between 10-13 million but I don't believe that it makes a whole lot of difference in magnitude whether it is 10 or 13 million however I am not going to buy the story that it was 3, 2 limping German Shepard's and a goldfish that failed racial profiling so why try and sell that story I do not know.

On the whole I recommend reading Irving's books if for no other reason than to understand that there are two sides to every story but take his numbers with a grain of salt.


"Two books stand out in English from the vast literature on the second world war. Chester Wilmot's, The struggle for Europe published in 1952 and David Irving's, Hitler's war. John Keegan, Times literary supplement 1980.

If you want to read an interesting book on the second world war from a non-military view point I would recommend...

Reaping the Whirlwind; Personal Accounts of the German, Japanese and Italian Experiences of WW II by Nigel Hawthorne.

Reaping the Whirlwind offers amazing insight into the events of World War II through the eyes of those who fought against the Allied forces in all theatres of the war. Readers will comb through many previously unpublished accounts of the war from German, Italian and Japanese soldiers, civilians and military leaders. The book covers every major arena of the war: Europe; the German invasion of Russia; Rommel's Afrika Korps; and the Pacific war between Japan and forces of the US, Australia and New Zealand. Reaping the Whirlwind uses the authentic voices of Germans and Japanese people caught up in the conflict and highlights the similar deprivations and dangers experienced by both victors and vanquished.

http://www.amazon.com/Reaping-Whirlwind-Personal-Accounts-Experiences/dp/0715327445


Another book I would suggest (for those interested in peoples thinking) is The Nuremberg Interviews by Leon Goldensohn.
He was the psychiatrist who monitored the mental condition of German leaders during the Nuremberg trials and his notes have been compiled into a book.

During the Nuremberg trials, Dr. Leon Goldensohn–a psychiatrist for the U.S. Army–monitored the mental health of two dozen German leaders charged with carrying out genocide. These recorded conversations have gone largely unexamined for more than fifty years, until Robert Gellately–one of the premier historians of Nazi Germany–made them available to the public in this remarkable collection.Here are interviews with the likes of Hans Frank, Hermann Goering, Ernst Kaltenbrunner, and Joachim von Ribbentrop–the highest ranking Nazi officials in the Nuremberg jails. Here too are interviews with lesser-known officials essential to the inner workings of the Third Reich. Candid and often shockingly truthful, The Nuremberg Interviews is a profound addition to our understanding of the Nazi mind and mission.

http://www.amazon.com/Nuremberg-Interviews-Leon-Goldensohn/dp/1400030439
 
Last edited:
I agree with you in part, no one is neutral and yes he does tend to slant his argument toward the German side however this is not necessarily a bad thing.

He is a very good historian and without people telling the German side of the story we are left with the Allied story which in many cases is as much propaganda as anything the Third Reich managed to produce.

I tend to find that with Irving the key is to halve his "Germans killed" and double his "Killed by Germans" numbers and you end up in about the right spot.

I honestly do not understand his desire to play down the Holocaust but I am prepared to listen to reasonable arguments over exact numbers killed as most literature puts the total at between 10-13 million but I don't believe that it makes a whole lot of difference in magnitude whether it is 10 or 13 million however I am not going to buy the story that it was 3, 2 limping German Shepard's and a goldfish that failed racial profiling so why try and sell that story I do not know.

On the whole I recommend reading Irving's books if for no other reason than to understand that there are two sides to every story but take his numbers with a grain of salt.

One cannot simply deny the Holocoust. But they can bring in some mitigating factors. They did try to expell those unwanted people to other countries but none of those were willing to take lots of them in, and when the war broke out all countries closed their doors. So the unwanted people were trapped inside the nazi territories. This is of course no excuse to kill them and blame someone else.
 
I was under the impression that the majority died from cholera and typhus epidemics that ravaged the camps. The only executions I'm aware of are the ones that occurred on the eastern front but all that nonsense of the gas chambers is utter rubbish. It has been proven time and again. Like I keep saying people, try reading from both parts of the argument. It allows you to reach a better understanding.
 
I was under the impression that the majority died from cholera and typhus epidemics that ravaged the camps. The only executions I'm aware of are the ones that occurred on the eastern front but all that nonsense of the gas chambers is utter rubbish. It has been proven time and again. Like I keep saying people, try reading from both parts of the argument. It allows you to reach a better understanding.
I have seen and been in these camps in 1946. I have seen personal photo albums with pictures from 1944. I had a family member who served in a concentration camp and was sentenced to 5 years imprisonment after the war.

This was the biggest blemish on Germany's honor and you claim that it never happened. I have lived through it and I still live with it. If you still have that point of view, then I have nothing to say to you.
 
That is very uncalled for, there is a very old proverb about picking your battles and in this case you have picked one you are going to lose.
My suggestion would be to just delete the post or at least edit it to be more civil before it gets ugly and trust me this will get ugly.
 
Last edited:
Oh no he didnt! Hahaha what a foolish boy you are micheal, go back to smashing bottles over your head with your neo nazi mates
 
You're a ****ing neo-Nazi and that such a pig have worn the Queen´s uniform I´m disgusted by.
I would encourage that you be thrown out and if not, that the members of this board ignores you!
 
You're a ****ing neo-Nazi and that such a pig have worn the Queen´s uniform I´m disgusted by.
I would encourage that you be thrown out and if not, that the members of this board ignores you!

My vote is that the prat gets chucked out.
 
I am less enthusiastic about "chucking people out" as nothing is learn't by segregating ourselves from those we don't agree with but the post needs to be removed.
 
I am less enthusiastic about "chucking people out" as nothing is learn't by segregating ourselves from those we don't agree with but the post needs to be removed.

One can tell where his mind set is at, if it stays are we going to be subjected to more of the same claptrap and more posts removed?
 
Last edited:
While its a sensitive issue- go ahead buddy state your case. I think you will find that holocaust denials are pretty feeble when the facts come out.
At my university david irving was held up as an example of an historian turned showboater who now has no credibility whatsoever. We watched his interviews and laughed.
Anyway take this as people taking the bait and show us your reasoning.
 
I don't think we can change the opinion of a damn neo-Nazi; it's not worth the energy and the time to do that. If you want to spread your neo-Nazi crap, join a white supremacist forum, there you will be welcome, not here
 
Back
Top