Comments by "Mitch Richards" (@mitchrichards1532) on "TIKhistory" channel.

  1.  @FortniteBlaster2  Regardless of Irving's work in any capacity regarding Dresden, he has failed to provide evidence to back his claims. Not forensic, not photographic, not anything from the archives that provides providence to the claim made by Goebbel's ministry. He has no evidence.... So my question to you is, why do you believe him?
    1
  2.  @FortniteBlaster2  As for Auschwitz, are you referring to the narrow list of names that only include German Jewish people and no one else? Or are you referring to the list that only includes those people that were processed in as workers and were given ID numbers? Either way, you are misrepresenting the historical record either willfully or ignorantly. Again, why?
    1
  3.  @FortniteBlaster2  My attempt to debunk his work? Not mine at all which you very well know but choose to attempt to distort and ultimately devalue. You have a pretty pedestrian and common denier methodology to your tactics. Run of the mill denier speak. Folks like you remain on the fringe and in the creases of cyber space hoping for...something. Cheers.
    1
  4.  @FortniteBlaster2  I argued the topic quite well, all of which you simply chose not to engage. That's the reality of this thread. You are exactly what you accuse me of.
    1
  5.  @FortniteBlaster2  Nothing "subjective" whatsoever. In fact, I was very specific from my first post which clearly was totally lost on you. Apparently 140k is a large sum of money for you to contemplate, when in fact in this case it was likely a discount considering the man's level of expertise and academic station. From the beginning you've demonstrated little acumen for understanding this topic and simply resort to attacks as if that suffices or the tactic goes unnoticed. You are a denier, a common pedestrian denier with all the same old defense mechanisms for your warped beliefs. Own it, wear it, its who you are. Cheers.
    1
  6. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VfWhGczWR9o
    1
  7. Hemingway....
    1
  8.  @flock9487  Cool story, I know more than enough to blend in and des troy from the inside. 😁 You guys aren't too bright.
    1
  9. Not alike in any way...
    1
  10. The Nazis never got more than 38% of the popular vote, and that was their best result from any election. The last free election in 1932 resulted in 33%, clearly they were losing ground as conditions in Germany improved.
    1
  11. So you trust that he didn't data mine those sources for specific nuggets that support the narrative that HE wanted to create while ignoring contrary evidence that paints a different picture? Why would you trust that he wouldn't do that when the Penguin case proved beyond doubt that he did exactly that, he engaged in historical distortion.
    1
  12.  @angelozachos8777  Irving is a fraud, he was exposed as such in the Pengiun case. The entire court case transcripts and evidence used is online. Read it and cope. 😁
    1
  13. So when does the "1 million paratroopers" evidence of an offensive get covered?  lol, the paratroopers with no drop aircraft, parachutes, jump training or specialized equipment... Do tell.
    1
  14. Ok, identify the drop aircraft and what quantity the Soviets had in 1941:   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_military_aircraft_of_the_Soviet_Union_and_the_CIS#Transport_and_liaison    "Why You NEED to Think Critically" is the title of the video.... No drop aircraft, no airborne operations.
    1
  15. Exactly.
    1
  16. You should look up Russian Information warfare. You just stated exactly what their objective is. Scary.
    1
  17.  @KansasHempMan  Comrade? lol, nope.... I know that topic because I'm the other end of their efforts. So ya, I do know all about it.
    1
  18.  @KansasHempMan  You''re "censored" cuz u so smart? LMAO... Clearly.
    1
  19.  @Ironsight2142  Agree with both of you. Cheers
    1
  20.  @-ED-  Ok, lay your evidence out there... I'll start with this: The early NS party was funded by party member dues, member donations, and mostly small to medium business donations. That is irrefutable fact and covers the 1920's. When you get into the 1930-33 period, the funding previously mentioned is still there, but now German industrialists are getting involved. The party was broke by 1932, then bailed out by I.G. Farben and Krupp. In a secret meeting in Berlin on February 20, 1933, the "Party" leadership met with the top 25 Industrial concerns in Germany and secured enough funds to save the party. There were no Americans at the meeting or involved in the decision making. Want the list of attendees and the agreements reached?
    1
  21. "all that could be turned from a defensive stance to an offensive one quite fast. Of course that is only my opinion, but there is absolutely no proof that it is not the case." There is a huge case against, with proof. "Stumbling Colossus" -David Glantz
    1
  22. lol, you repeat all the Suvorov/Rezun B S like a parrot. Do you say 1 million like Dr Evil? 1 Million paratroopers... Ok genius, name the drop aircraft and how many the Soviets had on hand. If you have "1 million" paratroopers and a handful of limited aircraft, do you really have any offensive airborne capability? (F no you don't!) The Soviets had 27k tanks, of which about 2000 were new models, and of the rest, about one in five actually worked (due to being old, worn out, etc). On paper the Russians have thousands of tanks today, but they can only field about 2500 in Ukraine. They never throw anything out and they tell the world how many they have and how strong they are to intimidate; these things don't change. Oh and the tanks that could run on the autobahn that Suvorov talks about? That was a failed design copied from a British tank, and oh yeah... It might be of interest that there was NO AUTOBAHN when those tanks were designed and built. LMAO
    1
  23. @g.g7427 Nope, that's just making things up.
    1
  24.  @ZontarDow  Zoomer is an id iot, typical N@zi apologist and someone I usually just laugh at. That said, I also don't buy anything without foundational evidence or proper citation as to where it's "facts" are taken. 10 million in this case is outlandish and does sound like Soviet propaganda. Soviet propaganda is a fact, they used it, and it was usually a load of BS. You can't ignore that when looking at this topic.
    1
  25.  @ZontarDow  Not a fan of Zoomer, he's clearly a N@zi apologist. I'm also not a fan of uncited BS statistics. You?
    1
  26. "30 000 soviet tanks against 5000 german". 5,000 working German tanks vs 5,000 working Soviet, mostly obsolete. The Soviets had less than 2,000 new tanks, most of which lacked trained crews, gun sights, basic issue equipment to maintain the tank, etc.
    1
  27. Any professional Historian with the proper credentials to call themselves one can post to YouTube. Someone without those credentials that posts history on Youtube is an amateur Historian. Historian is a professional title an d one that is earned through process, you can't just adopt the title without the credentials. Would you like a YouTuber as a Doctor? Attorney? Engineer? Look up what it takes to earn a Phd in History. Ignorance begets confidence, and when you don't know what you don't know, it all seems so simple.
    1
  28.  @antoinecringemann  Nope...
    1
  29. Because she went out in public and denied proven fact, that's not opinion that's making a conscious choice to break a law in a show of defiance. Germany doens't have freedom of speech for people to take advantage of and say whatever TF they feel like saying. Germany does not have to put up that type of idiotic behavior and they can arrest you for doing stu pid things.
    1
  30.  @jaberhassan7916  Nope.. That's in the US, not in Germany. They don't put up with BS from people who choose to act entitled to things they aren't. When something is a proven fact, laws are enacted to protect those that would suffer if people denied said fact, and someone makes the conscious choice to break the law knowing the consequences...why is there any second thought about them? Did they become a martyr to stupidity? lol
    1
  31. Germany needed Soviet resources and didn't have the means to trade or pay. "Wages of Destruction" by Dr. Adam Tooze, suggest you get a copy.
    1
  32. It was his libel suit, his decision, and his own failures were put on display. It took a lot of time to unravel his distortion and his racist comments during speeches, appearances, etc. and that costs money. He gambled on a quick payout from Penguin, he lost when they called his bluf. He is what Lipstadt said he was and it was proven beyond doubt in a public court. Case closed
    1
  33. @ I tried to search it, came up with something from the 60's and it wasn't the Gov. Seems he embellished quite a bit to make it seem like something it wasn't.
    1
  34. Thats what hes saying.
    1
  35. Recover? Neither one made a dent in GDP in the first place.
    1
  36.  @charliebrownie4158  The amount of fuel sent to Auschwitz for the entire war compared to the daily consumption of a Panzer Division is comparable. Hopefully that puts things in perspective.
    1
  37.  @EQOAnostalgia  Europa: created by Tobias Bratt, a Swedish neo-na zi member of the Nordic Resistance Movement, a European neo-Na zi movement. Go watch his garbage? Nope...
    1
  38. Why? Do have any proof of that or a source? Irving was suing for millions, he wasn't out to defend his name.
    1
  39. @EDMFanUwU Find this article "The Hindenburg Program of 1916: A Central Experiment in Wartime Planning" After reading it, then maybe we can have something resembling an intelligent conversation. You obviously interpreted my comment at a much lower level than it was made.
    1
  40. I question the "facts" deniers use... You? Do you bother doing that?
    1
  41.  @MichaelDeutschman  Obviously you don't question much... lol F' ing genius!
    1
  42. The problem was transportation. The Germans had winter clothing but couldn't get it forward due to the limited cargo capacity available. The priority is fuel, ammunition and food, then everything else. Most trucks will cube out (space available) before they weigh out (load capacity) and there just wasn't a way to get the necessary winter equipment forward.
    1
  43.  @Michael-it7nx  "start studying revisionism that is “illegal”. Right.... Who exactly? Tell who your experts are, I'd like to peel the onion on their "expertise" and the BS they've written.
    1
  44.  @angelozachos8777  There's no fear involved genius... It's concern, not unlike how unscrupulous adults' fool children. He's a charlatan and inspires the unwitting to have distorted views. It's similar to how people like Putin and Hit ler brainwashed a generation of children in their countries.
    1
  45. No one is "penalized" for questions, but outright denial is a different issue. Denying fact is not a question, but it does beg the question of why would someone deny fact? What's their agenda?
    1
  46.  @frostroxie2740  1940? Barbarossa was in 1941 and the Russians had more men than the Germans, far less trucks and plenty of horses too. The Germans had 600k motor vehicles for Barbarossa and the Soviets less than half that. The Germans also had 750k(ish) horses. So, when the advance is dictated by the pace of your leg Infantry, what's the difference if its a horse or truck dragging their artillery and ammunition? When you have limited oil for vehicles, horses make a great deal of sense...
    1
  47. Rhine meadows? Certainly not a positive experience for those interned, but James Bacque's total BS story was debunked. There was no mass dea ths there, just a really bad experience for those awaiting release/reassignment. There is no real evidence otherwise, none.
    1
  48. He tries to say exactly that without actually providing real proof. He uses weasel words and vagueness while avoiding specificity. It's basically historical distortion when you account for the omissions and look at the implications of making assumptions while factoring out inconvenient data.
    1
  49. And most of what he says is total BS too. He claims Germany had won WW1 by 1916, but the historical reality of Germany's situation is completely different than what he claims. His claims for WW1 are the foundation for the rest of his arguments, and his basis is all total BS. Freedman's speech is worthless.
    1
  50.  @KansasHempMan  Ya ok, and anytime something is "censored" it becomes gospel truth to certain people just because of that. Explain that little fact of nutter psychology? It's like: Oh "they" tried to suppress the info??? Then that proves it MUST BE TRUE!!! lol, explain that complete lack of critical or even rational thought by a segment of the population.
    1