Comments by "Dennis Weidner" (@dennisweidner288) on "TIKhistory" channel.

  1. Id they didn't want to be bombed they should not have invaded South Korea. I suggest that you compare South Korea and North Korea today and see what was at stake.
    1
  2. I suggest you look at what the Communists did in Cambodia.
    1
  3. Nonsence. The Japanese built a significant industrial base in North Korea before World War II.
    1
  4. Seeing the rple in destroying the NAZI and Japanese militarists, it is for good reason.
    1
  5. Exempt from what? Are you saying they had the right to invade South Korea and commit war crimes?
    1
  6.  ROBERT J KIS  Yoi may not like 'Yanks', but I notice you do not provide any facts. Like how America saved Britain or the millions of Europeans that are alive today because of America.
    1
  7.  Rafael Resende  You need to read a little about the issues you pontificate on. Di you even know what a kangaroo court is? In the Allied trials of the Germans after the War they would provided basic civil rights. They were allowed consul. They were allowed to call witnesses and present evidence. All the normal procedures of Western criminal justice. And the procedures were all public and a matter of public record. The defendants were not tortured before or after the trials. And not all the defendants were found guilty. It was the NAZIs who held Kangaroo courts, not the Allies. If you object to kangaroo courts it is the NAZI judicial system you need to criticize, not the Allies. And in the case of the Einsatzgrupen, the 1.5 million men, women, and children murdered were not even given kangaroo court trials, they were just rounded up and murdered. Only a twisted mind would suggest that the Soviet Policy toward the Geneva Convention justifies the Einsatzgruppen murder rampage against innocent civilians. And in fact only a small number of the men of the Einsatzgruppen were ever tried and punished. https://www.histclo.com/essay/war/ww2/hol/eg/hol-eg.html
    1
  8.  Rafael Resende  If you were using irony why did you refer to the trials of German war criminals as kangaroo courts? So now we are defending the North Korea regime. Is there no end of evil, murderous regimes you do not defend?. Have you compared the modern vibrant democracy of South Korea to the totalitarian nightmare of the north? https://www.histclo.com/country/other/kor/eco/south/kse-tehan.html America did not start the Korean War. The Soviet Union (which armed the North to the teeth) and North Korea launched the War. Perhaps you missed that little piece of history. I have never heard that President Truman justified the bombing because North Korea had not signed the Geneva Convention. What is your source? The bombing occurred in an effort to disrupt the Chinese/North Korea war effort and to impair the flow of men and material to the south. Supporting our men and ROK soldiers who at great personal cost were defending the people of South Korea from a brutal invader is not a war crime. If North Korea did not want to be bombed, they should not have launched the War and invaded South Korea. And committed countless war crimes in the process--something else you seemed to have missed.
    1
  9. Another comment. This is a very good video, Collingham's work is very important. But you make a serious error when you speak of the War in the West tying up Allied divisions. [9:30] This was not why the war in the West was important. With Barbarossa, German manpower was primarily committed to the Ostkrieg, even after D-Day--over 80 percent. There were two primary reasons why the War in the West was important: 1. I made it impossible for Germany to import oil (which you mention, but Russian authors do not). 2. Germany had to devote its industry primarily to fighting the War in the West. The Battle of the Atlantic, and even more the Air War required huge industrial commitments. As a result, the Ostheer was poorly supplied and supported--trudging east with horse-drawn carts. The Ostheer was the decisive camping of the War, yet because of the War un the West, Germany was not able to bring one of its major assets--its industrial war machine to fully to bear on the Red Army (which you do not mention and Russian authors also ignore).
    1
  10.  @TheImperatorKnight  Absolutely. But many were actually seized by the NAZI state as part if Goering's Five Year Plan. https://www.histclo.com/essay/war/ww2/tol/ger/eco/nazi-eco.html I think there is so much resistance to this idea is a testimony to the extent that Marxist professors in our universities have popularized the idea of socialism.
    1
  11. As i understand the British system, you folks are stuck with a Labour Government for 5 years and a majority that means there is no opposition to what they can do.
    1
  12. You might want to check this out. https://www.histclo.com/essay/war/ww2/camp/pac/china/w2c-inv.html
    1
  13.  @grizzlygrizzle  Good heavens. It will take a little time to digest all of that. We certainly could not agree more about the 1619 Project. Which is nothing but historical nonsense. The only thing that I can think of that is more nonsensical is the Russia, Russia, Russia hoax witch hunt. The fundamental matter that was launched in colonial America was the idea that ordinary people can govern themselves without kings. Slavery was a terrible thing but involved a small part of the American population and a smaller part of the world population. And America not only put the nail in the coffin of monarchy but American democracy and capitalism also put a nail in the coffin of forced labor of which slavery was a relatively small part. I do not mean to dismiss the horrors of slavery, but the 1619 Project ignores the role America played in ending both it and the larger problem of forced labor around the world. By 'based on' I was referring to the percentage of the population that was enslaved. While historians debate the extent of the slave population in Greece and Rome, something like one-third is a ballpark figure. Other ancient civilizations have smaller numbers. This is because much of the population of other civilizations was a landless peasantry with very few rights--making slavery unnecessary. I will assess the rest of your post but give me more time.
    1
  14.  @grizzlygrizzle  1. disagree the numbers are not important. I see as a primary factor the proportion of people enslaved. Not the only factor, but in my thinking, the single most important one. 2. I think you overestimate the number of slaves in ancient civilizations. For example, it used to be thought that the pyramids were built by slaves. we now know they were for the most part paid wages. My understanding is that the slave population of Greece and Rome was much higher than other ancient civilizations. This of course is especially interesting in itself given it was the Greeks who invented the very idea of freedom. Now my reading of ancient history is is episodic at best and I certainly do not pretend to have any great knowledge, but that is my understanding. I have read a good bit about Mose-America and the Andes. And there certainly were slaves, but they were a small portion of the population. This certainly was the case of China. The vast portion of the population was the peasantry. 3. You are right that Africans and African chiefs were involved in the slave trade. But I think this was exacerbated by Arab and European slave traders. I think before the arrival of the Arabs and Europeans that slave trading was on a much lower order of magnitude. Again my knowledge of early African societies is limited, but that is the impression I have at this time. I think is suggested by the degree to which areas of Africa were depopulated by the external slave trade. Or the fact that African slaves were a very small part of the slave population in ancient Rome. 4. Are you sure that babies and very young children are impacted by people who look differently. I am unfamiliar with the research on this. I take it you have some knowledge of actual research. Verb interesting. 5. Children on the other hand are less polluted with racism for the simple fact, as you explain, culture and learned behaviors are a major part of racism. 6. Genetics is a taboo topic, for me. In this case, avoiding the subject I think justifiable so because of the huge harm that can come of it. Another factor is that even if there are genetic differences (especially with intelligence) the order of magnitude would seem below that of the level of differences within racial/ethnic groups. And there is also the issue of separating differences between race and culture. 7. This brings me to me the most interesting issue you raise -- the fact that what is often seen as racism is a cultural issue. This touches on one of the great issues in modern America violence and the police. Now I think that there should be very high standards for police and that they should be carefully vetted. But I also think that we should have reasonable expectations for the police. And that individuals can not help to be impacted by their day-to-day experiences. People who would not think of going into police work,n especially the woke crowd expect perfection. from the police. And this all is worsened when parents teach children to hate the police. The problem here is African-Americans have a much higher rate of criminal behavior than other ethnic groups. We know this because neighborhoods that have high populations of AAs are some of the highest crime rates. And this is based on REPORTED crimes and not police profiling. In AA neighborhoods, the crimes being reported are being reported by mostly AAs. These high crime rates can not help but impact police officers (both black and white). This is something the AA community does not like to hear and assumes that anyone that brings this up is a racist. AA spokesmen and rewoken median are all for bringing up statistics dealing with inequities, but statistics about high crime in AA neighborhoods are seen as racist and suppressed. It is something that needs to be part of the conversation. And notice that many of the high-profile incidents in the news like George Floyd are criminals and come to the attention of the police because of criminal behavior. 7. Another cultural matter. One problem leading to income differences is that AAs or much less likely to engage in entrepreneurial efforts even in AA neighborhoods. Hispanics or Asians (often immigrants) are much more likely to start up a business. . Especially notable is that immigrant Africans do better than native-born AA in starting up businesses and succeeding in these startups. This is different than most immigrant groups where the second and subsequent generations do better than the first generation. 8. I do not say all of this to deny that pure racism is not a factor. I do believe that this exists, although to a far lesser extent than it once was. And today pure racism is not backed by the force of law and government-imposed limitations. Too often what is at play today is culture and the AA tendency to ignore this and just blame it all on hateful whites and white privilege makes this problem unsolvable.
    1
  15.  @marine76a  If you are trying to shame me for bringing up the FACT that over 70 percent of African-American children are born to unwed mothers, it is you who should be ashamed. First for trying to censor me. You seem to be unaware that freedom of speech is the Crown Jewel of American Democracy. Perhaps you should take a civics class. Second for trying to ignore a major problem that is condemning African American children to lives of poverty and the issues that flow from denying the children their god-given right to have a father.
    1
  16. @ Stan Dalby Nonsense. Western banks did not support Hitler. His financing was domestic. You might want to actually open a book. Try Tooze's 'The Wages of Destruction,
    1
  17. @ Alec Avdakov The thing is that the extreme right is very similar to the extreme left, suppression of free speech, secret police, concentration camps, slave labor, suppression of trade unions, heavy military spending, control of the economy, etc. Totalitarianism is totalitarianism. The only major difference was Hiter's Jewish mania.
    1
  18.  @frederickthegreatpodcast382  This is in correct. Please read about Goering's Five Year Plan and the extent of NAZI seizures of private companies. https://www.histclo.com/essay/war/ww2/tol/ger/eco/nazi-eco.html
    1
  19.  @SSWaffenSs  I don't think it was meant to be a funny question.
    1
  20. You make it sound like there was significant trade before the War. There was not. Russian never produced much in the way of goods that could be sold in the West. Even today their primary export is oil and other raw materials, They are now exporting grain because of privatization of the state farms.
    1
  21. Lend Lease vehicles were very important as you explain, but they were hardly the only important Lend Lease item.https://www.histclo.com/essay/war/ww2/cou/us/aod/ll/llc-sov.html
    1
  22.  @andrewwmacfadyen6958  Why was Allied aircraft not suited for the East, The Red Air Force used the American Air Cobras successfully and they were one of the weaker American planes.
    1
  23.  @tylercrist3428  Lend Lease was important, but the Allies forced the Germans to divert much of their industrial war economy to the West. While German manpower was mostly deployed in the East, German industry mostly sent to the West. It takes a lot more industry to build ships and planes that the horse drawn carts that the Ostheer depended on. This left the Ostheer poorly supported and vulnerable. It was a recipe fir disaster, . https://www.histclo.com/essay/war/ww2/cou/sov/pc/pc/gpwpc-wr.html
    1
  24. @ Dom Weselny Brzozie Lubawskie No one will wonder. Here is what your "best countries" were up to: https://www.histclo.com/essay/war/ww2/wca/ww2-wca.html
    1
  25. German was stronger in 1941 in part because the Soviet Union was supplying the German war economy vast quantities of oil and other critical war material.
    1
  26. Teras Mus German was stronger in 1941 in part because the Soviet Union was supplying the German war economy vast quantities of oil and other critical war material.
    1
  27. Yes when Maggy arrived.
    1
  28. Fascinating. I don't believe that there was a comparable problem in America. Any idea why?
    1
  29. @ Not Today TIK is absolutely correct. The Royal Navy cut off the flow of oil and other resources Germsny needed to wage war. This is often forgotten in assessing the importance of the War in the West.
    1
  30.  @nottoday3817  Not true. The Latin Americans would have sold them everything they needed including oil. America and Britain prevented that.
    1
  31.  @inovakovsky  Notice that you are : 1. pointing to regimes without any real popular foundation. 2. regimes without the rule of law. 3. They are mostly authoritarian not totalitarian. Capitalism does not just mean that private property exists. Without the rule of law, private property is not secure. A lawless regime can seize property at any time. Capitalism requires government, but it also requires a regime where there are legal constraints on government. Take pre-War Japan or NAZI Germany. There were large corporations, it is true, but the owners lost control of their companies.. Look at Hugo Junkers. When he refused to take NAZI orders, they took his company from him.
    1
  32.  @inovakovsky  Wow! Are you impressed with yourself! "End of story. Cope smarter next time, pal." says it all. If only your actual knowledge of the subject equaled your self-congratulatory view. Now private property is central to capitalism. That is true. But you fail to understand that private property can only exist in liberal democracies. If you think it can exist elsewhere, ponder this: 1, Before capitalism for 10 millennia of human civilization, the vast portion of humanity was a landless peasantry. 2. In our modern world real private property can only exist in democratic/capitalist countries because they have the rule of law. If you think it can exist elsewhere I suggest you chat with Hugo Junkers and Jack Ma.
    1
  33. The shortage was well trained German pilots.
    1
  34.  @TheImperatorKnight  Here I have to disagree with you. It is tragically mostly home grown: left wing professors, poorly educated teachers, Hollywood, and the left-wing mainstream media. Even Wall Street and major businessmen fail to stand up for capitalism. And now Big Tech/Social Media is pushing the joys of censorship. I just did a Google search on 'World War II war crimes' and what came up? Allied war crimes was the number one link. By the way, I find your videos very informative,
    1
  35.  @Iv4Bez  True, but the Soviet system did not. It was one consequence of not having the price mechanism. Not adding value to raw materials and labor is why salaries were so low in the Soviet Union and ultimately the system failed. The raw materials that went into Soviet factories were worth more than the finished goods that came out of them. It is one reason why Russia today has an economy based on selling raw materials/energy, like a Third World country.
    1
  36.  @Iv4Bez  Not everything was "abolished:. What happened was many unprofitable businesses went bankrupt. Supporting unprofitable businesses only means that the economy performs badly and can not sustain the same level of prosperity as in the West.
    1
  37.  @Iv4Bez  A fair point. I did not mean to imply that a conversion to market economics was easy, but I will point out that many countries have done it. Look at the Baltics, Poland, Slovakia, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Slovenia, and Croatia or China and Vietnam. And Russia had many advantages including oil income and a highly educated population.
    1
  38.  @Iv4Bez  I think you lay out some of the difficulties that Russia faced. The decision to continue high levels of military spending is certainly one of them. I would not say a free press was one of them. I think that freedom of speech is the crown jewel of Western democracy. I would say the rule of law was the major problem. Capitalism requires a legal infrastructure that post-Soviet Russia did not have. I am an American, but I think that much of the reason that America has done well is our English heritage--especially English law.
    1
  39. Absolutely. It is just one example of how the Germans had to divert their industry primarily to fitting the Western Allies.
    1
  40. Self defense is nit a crime,
    1
  41. @ AFGuidesHD You need to listen to the video again.
    1
  42.  @goldenhawk352 Well I agree with you about the U.S. debt, but there were important differences. The Reich Mark was virtually valueless outside of the Reich. Germany unlike the United States was not self sufficient in food, oil, and many natural resources. It needed imports to keep the economy going.
    1
  43. @Eddard Tyrsson For those of us who are interested can you tell us what his thesis is.
    1
  44. Even during height of the Wuhn crisis, Supermarket shelves were never empty. There were some items that were missing, but I had no problem finding plenty to eat. If you want to find empty super market shelves go to Cuba or Venezuela,
    1
  45. You don't like facts. I guess you preferred good old Stalinist state-controlled media.
    1
  46. Absolutely--Shanghai 1931.
    1
  47. The Locarno Pact outlawed war. And it was Germany that launched the War. And it was the Germans who began bombing cities.
    1
  48.  @malcolmlewis5860  Malcolm, if I understand you , you are making the turn the other cheek argument. But how would you have stopped Hitler? You realize of course that he had plans to kill far more people than he actually killed. Are you aware of Generalplan Ost? Given the dimensions of World War II, it is easy ti find fault with Allied operatiins, but just how would you have stopped Hitler without hurting innocent civilians?.
    1
  49.  @malcolmlewis5860  The Germans should definitely been stopped earlier, but the the pacifists and and isolationists were opposed to any show of force. It was not just conservatives who wanted to appease Hitler. The British Labour (Socialist) Party was intent on Appeasement. In fact they wanted to do away with the Brutish Army. Now once Hitler struck what was to be done? You criticize the bombing. But you do not say what we should have done.It is easy to criticize the bombing, but much more difficult to come up with the alternative. Now as to the effectiveness of the bombing. I will point out that it forced the Germans to divert huge industrial resources from the East to the West. You say the bombing at first was ineffective. How are you measuring that? What if the Germans has been able to concentrate on the East. The War would have turned out very differently. I also take issue with your statement that the main military effort was in the East. Now it is true that the Osrheer was the bilk of German manpower, something like 80 percent. Which is why the bulk of German casualties were suffered in the East. But you have to realize that the great bulk f the Ostheer was not motorized Panzer divisions, it was notarized infantry using horses and carts.. The Germans went east with horse drawn artillery and supply wagons,. It does not rake much industry to equip horse and wagon units,. The bulk of German industry was supplying the Luftwaffe and Kriegsmarine--both of which were destroyed in the West. After the strategic bombing campaign began with the arrival if the Avro Lancaster,. the Luftwaffe had ti be repositioning west to protect German cities, And a huge amount of German artillery had to be used to ring German cities to provide AA protection. This also consumed a vast amount of munitions desperately need in the East..
    1
  50.  @malcolmlewis5860  Hitler saw war as a positive thing. Any one who opposed him wound up in a concentration camp. He actually wanted a war. The only way to stop him was was another war. Isolationism and pacifism actually played in to his plan of conquest.
    1