Mark Collett
Britain Should Not Have
Gone to War with Germany
Fri, Jun 14, 2024
[In this video Mark Collett, leader of the pro-White British nationalist movement, Patriotic Alternative, says:
“A Reform Party candidate has been hauled over the coals by the mainstream media for stating that Britain would have been better off had it not gone to war with Germany. But despite the media’s outrage over this comment, it is an undeniable fact – find out why!”
– KATANA]
https://odysee.com/@MarkCollett:6/20240614—Britain-Should-NOT-have-Gone-to-War-with-Germany:2
https://www.bitchute.com/video/MmWfT5eEBjxS/
https://rumble.com/v51ikph-britain-should-not-have-gone-to-war-with-germany.html
Published on Fri, Jun 14, 2024
Description
Britain Should NOT have Gone to War with Germany
June 14, 2024
2,225 views
346
Support
Save
7 Reposts
Share
Mark Collett
@MarkCollett
15K followers
Join
Following
A Reform Party candidate has been hauled over the coals by the mainstream media for stating that Britain would have been better off had it not gone to war with Germany. But despite the media’s outrage over this comment, it is an undeniable fact – find out why!
Hellstorm:
Ways you can help contribute to my work:
BitCoin: bc1qzgjz953f4gznway0hvz6lx360yd2autdkwf6nu
Etherium: 0xb44739a8f2c57Cad38F96Aab8F2a0cA18258A7bA
BitCoin Cash: qpaaukrttfvq0j99gfl43hhs5q0tmhzfevkhp3r2c9
Monero: 42qypZQGMzNfFa5yXBxkqxL4iDw5cmzbtCC81dKcQbMrhLrs
JUYAFSsLs9Um4hG32R5GfaqfgGj7oR6ZJ7pGyaY3FFu9HKD
You can also donate to my work via Entropy:
https://entropystream.live/app/markcollett
My book, The Fall of Western Man is now available. It is available as a FREE eBook and also in hardback and paperback editions.
The Official Website:
http://www.thefallofwesternman.com/
FREE eBook download:
http://www.thefallofwesternman.com/downloads/TheFallofWesternMan.pdf
Hardback Edition:
https://www.lulu.com/shop/mark-collett/the-fall-of-western-man/hardcover/product-23388841.html
Paperback Edition:
http://amzn.eu/9LaS7HN
PLEASE NOTE: If you wish to debate with me in the comments about anything I have said, I welcome that. However please listen to the complete podcast and ensure you argue with the points I have made. Arguments that simply consist of nonsense such as “what gives you the right to judge” or “I’m a [insert religious affiliation] and you should be ashamed of yourself” or other such vacuous non-arguments will simply be ridiculed.
File size
108.89 MB
Less
31.01
126 comments
_____________
TRANSCRIPT QUALITY = 5 Stars
1 Star — Poor quality with many errors, contains nonsense text 2 Stars — Low quality with many errors, some nonsense text. 3 Stars — Medium quality with some errors. 4 Stars — Good quality with only a few errors. 5 Stars — High quality with few to no errors.
NOTE: Users can help improve the quality of this transcript by putting corrections in the Comment section. Thanks.
TRANSCRIPT
(Words: 1,624 – 11:10 mins)
It’s election time, that wonderful time of the year when people you have never heard of are catapulted into the limelight after standing for election and having their entire social media history raked over with a fine-tooth comb so the press can dig up those embarrassing posts that were made a decade ago on the way home from a particularly heavy session at the local watering hole.
Good job I didn’t stand, eh? The BBC would just LOVE my reading list recommendations…
Anyway, Ian Gribbin, a plucky Reform Party candidate hit the headlines for – prepare yourself for this – claiming that Britain would have been better off had it not gone to war with Nazi Germany!
I read from the Jewish Chronicle, and I quote:
“A Reform UK spokesman has said it is ‘probably true’ that Britain would have been better off had it remained neutral during the Second World War.”
“The claim comes after the BBC revealed that the party’s Bexhill and Battle parliamentary candidate had argued that the UK should have declined to fight Nazi Germany.”
End quote. So, with all this election madness going on, I thought I would take a little time out from the usual election coverage to explain why Ian was right.
Before we begin, it’s important to note that it was Britain that declared war on Germany, not the other way around. Germany also offered Britain peace on numerous occasions after Britain’s declaration of war. Hitler never actually wanted conflict with Britain or the British Empire – in fact he didn’t want war with Western Europe. Yet despite this being a historical fact, most people are blissfully unaware of this, to the point where some will argue until they are blue in the face that Germany declared war on Britain.
Anyway, let’s get into why it would have been better for Britain not to go to war with Germany, let’s prove Ian right!
Now firstly, and most obviously, over 450,000 Brits died during World War 2. 384,000 of those deaths were combat losses and the remaining 70,000 were civilian casualties. Had Britain not gone to war with Germany these people would not have had their lives cut short. This may be more important than you initially think: 450,000 people is a LOT of people, but the 384,000 combat losses is far more significant when you realise that these were mainly strong, healthy and patriotic young men who never went on to reproduce and have families of their own.
This was a massive blow to our gene pool and represents a huge loss of some of the best, bravest and most upstanding British men of that generation. And I don’t think it’s an understatement to say that we are still feeling that loss today.
Secondly, had Britain not entered the war, Western Europe would not have faced devastation, there would have been no further fighting in France, Belgium, Denmark, and war would never have come to Italy. This would again have saved the lives of hundreds of thousands of European lives as well as preserving European towns and cities.
Thirdly, we have to acknowledge there would still have been war, but that war would have been in the East. A brutal war would have raged between Axis forces and the Soviet Union. And it’s highly likely that said war would have been won by Germany and the Axis forces, but not without considerable losses might I add. However, this would have meant that Eastern Europe and Russia would have been free of the murderous Communist regime that went on to systematically kill in the region of 20 million white Christians.
As a knock-on effect, there would have been no partitioning of Germany, no cold war, no Cuban missile crisis and the world would not have spent decades living under the spectre of nuclear annihilation. A world without Communism you say, hardly a bad thing.
Fourth, America would not have entered the war had Britain accepted peace. This would mean that America’s influence in the modern world would be far smaller than it is today. Ever since the conclusion of World War 2 countries like Germany and Britain have fallen under US influence to differing degrees, with some arguing that many countries in Europe have been reduced to occupied vassal states of America. Further to this point, had America taken the same path it took in our timeline, which of course led to the rise of the Judeo-American state and the establishment of globally enforced multi-cultural liberal tyranny, America having a smaller influence would have been a good thing.
What’s more, if America still went on to become the failed liberal state that it is today, there would have been a powerful nationalist counterbalance in Europe in the form Germany and her allies.
Fifth, had Britain and America not been involved in World War 2, the two greatest war crimes ever committed would never have taken place. The atomic bombs would not have been dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki and the firebombing of German cities would also not have taken place.
I am not going to go into greater detail here, however if you wish to learn more about the planned destruction of the German people toward the end of the war you should watch Hellstorm, or read the book of the same name. I warn you though, it is the most upsetting documentary I have ever watched. The link is in the description.
Finally, had Britain not entered the war, Britain would never have emerged the “victor”. Now that sounds like an odd reason to oppose going into a war, after all, the purpose of going to war is fundamentally to “win”. However, there is such a thing as a pyrrhic victory — a victory that inflicts such a devastating toll on the victor that it is tantamount to defeat.
[06:30]
And Britain’s involvement in World War 2 is best summed up in that way. It was the greatest pyrrhic victory the world has ever seen!
In 1938 Britain had the largest empire the world had ever known, by the end of the war the damage inflicted upon the British empire was so catastrophic that whilst the British Empire may have been outwardly celebrating victory, in reality, the Empire had been mortally wounded.
As the Empire then collapsed, millions of people from former colonies began heading to Britain. And where were the British men to resist this invasion? Well, 384,000 of them had perished fighting their European brothers. And as we all know, or more accurately as we’re constantly told, we “needed” those migrants to rebuild!
And that leads us on to possibly the most important point so-far: Post 1945, A weakened Britain began to have its history rewritten. A new and fraudulent foundational myth of our island home was concocted. And Winston Churchill, the brave hero, became the man who was central to this new foundational narrative – a narrative that was seeded amongst the population and pushed relentless upon their descendants almost from birth.
This new narrative stated that Britain was always a multicultural, multiracial and liberal nation – and that’s why Britain went to war, to stand up to the tyranny of Nazi Germany. Those 384,000 men who died, they weren’t fighting to keep Britain “British”, but instead, they were fighting for Western Liberal Democracy. They gave their lives for gay rights, mass immigration, transgender bathrooms and every anti-white, anti-family diversity policy you could name.
This new narrative insists that those men fought for a London where White Britons would become a minority. That they fought so their granddaughters could walk down the street and stare at men in bondage gear performing sex acts on one another at a gay pride events. That they fought so their grandsons could legally cut off their penises and call themselves girls. That they fought so foreign rapists could go on to use human rights laws in order to legally remain in Britain, where they could then continue to prey upon British girls.
This is of course, all nonsense!
Those men fought because they were told Germany was going to invade, that British culture would be replaced by German culture and because they were asked “Do you want to end up speaking German?”. Well, very few people in Britain speak German, instead, the grand children of those who fought and survived World War 2 sit in classrooms where they are outnumbered by foreigners and English is the minority language.
These men were lied to, deceived and sent off to fight a war that wasn’t in their interests, and nor was it in the interests of the vast majority of British people, either at the time, or in the present day.
That doesn’t make those men any less brave, or their sacrifice any less heroic. And it certainly doesn’t make them bad men.
What it does mean though, is sadly; their sacrifice was in vain. The Britain they loved, the people they held dear, their culture and ways of life; the Britain they fought and died for, that Britain is now gone!
And not because the “Nazis” took it away, but because the people who conned them into fighting that war took it away. Those brave men were reduced to pawns in the globalist’s game. And once the war was concluded, those very same globalists were the ones who went on to dismantle, destroy and replace everything that those brave men marched off to fight for.
So YES, Ian was right. Britain would have been better off NOT going to war with Germany.
But I will go a step further than Ian did, had Britain not gone to war with Germany, the whole world would be a better place.
[11:10]
END
============================================
Odysee Comments
(Comments as of 6/18/2024 = 126)
GusinLanzarote Alt Right
10 hours ago
Back in the 90s Boomer world as a young Air Cadet- I would have been shocked by this argument; any suggestion to me & my school pals that my Grandad in his RAF uniform & my school fellows grandad’s were anything less than heroes who had fought evil would have been heresy. But now looking at the decaying Britain around us we can see it is 100% on point & had all our grandad’s been shown the future- that they would fight off a possible German invasion so we could be over run by those a thousand times more foreign & hostile; then they would never have bothered. Neutrality in WW2 would have preserved a GREAT homogenous powerful Britain- instead of creating a 3rd rate bankrupt multicultural LGBT feminazi cesspit- a neutral Britain could have sat by whilst 2 evil dictators bled each other dry & even mediated to prevent some atrocities- like the 3 million Soviet POWs starved/ murdered; we could have offered to hold them in work camps in our Empire for the duration. How we put this argument is VERY important- it is a winning argument but if we do like that Thomas bloke in Oz & say “my grandad/ your grandad serving in WW2 were criminals & Nazi Germany was perfect/ flawless” all you do is scare Normies especially Boomers away; Mark has hit the right tone here.
mzaks
1 day ago
Nazi Germany Should NOT have Gone to War with Poland
0
3
@Aeneid88
1 day ago
Why are you turning off the dislikes what is this youtube?
2
0
@Deanfranjek
1 day ago
Hitler saw this mess in Europe today then. Germany should stand proud today .
1
0
silverbullet
2 days ago
0
1
Anonymous
2 days ago
Without WW2 this wouldn’t have been happening:
https://open.lbry.com/@AbeScott:b/Germany-Muslim-Stabs-Police-And-Germans:d
0
1
@Gundobar
2 days ago
Sherlock Holmes says: absolutely true
0
1
Anonymous
2 days ago(edited)
Churchill was bought and paid for by a clandestine group known as “The focus” made up of wealthy Jews and trade unionists. Headed by Robert Waley-Cohen, they gave Churchill £40,000 in 1936, (equivalent to £2 million today). This is why Churchill was banging the drums for war, along with the Jewish minister for war, Isaac Hore-Belisha.
A good book on Hitler’s peace offers to Britain is “What the world rejected: Hitler’s peace offers 1933-1940” by Dr Friedrich Stevie. Silverbullet2008bb
2
1
@Euclid
2 days ago
A brilliant and concise summary of the biggest crime of getting Britain into war with Germany with the resulting disastrous consequences for white civilization. An absolute tragedy. When I was at school we were shown loads of film footage of WW2. But it used to bug me that no one ever explained why we got into war with Germany in the first place (of course the same applies with WW1). What were the real reasons for doing this. I used to ask myself whether it could have been avoided, thus saving millions of lives. Only in relatively recent times the truth began to surface and made more readily available, and we now know who the truly evil enemy is. They even now trying the same tactic in Ukraine.
4
0
Hide replies
GusinLanzarote Alt Right
10 hours ago
Imagine the MILLIONS of GREAT Britons/ other Europeans who have NEVER existed because their ancestors-often the bravest died in WW1 & WW2. An absolute tragedy we have lost such genetic material- I’d happily sit in second place for such folk to lead us.
1
0
Cone of Silence
2 days ago
well said Mark.
Sunscarred
2 days ago
Churchill should have died in a jail, raped to death in South Africa.
4
1
Hide replies
GusinLanzarote Alt Right
10 hours ago
without any alcohol provided for the old sot!
Hide replies
Sunscarred
10 hours ago
the only karmic justice that worthless, fat dumpster fire obtained was being voted out and britain being flooded with mongrels. “Keep England white” was his campaign slogan, but he did instigate both world wars that costed 2 generations of the best and bravest men of his nation. The british empire may have just endured if he just concerned himself with the British empire’s holdings instead of trying wipe out potential threats.
1
0
Viceroy
2 days ago
I’ve said similar things at times, but counterfactual history can have a variety of different outcomes. If the British Empire hadn’t entered the war it’s most likely the Nazis would have defeated their continental opponents, and then they would have attacked and likely defeated the British. The idea that the Nazis would have been content just to dominate the continent and leave Britain alone is far fetched.
It wasn’t wrong for the British to oppose the Nazis. The problem is subsequent generations sold out on the things that the Brits of the 1940s fought for.
Anyway, WW2 is really a continuation of WW1. That’s the war we should have avoided.
1
4
Viceroy
2 days ago
So, will you be voting for Reform in the upcoming election Mark?
1
2
@xero
2 days ago
Britain shouldn’t have remained neutral they should have helped Germany fight the USSR
5
0
Graham Playing Games
2 days ago
People focus on the Atomic bombs, but a lot of people probably don’t know that there were huge firebombing campaigns in Japan, like on Tokyo. 80 000-100 000 people are estimated to have been killed in Tokyo.
4
0
Fancy
3 days ago
everyone should watch hellstorm. good to show normal people to red pill them
6
0
Fancy
3 days ago
In the book The Unknown Warriors
by Nicholas Pringle the old soldiers them selfs said it was not worth it and if had the choice again would not have gone. AND CAN YOU BLAME THEM
4
0
Nationalist Geographic (Mini-Hyph)
3 days ago
“Our bond with Europe is a bond of race and not of political ideology,” claimed Lindbergh. “It is the European race we must preserve; political progress will follow. Racial strength is vital—politics a luxury. If the white race is ever . . . threatened, it may then be time for us to take our part in its protection, to fight side by side with the English, French, and Germans, but not with one against the other for our mutual destruction.” – Charles Lindbergh
4
0
HeliRides4AntiWhites
3 days ago
Our based Austrian painter uncle actually wanted peace with England and viewed the English with great reverence. It’s too bad Churchill was just a bloodthirsty warmonger who wanted nothing more than to lay waste to the continent in exchange for jew gold
4
0
@clintwayne
3 days ago
Excellent reasoned argument by Mark and reading the comments makes me happy so many get it.
Its up to all of us to spread the truth, its crucial.
4
0
@MaybeNextTime
3 days ago
D-Day and WW2 Explained 2 minutes long-
Swesurvivor
3 days ago
Thank you Mark for the video. Greetings from Sweden
3
0
@Spectromancer
3 days ago
This comment was slimed to death. (Click to view)
1
5
ThinRedLine
3 days ago
Great video Mark
3
0
ThinRedLine
3 days ago
Looking at the world today would you say the good guys won WWII
6
0
ThinRedLine
3 days ago
Ian Grippin (RF) was right
3
0
MagicManintheSky
3 days ago
Bottom line. It’s the Jews who are to blame for our misery.
5
0
MagicManintheSky
3 days ago
The Second World War was engineered by International Jewry because Hitler rejected Jewish usury, corruption and the Jews financial stranglehold over the nation.
11
0
All political expressiveness is flatulence; censor a fart and it will come back as thunder.
3 days ago
Mark: serious request…. I would love to see a historically focused video from you, debating the question: should John Amory have been hanged? This question should send all nationalists into a quandry. The argument ‘against’ would surely be based on Amory’s commitment to an ethical view of nationalism based on opposition to globalist plutocracy. The argument ‘for’ would be based straightforwardly on the commonsense principle of ‘my country right or wrong’. I’m still not sure what to conclude. I would value your thoughts enormously.
Kelema90
3 days ago
💯
1
0
JamesL
3 days ago
…and Mark’s done it yet again – hit the nail squarely on the head.
8
0
@Grumpole
3 days ago
Germany never wanted war with anyone, he just wanted the purveyors of usury kicked out and when he did the jews declared war on Germany. This is a historical fact that few acknowledge.
14
1
Hide replies
0KT0BER
3 days ago
It’s easy enough to find archived press that says exactly that even though NYT have disappeared their archive.
“Friday, March 24, 1933 – Judea Declares War on Germany”
8
0
Show reply
@DiesIrae
3 days ago
An excellent presentation.
3
0
@ItWasMadeUp
3 days ago
Great stuff, this sort of thing should be on television.
12
0
@VikingN64
3 days ago
Well said my brother! 100% Correct and true!!
16
0
Gr8SergeisGhost
3 days ago
Definitely gives us insight into Ukraine’s tragic future.
12
0
Hide replies
ThinRedLine
3 days ago
good point
3
0
Lars Agerbæk Odyssæus
3 days ago
I also think Japan influenced America and Britain decision on fighting Germany.
0
7
Lars Agerbæk Odyssæus
3 days ago
I’m not so sure that the losses were so numerous on the western front in the beginning of the war. And I don’t believe the Sovietunion was that murderous after the second world war.
I think most murdering by communism after the war happened in China. I could be wrong though.
0
9
Lars Agerbæk Odyssæus
3 days ago
Goebbels did celebrate the fall of the British Empire in his will.
3
0
Hide replies
CelticPerspective
3 days ago
It’s easy to see why he’d be happy that the British destroyed themselves while they destroyed Germany, their destruction of Germany was what destroyed them as well. Both would still be standing if Britain didn’t start war with Germany.
5
0
Lars Agerbæk Odyssæus
3 days ago
if Great Britain had accepted peace with Germany. The Sovietunionen would probably have been destroyed or at least become an external battlefield as Hitler imagined in the coffee table book.
If Germany had gained control over the resources of Russia I think Hitler would eventually have tried to conquer England – and if successful America too.
Great Britain didn’t declare war on Germany in defense of democracy. It declared war on Germany in self defense.
2
11
Hide replies
CelticPerspective
3 days ago
That’s impossible to know, and sounds incredibly unlikely. There’d be no reason to be aggressive toward Anglo nations, especially if he had already achieved his war aims in the East. If anything the Americans and British would be incentivised to be friendly to Germany, but that’s impossible to know as well.
3
0
AurigaBooks
3 days ago
How Hitler and NS Germany became J Woke.
5
1
@AlbionForever
3 days ago
Reminder that Churchill had all of his debts wiped by a clique of London bankers called “The Focus”, in exchange for him waging war on Germany.
https://ihr.org/journal/v07p498_Okeefe.html
29
0
Yuri Knew
3 days ago
Well said
4
0
The Awakened Saxon
3 days ago
From the James Forrestal Diaries (former US Secretary for Navy and Secretary of Defence) 7th December 1945. ‘Played golf today with Joe Kennedy [Joseph P. Kennedy, who was Roosevelt’s Ambassador to Great Britain in the years immediately before the war]. I asked him about his conversations with Roosevelt and Neville Chamberlain from 1938 on.
He said Chamberlain’s position in 1938 was that England had nothing with which to fight and that she could not risk going to war with Hitler.
Kennedy’s view: That Hitler would have fought Russia without any later conflict with England if it had not been for Bullitt’s [William C. Bullitt, then Ambassador to France] urging on Roosevelt in the summer of 1939 that the Germans must be faced down about Poland; neither the French nor the British would have made Poland a cause of war if it had not been for the constant needling from Washington.
Bullitt, he said, kept telling Roosevelt that the Germans wouldn’t fight, Kennedy that they would, and that they would overrun Europe. Chamberlain, he says, stated that ‘ America and the world Jews had forced England into the war.’
8
0
Hide replies
MagicManintheSky
3 days ago
The Jewnited States of Jewmurica.
2
0
Avalon
3 days ago
If Windrush were needed to rebuild why was there no record of them being invited in Hansard. Why did the government send a million £10 poms to Australia?
2
0
d
3 days ago
Britain was Jewish controlled for far too long.
Ww2 was just the nail in the coffin for Europeans and their civilization.
The cabal that controlled Churchill, plunged the continent into a war that ended with the eradication of European civilization and the triumph the regime that is currently ruining our race, homelands, culture and future.
38
0
Hide replies
MajesticCasual
3 days ago
Elon once said “You have said the actual truth”
12
0
ThinRedLine
3 days ago
since the “glorious” revolution
2
0
Hide replies
d
3 days ago
I dare say since their civil war.
After the parliamentarians won, Jews were allowed back in the Island.
They were forbidden to enter for almost 400 years since the days of Edward the first.
Jewish money lenders that backed the parliamentarians. Many of them from Netherlands.
6
0
Hide replies
ThinRedLine
3 days ago
true they came in to Britain there but their power really after the revolution
3
0
Hide replies
MagicManintheSky
3 days ago
The ‘French’ revolution like the ‘Russian’ revolution was Jewish in origin.
2
0
@Esoteric_Bowdenite
14 hours ago
Jews are not the central power of all history.
MagicManintheSky
3 days ago
Britain STILL IS Jewish-controlled.
14
1
Show 2 replies
@Esoteric_Bowdenite
3 days ago
Nothing is or has ever been Jewish controlled, we are leftist traitor controlled. Leftists exist because of civilisational, spiritual and genetic decay. Jews are a weak slave race who have never controlled anything other than positions of usury granted to them by white traitor leftists.
3
21
Hide replies
@K19
17 hours ago
Oh, I see. You are an anti-White spastic retard… Or perhaps, you are fully aware that you are lying, meaning you are a disgusting vermin.
1
0
Hide replies
@Esoteric_Bowdenite
14 hours ago
Thanks for the pro-White solidarity, very inspiring.
@Esoteric_Bowdenite
14 hours ago
There are so many pathetic triggered hate-worshippers of Jews in the comments with no rational argument, who think that Jews have conquered us because they are stronger. This is an emasculated view. Jewish usury is a major issue, but is just a symptom; treachery is the source, and if you cannot see this then the problem will never be solved.
1
0
@BritishGammon
3 days ago
Britain declared war on Germany to come to the aid of Poland.
The “fighting the horrible Nazi” stuff was made up much later.
11
0
Hide replies
Htrac
3 days ago
Actually it was because Churchill wanted to destroy Germany, because their economic success showed what a country can do without the Rothschild owned central banks. Churchill’s financial backers demanded that Germany be destroyed and they wanted the US brought into the war too.
24
0
Hide replies
NatSoc209
3 days ago
Churchill was in major debt before WW2 and it was a jew who paid his debts. They owned him.
10
0
@BritishGammon
3 days ago
Exactly. But the official reason was to come to the defence of Poland, which we know was a lie.
4
0
Handy Channel
2 days ago
Chamberlain was PM when war was declared, not Churchill.
1
0
Mike Forester
3 days ago(edited)
Aid? What aid did Britain give Poland? British power-politics used Poland as a pawn to get IN the war, to have a reason to declare war and don’t be considered the aggressor.
15
0
Hide replies
@BritishGammon
3 days ago
Exactly. And at the end of the war Churchill gave Poland to the commies….some aid!
5
0
@RoryHerbert
3 days ago
But Britain never declared war on Russia when they invaded Poland a week or so later. I’ve never heard a convincing argument about that one.
11
0
Hide replies
Handy Channel
2 days ago
Declaring war on the USSR in 1939 would have been suicide. Britain and the USSR entered the cold war after WW2.
1
0
MagicManintheSky
3 days ago
Judeo-Britain set Poland (and anti-Prussian atrocities) up as a trap to draw Germany into a war that it did not seek.
2
0
Hide replies
Handy Channel
2 days ago
In “Hitler’s War” David Irving confirms that Hitler’s motivation for invading Poland was lebensraum. Hitler says as much in Mein Kampf. The 1920 NSDAP platform also states it.
1
1
Hide replies
mzaks
1 day ago
Also, the “atrocities” were largely fabricated for propaganda.
https://www.bitchute.com/video/eGaNuErtNHDF/
1
0
silverbullet
2 days ago
The Anglo-Polish military alliance was made in March 1939, just the same time as the Polish started to massacre the German minority in Poland. It also contained a secret protocol that stated Britain would only come to Poland’s aid if Poland was attacked by Germany. Any other country could have attacked Poland and Britain would have done nothing. This is not how true allies act. When the Soviet Union invaded Poland a few weeks after Germany no war was declared against them. Also, before WW2 was even over in Europe, Churchill, Roosevelt and Stalin met at Yalta and Poland was given over to the Soviet Union. This proves Britain had no interest in protecting Polish independence, the whole thing was a set up so that an excuse could be made to attack Germany.
2
0
Hide replies
@BritishGammon
1 day ago
The more I learn about this the more convinced I am that Britain fought the wrong enemy.
2
0
@bagelsandloxism
3 days ago(edited)
The “cold war” was a (((hoax)))
and so was the fall of communism
see Anatoly Golitsyn (The Peristroika Deception, New Lies For Old)
pretty much the whole world is under (((communism))) now
17
0
Hide replies
d
3 days ago
I’d agree.
The entire world is thoroughly Bolshevized.
8
0
@bagelsandloxism
3 days ago
NONE of the allies should have because the Austrian painter was right
60
0
Hide replies
@Esoteric_Bowdenite
3 days ago
Hitler brewed the second part of the worldwide European civil war more than any allied politician when he kept invading countries, and should not be mythologised as a saviour of the European races. Yes, of course the treacherous allied politicians should not have declared a war against their interests, but that does not excuse the arrogant and ultimately fatal actions of the other side.
4
17
Hide replies
mzaks
2 days ago
Unfortunately, people are easily trapped in binary thinking. They assume “If Jews are bad then Hitler was good for fighting them”. They have actually internalized the mainstream narrative, just taking the opposite position. In reality, dealing with “The Jews” was quite low on Hitler’s list of priorities. His primary goal was expanding German land territory at the expense of other European nations. The meme documentaries like Europa and TGSNT get them emotionally invested in the “Hitler good” narrative, so stating facts which contradict their narrative gets them emotionally triggered.
4
7
Hide replies
Abrahamic Matrix Destroyer
2 days ago
Well said.
5
0
Hide replies
DOLO
2 days ago
What was good about what he said here?
Handy Channel
2 days ago
Yes, the “Hitler good” trend in nationalism is ignorant and discredits us.
3
1
@MaybeNextTime
2 days ago
I bet You believe the Arch Duke Ferdinand was killed by a Bosnian too.
1
0
silverbullet
2 days ago
1
0
Hide replies
mzaks
2 days ago
“I have done everything within my power”
Except, you know, not ordering the armed forces into other countries.
The Allies actually gave Hitler an ultimatum to start withdrawing from Poland within a couple days, but Hitler ignored this, so they declared war.
It was entirely within Hitler’s power to avoid the war but he chose not to due to his Lebensraum ambitions.
1
1
Hide replies
@Gundobar
1 day ago
you should educate yourself a little about freemason Władysław Raczkiewicz. At least you should try, I know it will be very very hard for you
Hide replies
mzaks
1 day ago
What’s your point? How is he relevant to this discussion?
Hide replies
@Gundobar
1 day ago
lol, there is a reason you want to conceal Władysław Raczkiewicz
Hide replies
mzaks
1 day ago
I’m literally asking why you think this person is relevant.
Hide replies
@Gundobar
1 day ago
you know why or you’re even dumber than I thought
d
14 hours ago
Judeo-Bolsheviks invaded Poland from the east and have already invaded or conquered much of eastern Europe.
(((Britain))) declared war on Germany.
Your “arguments’ are ludicrous.
By the way, Great Britain used to have an empire that controlled 1/4 of the earth’s surface. They were the LAST nation justified to declare war on the basis of expansionism.
Hide replies
mzaks
4 hours ago
Soviets invaded weeks after the Nazis. Their later expansion to the Baltics and Finland was only made possible by Hitler’s disruption of the political landscape in Europe. Inter-war Europe was basically united against the Soviets, but then Hitler made his regime the more immediate threat, giving Stalin the opportunity to make his moves. The Cold War with the Soviets remained once the Nazi threat was neutralized.
Germany was the defeated power in WW1. Peace was made on the terms of the victor. The Versailles terms were very lenient, and weren’t enforced effectively. Germany was allowed to re-arm because the Allies saw that Germany could serve as a bulwark against the Soviets. The Allies tolerated Hitler’s land-grabbing, but they drew a red line at bloodshed – warning Hitler for months that invading Poland would result in their declaration of war. Hitler decided to cross that line. In so doing, he made forfeit the WW1 peace. Britain had no choice but to declare war. Not doing so would have cost them their credibility on the world stage and only delay the inevitable clash between Germany and the Allies to when Germany would be stronger.
Less
Hide replies
d
3 hours ago(edited)
“soviets invaded weeks after the Nazis” .
Is this suppose to be an “argument” ?
“cold war’ ! Yes right, “cold war”. You mean the same “cold war” that began with the “British” and the “Americans” giving away half of Europe to their Soviet buddies. The same eastern Europe that supposedly went to ww2 for?
“Britain had no choice but to declare war”. I like how Britain had no choice even after numerous peace offers by Adolf Hitler. But had plenty of choice when it came to the Judeo-Soviets invading Finland and half of eastern Europe.
Yes, the “British” were so preoccupied with salvaging their “world image” that they went to war against a regime and a leader that was a declared friend of their empire. A war that cost them that same empire…
By the way, since we are hinging the entire “conversation” on the Polish issue. Try to research about the “secret’ negotiations between the Polish authorities and Roosevelt and how the latter was agitating them to not negotiate with Germany and declare war.
And then how the Jewish Bolshevik Litvinov went to England in order to arrange the Lend-Lease program on behalf of the Soviet regime with the other Jew, Morgentau who was the secretary of treasury of the USA.
The question is, why are you commenting in a channel like this, regurgitating the ludicrous, mainstream Jewish talking points aimed at the average person that has no idea what actually happened during ww2?
What are you trying to achieve here? This is beyond ridiculous.
Less
d
1 day ago
@Esoteric_Bowdenite
Yeah, right COHEN, your “arguments” are so “convincing”, everyone believes that you are actually a pro White European nationalist…
4
1
Just Grifting and Gaming
23 hours ago
you do realize the soviets invaded loads of people starting with the 1920 Polish war? and instigated civil wars?
Youre assigning blame to the wrong people. Clown
1
0
Euroicism
1 day ago
Britain should have entered WW2 but we should have joined the other team.
4
0
Mike Forester
3 days ago(edited)
0:55
Thing is, with Britain (and the Commonwealth by extension) being neutral in the Polish-German war of 1939, there never would’ve been a World War to begin with. The minority, Danzig and Corridor question would’ve been solved probably even diplomatically with Poland never receiving Cart Blanche from London.
With this in mind, there never would’ve been a Soviet invasion on Sept. 17th 1939 and thus no west-shift of the deployment area that later became grounds for Germany to preemptivly strike against USSR.
So yes: Britain had all the leverage to literally prevent the 2nd great Brother War and maybe even the handle to build a decisive Central-Western European front against Stalinistic Bolshevism, which would’ve made the shifty Georgian gangster think twice.
32
0
Hide replies
Blankeon
3 days ago
Correct. WW2 would have been a war against Communism instead of a World War.
24
0
mzaks
3 days ago
Except Danzig was a false pretense for Hitler’s intervention in Poland, just as Sudetenland was a false pretense for his intervention in Czechoslovakia. Hitler wanted the land and said so many times himself:
A few days later, on May 23, Hitler delivered a four-hour speech to his Commanders in Chief in his cavernous study. He stood at a lectern and addressed altogether a dozen officers seated in three rows: Raeder, Milch, Brauchitsch, and Keitel formed the front row (Göring was away), and their chiefs of staff and adjutants the two other rows. Hitler stated once again that Danzig was not his ultimate objective – that would be to secure Lebensraum in the east to feed Germany’s eighty million inhabitants. ‘If fate forces us to fight in the west,’ Hitler told them, ‘it will be just as well if first we possess more in the east.’ This was why he had decided to ‘take on Poland at the first suitable opportunity.’ His immediate purpose now, he explained, would be to isolate Poland. ‘It is of crucial importance that we succeed in isolating her.’
p.177 of ‘Hitler’s War’
Less
1
9
Hide replies
Handy Channel
2 days ago
I agree mzaks – Hitler was an expansionist madman and not the sweet dindunuffin idol that many nationalists appear to believe in.
1
2
Hide replies
@Gundobar
1 day ago
found the unit 8200
@Gundobar
1 day ago
you stupid?
2
1
Mike Forester
1 day ago(edited)
Let me guess, you’re a Polack, init?
First of all: Danzig is German clay, the entire city, from its Hanseatic origin up to 1939 was German. So there’s no “pretext”.
Polish government mobilised its army on March 29th 1939 and deployed the combat capable divisions against Danzig, still under League of Nations mandate, and East Prussia — that’s the casus belli right there.
Oh, and Poland took its slice of pie too from the failing chimera state of “Czechoslovakia”, didn’t they?
The ultimate objective was TO SAVE THE GERMAN PEOPLE from Polish atrocities, murder, “polonisation” under the muzzle, dispossession of their ancestral homesteads and to NULLIFY the shameful treaty of Versailles, which included to bring home those territories and its German people who were unlawfully ripped from the Reich.
1
0
Hide replies
mzaks
1 day ago
“deployed the combat capable divisions against Danzig”
Sounds like an interesting alternate history, but in reality things were peaceful in Danzig, though tense, until Hitler’s invasion.
The so-called Polish atrocities are largely fictitious.
Supposedly 58,000 dead or missing, there should be 5-10x as many who made it out alive – where is the evidence of their existence? Where were the refugee camps? Where are the photos and footage of those refugees? Surely the Nazis would record the sufferings of their co-ethnics for propaganda effect?
https://www.bitchute.com/video/eGaNuErtNHDF/
And of course, Hitler’s actions speak for themselves. If Danzig was the motivation, why invade and hold lands which had no German population and were never historically German? (As agreed with Stalin in the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact). Then Hitler invades Russia, further proving his motivation was taking land.
Martinez has documented Hitler’s Lebensraum ambitions here. I would like to see you refute what he presents, but it’s not going to happen.
You must have a really low estimation of Hitler as a world leader if you think he would risk millions of Germans – the entire Reich – in a World War, to capture a city and some few hundred thousand Germans.
Less
1
1
Hide replies
Handy Channel
23 hours ago
I’m really enjoying your comments and links mzaks, thanks.
I wonder if this pro-Hitler signalling is what anti-Europeans want – it completely discredits us morally. It seems like atomwaffen tier retardation to normies.
1
1
Hide replies
mzaks
21 hours ago
Thank you.
Yes, I’m thinking it is so. Hitler divides Whites and unites Jews.
0
1
Mike Forester
6 hours ago(edited)
1/2
Sounds like an interesting alternate history … things were peaceful
You have no understanding of the term mobilisation and military deployment, do you? It’s utterly irrelevant what the situation in a city is when it comes to quite literally provoking a war by mobilising and deploying combat ready troops.
atrocities are largely fictitious.
Violence and murder stood at the end of a long line of malicious acts to oust the German population that has settled between Danzig and Uppler-Silesia for centuries. Starting with the restitution of the Polish nation state by Entente Powers snorting on the map and drawing up a Poland that utterly missed (or did by design) disregard any ethnic borders, be it German or Ukrainian for that matter. Already in 1923 apprx. 500,000 ethnic Germans were harassed, dispossessed and forcefully evicted and fled their ancestral home. German language was forbidden as official language in majority German populated territories (violation of bilateral minority treaties), community buildings and newspapers seized, ruinous taxes burdened on German communities, German owned businesses systematically boycotted, social clubs and associations banned, revoking of business-licences, closing of German schools.
photos and footage
You’re a funny guy. We are talking about things happening 1) outside of the grasp of NSDAP in rural Silesia and West-Prussia and 2) covering a time range between 1921-1939. How many normal folk could afford a Leica Model C in 1932?
Surely the Nazis would record the sufferings of their co-ethnics for propaganda effect?
Of course they did. You’re just too dumb to perform historic research
https://archive.org/details/Auswaertiges-Amt-Weissbuch-2/mode/2up
(Yes, it’s in German. Why should it be in any other language?)
Less
Hide replies
mzaks
3 hours ago
You think moving troops within your own territory is “provoking war”? Well, I guess you would need to think so to cope with Hitler’s insanity.
If you apply the same level of scrutiny to the Nazi claims of atrocity against ethnic Germans as you do with the Holocaust, you will find that the evidence does not fare well. There is clear evidence of Nazis fabricating incidents – even David Irving confirms this. Why would they fake things if there were real atrocities?
Germany’s eastern border was drawn carefully with respect to the ethnic majorities living there.
Sure, there were islands of Germans, but not much else could be done with these settlement patterns.
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/b3/3d/63/b33d632d31bf9c6d1a4c7e839b236c83.jpg
Even if the persecution of Ethnic Germans in Poland was real, Hitler could have simply evacuated them and avoided a World War. Funny enough he agreed to do this with Mussolini in the disputed South Tyrol territory. Of course, South Tyrol was not in-between him and his Intended Lebensraum in Russia, while Poland was.
Less
Mike Forester
6 hours ago(edited)
2/2
If Danzig was the motivation, why invade and hold lands which had no German population
Danzig, as I wrote in the OP, was but one of several factors. Polish government rejected numerous offers to settle the crisis diplomatically and for both parties to safe face on the geopolitical chessboard.
The last offer was sent to Polish minister for foreign affairs, Beck, on 8/31/1939 at 9 p.m. … the reception of the note was rejected!
This was months after above mentioned Polish mobilisation documented here:
https://archive.org/details/Auswaertiges-Amt-Weissbuch-2/page/n263/mode/2up?view=theater
To make it abundantly clear: Mobilisation means “resolve to conduct war”. War means both warring parties try to occupy the enemy’s territory. And to be blunt: After the capitulation of France, Germany offered peace to Britain, yet again, and suggested to retreat from ethnic Polish territory.
Molotov-Ribbentrop pact
That’s a downright Huffpost-tier interpretation of geostrategic agreements. Agreements are formed as strategic quasi insurances. Mind you, before that agreement the Entente nations tried to close a similar deal with USSR against Germany, but Stalin wanted the war happening in the West, exhausting its future enemies’ armed forces.
muh Lebensraum
Did you even read “Mein Kampf”? The infamous paragraphs about “stopping the endless trek to the west…” is in the next to last chapter of Vol. II that was finished ca. 1926-28. In 1926 USSR existed 4 years, after a devastating civil war. Hitler, as well as many political leaders, assumed that this Communist state would collapse sooner or later, leaving a (cultural and) territorial vacuum to be filled by German hegemony. Time proved him to be wrong, and in 1937 Stalin was at the height of his power. So the reasons for a preemptive strike against Red Army were primarily military-strategic
Less
Hide replies
mzaks
3 hours ago
Hitler gave a speech in Berlin on 26 September 1938 and declared that the Sudetenland was “the last territorial demand I have to make in Europe”. He also stated that he had told Chamberlain, “I have assured him further that, and this I repeat here before you, once this issue has been resolved, there will no longer be any further territorial problems for Germany in Europe!”
A few months later, Hitler ordered his forces beyond the Sudeten territories, invaded Prague and the rest of the Czech lands, nearly sparking war then.
Why would Poland, or anyone else negotiate with Hitler after he had so proved that his negotiations were in bad faith?
Do you have any evidence that Hitler actually believed he was making a preemptive strike before an impending Soviet invasion? I haven’t seen any, while there are mounds of evidence as Martinez presented that Hitler’s motive was taking the land.
Less
GusinLanzarote Alt Right
10 hours ago
Danzig was 95% German- it was a reasonable request.
2
0
==========================
See Also
Mark Collett — It’s Okay To Be White — TRANSCRIPT
Mark Collett — Christmas Adverts – Multicultural Propaganda — TRANSCRIPT
Mark Collett — What We Must Do To Win — TRANSCRIPT
Mark Collett — Assad Didn’t Do It – Faked Syrian Gas Attack — TRANSCRIPT
Mark Collett — The Plot to Flood Europe with 200 Million Africans — TRANSCRIPT
Mark Collett — The jewish Question Explained in Four Minutes — TRANSCRIPT
Mark Collett at The Scandza Forum, Copenhagen – Oct 12, 2019 — Transcript
Patriotic Weekly Review – with Blair Cottrell – Dec 4, 2019 — TRANSCRIPT
Dangerfield – Talking Tough with Mark Collett – Mar 28, 2020 — Transcript
Mark Collett – Sam Melia Sentencing – with Laura Towler – Mar 1, 2024 – Transcript
Joe Marsh – Sam Melia Going into Court Before He was Sentenced – Mar 1, 2024 – Transcript
911 – The Jews Had Me Fooled: A Jewish Engineered Pearl Harbor
Organized jewry Did 9/11 — The 16th Anniversary, 2017
Know More News — Christopher Bollyn, The Man Who Solved 9/11 — TRANSCRIPT
The Realist Report with Christopher Bollyn – Sep 2018 — TRANSCRIPT
Guns and Butter interviews Christopher Bollyn — The War on Terror – Dec 18, 2019 — Transcript
AE911Truth – Exposing Those Who Covered up the Crime of the Century – May 28, 2023 – Transcript
============================================
PDF Download
Total words in transcript = 1624
- Total words in post = xxx
- Total images = xx
- Total A4 pages = xxx
Use your browser to download/export a PDF of this post.
Version History
Version 5:
Version 4:
Version 3:
Version 2:
Version 1: Thu, Jun 20, 2024 — Published post. Includes Odysee comments (126).