Carson suggests that gun rights might have changed history for Jews in WWII

[AthenaAwakened]

More from right-wing doctors

Fox News’ Dr. Keith Ablow: Jews Lacked Courage, ‘Surrendered’ to Nazis

 

[ideologyhunter]

I can see Trump stirring up the nonreaders. But Carson is so pallid...his vocal is delivery is so shambling, almost a bashful mumble...I can hardly get through one of his soundbites. Does he actually build up any steam, in his rallies? It's mystifying to me. Yeah, he says stupid things and then stumbles all over his explanations. But where is the crazy factor that gets the Trumpies salivating?

 

[maxparrish]

The only unbalanced and stupid nonsense in the "Me Hate Ben Carson" thread are by his many thoughtless critics. While we are speculating on historical "what-ifs", Carson is quite correct in noting:

“I think the likelihood of Hitler being able to accomplish his goals would have been greatly diminished if the people had been armed,” Carson said.

Blitzer pushed a bit more: “Because they had a powerful military machine, as you know, the Nazis.”

“I understand that,” Carson said. “I’m telling you that there is a reason that these dictatorial people take the guns first.”

Yes Dorothy, one or more of Hitlers main goals would likely have been greatly diminished - such as the extermination of 6 million Jews.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

The only unbalanced and stupid nonsense in the "Me Hate Ben Carson" thread are by his many thoughtless critics. While we are speculating on historical "what-ifs", Carson is quite correct in noting:

“I think the likelihood of Hitler being able to accomplish his goals would have been greatly diminished if the people had been armed,” Carson said.

Blitzer pushed a bit more: “Because they had a powerful military machine, as you know, the Nazis.”

“I understand that,” Carson said. “I’m telling you that there is a reason that these dictatorial people take the guns first.”

Yes Dorothy, one or more of Hitlers main goals would likely have been greatly diminished - such as the extermination of 6 million Jews.

If everyone had been armed, that would have included non Jews who had bought into the Nazi ideology, correct?
How many guns did the Jewish population own and how widely were they dispersed? I somehow don't think there was gun in every German household, regardless of religion.
How does a hunting rifle stand up to a tank?

There is a lovely fantasy that some gun owners have standing off the government with their own private arsenal.

You know, like Ruby Ridge.

 

[coloradoatheist]

Carson needs to be very careful and say there was a slightly higher chance of Jews defending themselves. They would have had to known that the Germans were coming for them and used weapons to slow them down. The Warsaw ghetoo fought back, but the Jews were concentrated there and by then they would have heard the stories. However as we see with Iraq and Afghanistan, armed resistance can slow down a powerful army.

 

[Ford]

The only unbalanced and stupid nonsense in the "Me Hate Ben Carson" thread are by his many thoughtless critics. While we are speculating on historical "what-ifs", Carson is quite correct in noting:

“I think the likelihood of Hitler being able to accomplish his goals would have been greatly diminished if the people had been armed,” Carson said.

Blitzer pushed a bit more: “Because they had a powerful military machine, as you know, the Nazis.”

“I understand that,” Carson said. “I’m telling you that there is a reason that these dictatorial people take the guns first.”

Yes Dorothy, one or more of Hitlers main goals would likely have been greatly diminished - such as the extermination of 6 million Jews.

Yeah, because if there's one thing we know about Hitler, it's that he just couldn't stand armed resistance to his ideas. If the Jews had been armed, he'd have just given up and tried to restart his painting career.

 

[maxparrish]

The only unbalanced and stupid nonsense in the "Me Hate Ben Carson" thread are by his many thoughtless critics. While we are speculating on historical "what-ifs", Carson is quite correct in noting:



Yes Dorothy, one or more of Hitlers main goals would likely have been greatly diminished - such as the extermination of 6 million Jews.

Yeah, because if there's one thing we know about Hitler, it's that he just couldn't stand armed resistance to his ideas. If the Jews had been armed, he'd have just given up and tried to restart his painting career.

One might think that there were other possible outcomes between success at total racial annihilation vs. Hilter going fishing. Between those two outcomes is "diminishment" - just as allied guns accomplished.

The history of the Jewish genocide (as well as that of others) were of small numbers of gestapo and police rounding up civilian Jews, and forcing them on trains to their death with relatively small numbers of guards. Had Jews been armed (as they eventually and partially were in the Warsaw Ghetto uprising) the subjection of the Jewish people by low profile arrests would not have been nearly as effective.

Indeed, the first armed resistance by German Jews in the 1930s to the camps would have sparked international rage, and much broader resistance among an armed Jewish populace.

Carson understands the obvious, the critics refuse to.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Ya, fucking Jews. Why does everyone blame the Holocaust on someone other than them?

 

[untermensche]

The man is fucking insane.

He's probably lying about the Popeye's incident.

Many people who are brilliant when young, basically good at remembering stuff, become raving lunatics later in life.

This guy and Trump come to mind.

 

[maxparrish]

The only unbalanced and stupid nonsense in the "Me Hate Ben Carson" thread are by his many thoughtless critics. While we are speculating on historical "what-ifs", Carson is quite correct in noting:



Yes Dorothy, one or more of Hitlers main goals would likely have been greatly diminished - such as the extermination of 6 million Jews.

If everyone had been armed, that would have included non Jews who had bought into the Nazi ideology, correct?
How many guns did the Jewish population own and how widely were they dispersed? I somehow don't think there was gun in every German household, regardless of religion.
How does a hunting rifle stand up to a tank?

There is a lovely fantasy that some gun owners have standing off the government with their own private arsenal.

You know, like Ruby Ridge.

And Ruby Ridge and Waco was wisely not followed up by more government provocation; but it did inspire horrific "resistence" in OKC. The "unlovely fantasy" of the left anti-gun crowd is that armed resistance is only allowed for their left wing comrades; the Viet Cong, Cuban guerrillas, Sandinistas, etc. Let some non-leftist/socialist arise (e.g. the contras, afghanistan anti-Soviet mujahideen, Jewish resistance to the British and Arab armies etc.) and it is dismissed as a "lovely fantasy" that is unnecessary and ineffective.

 

[untermensche]

If Jews had guns and tried to use them all that would have meant is more dead Jews in the streets and less in the gas chambers.

Unconnected civilians with guns don't slow down trained military with guns.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

If Jews had guns and tried to use them all that would have meant is more dead Jews in the streets and less in the gas chambers.

Unconnected civilians with guns don't slow down trained military with guns.

QFT

 

[AthenaAwakened]

If everyone had been armed, that would have included non Jews who had bought into the Nazi ideology, correct?
How many guns did the Jewish population own and how widely were they dispersed? I somehow don't think there was gun in every German household, regardless of religion.
How does a hunting rifle stand up to a tank?

There is a lovely fantasy that some gun owners have standing off the government with their own private arsenal.

You know, like Ruby Ridge.

And Ruby Ridge and Waco was wisely not followed up by more government provocation;

"government provocation"

Oy Vey

We are about to take a trip, aren't we?

but it did inspire horrific "resistence" in OKC.

You consider blowing up a building and killing hundreds of people "resistence" even as a try, unsuccessfully, at sarcasm?

The "unlovely fantasy" of the left anti-gun crowd is that armed resistance is only allowed for their left wing comrades; the Viet Cong, Cuban guerrillas, Sandinistas, etc.

Prove it, retract it, or let it stand as a lie. Take your pick.

Let some non-leftist/socialist arise (e.g. the contras, afghanistan anti-Soviet mujahideen, Jewish resistance to the British and Arab armies etc.) and it is dismissed as a "lovely fantasy" that is unnecessary and ineffective.

You have no proof to back any of this up, now do you?

 

[laughing dog]

Yeah, because if there's one thing we know about Hitler, it's that he just couldn't stand armed resistance to his ideas. If the Jews had been armed, he'd have just given up and tried to restart his painting career.

One might think that there were other possible outcomes between success at total racial annihilation vs. Hilter going fishing. Between those two outcomes is "diminishment" - just as allied guns accomplished.

The history of the Jewish genocide (as well as that of others) were of small numbers of gestapo and police rounding up civilian Jews, and forcing them on trains to their death with relatively small numbers of guards. Had Jews been armed (as they eventually and partially were in the Warsaw Ghetto uprising) the subjection of the Jewish people by low profile arrests would not have been nearly as effective.

Indeed, the first armed resistance by German Jews in the 1930s to the camps would have sparked international rage, and much broader resistance among an armed Jewish populace.

The world knew what was happening and the world did not care. The Nazis knew how to stoke antisemitism which was rampant in Poland, Ukraine etc.... and had no trouble getting local volunteers to help round up and kill Jews. Armed Jews would have meant more SS with heavier arms. The Nazis did not coddle resisters - they tried to annihilate them. Your analysis is pure fantasy.

Carson understands the obvious, the critics refuse to.

Carson is the darling of the conservative loonisphere because of his batshit utterances.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Yeah, because if there's one thing we know about Hitler, it's that he just couldn't stand armed resistance to his ideas. If the Jews had been armed, he'd have just given up and tried to restart his painting career.

One might think that there were other possible outcomes between success at total racial annihilation vs. Hilter going fishing. Between those two outcomes is "diminishment" - just as allied guns accomplished.

The history of the Jewish genocide (as well as that of others) were of small numbers of gestapo and police rounding up civilian Jews, and forcing them on trains to their death with relatively small numbers of guards. Had Jews been armed (as they eventually and partially were in the Warsaw Ghetto uprising) the subjection of the Jewish people by low profile arrests would not have been nearly as effective.

Indeed, the first armed resistance by German Jews in the 1930s to the camps would have sparked international rage, and much broader resistance among an armed Jewish populace.

Carson understands the obvious, the critics refuse to.

That's odd, because the right-wing thought that Mandela was a terrorist for fighting against the State.

 

[maxparrish]

If Jews had guns and tried to use them all that would have meant is more dead Jews in the streets and less in the gas chambers.

Unconnected civilians with guns don't slow down trained military with guns.

So if you were so certain, you'd have them lay down as a meal for the NAZI beast would you? Such humane advice you would gladly provide to your Jewish neighbor?

"Mr. Goldstein, it's futile to buy and keep your guns, you might be hurt or killed, comply. And when they march you up a ramp into a box car, it won't do you any good...comply. And why resist being worked to death in the camps or feeding your fellow Jews to the ovens - just comply. And when they finally come for you to feed their gas chambers - go. .... Its best for you Jews."

Ahhh such good advice to the victim. "Jew, let them kill you."

 

[marc]

[YOUTUBE]https://youtu.be/Ihhxg6MPHmc[/YOUTUBE]

 

[untermensche]

If Jews had guns and tried to use them all that would have meant is more dead Jews in the streets and less in the gas chambers.

Unconnected civilians with guns don't slow down trained military with guns.

So if you were so certain, you'd have them lay down as a meal for the NAZI beast would you? Such humane advice you would gladly provide to your Jewish neighbor?

"Mr. Goldstein, it's futile to buy and keep your guns, you might be hurt or killed, comply. And when they march you up a ramp into a box car, it won't do you any good...comply. And why resist being worked to death in the camps or feeding your fellow Jews to the ovens - just comply. And when they finally come for you to feed their gas chambers - go. .... Its best for you Jews."

Ahhh such good advice to the victim. "Jew, let them kill you."

If the Nazi Army went into some town and met any resistance it would just bomb that town to the ground. It didn't care, it was going to kill everyone anyway.

A few unconnected civilians with guns wouldn't have changed history.

Nations with armies might have been able to if they had acted soon enough.

But Conservatives in the US were huge fans of the Nazi's. Good for profits and keeping the riff raff in line and all that.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

Apparently Carson now claims that Khamenei and Putin were buddies in school and he heard it from the CIA.

Full Nutter.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

If everyone had been armed, that would have included non Jews who had bought into the Nazi ideology, correct?
How many guns did the Jewish population own and how widely were they dispersed? I somehow don't think there was gun in every German household, regardless of religion.
How does a hunting rifle stand up to a tank?

There is a lovely fantasy that some gun owners have standing off the government with their own private arsenal.

You know, like Ruby Ridge.

And Ruby Ridge and Waco was wisely not followed up by more government provocation; but it did inspire horrific "resistence" in OKC. The "unlovely fantasy" of the left anti-gun crowd is that armed resistance is only allowed for their left wing comrades; the Viet Cong, Cuban guerrillas, Sandinistas, etc. Let some non-leftist/socialist arise (e.g. the contras, afghanistan anti-Soviet mujahideen, Jewish resistance to the British and Arab armies etc.) and it is dismissed as a "lovely fantasy" that is unnecessary and ineffective.

uh-huh

The government doesn't need to provoke anything, it simply lies siege and then arrests your ass.

In March 1996, agents of the FBI and other law enforcement organizations surrounded the 960-acre (390 ha) eastern Montana "Justus Township" compound of the Montana Freemen. The Freemen were a Sovereign Citizen group that included elements of the Christian Identity ideology, espoused common law legal theories, and rejected the legitimacy of the Federal Reserve.[5] Montana legislator Carl Ohs mediated through the standoff. Both Randy Weaver (one of the besieged at Ruby Ridge) and Bo Gritz (a civilian negotiator at Ruby Ridge) had attempted to talk to the group but had given up in frustration, as did Colorado Senator Charlie Duke when he had attempted negotiations.[10] A break finally came when far right leaders abandoned the group to their fate.[11] The group surrendered peacefully after an 81-day standoff and 14 of the Freemen faced criminal charges relating to circulating millions of dollars in bogus checks and threatening the life of a federal judge.[10] The peaceful resolution of this and other standoffs after Ruby Ridge and Waco have been credited by some to the creation of the Critical Incident Response Group (CIRG) in the U.S. Department of Justice in 1994.[12]
Another incident occurred in Fort Davis, Texas a year later in March 1997 when a faction of the self-styled "Republic of Texas" militia group seized hostages. The Republic of Texas group believed that the annexation of Texas as a state in 1845 was illegal, that Texas should remain an independent nation, and that the legitimate government of Texas was the group's leadership.[13] Joe and Margaret Ann Rowe were taken at gunpoint in retaliation for the arrest of member Robert J. Scheidt, who had been arrested on weapons charges. Leader Richard McLaren then declared that the group was in a state of war with the federal government.[14] The property was then surrounded by the entire Jeff Davis County sheriff's department, state troopers, Texas Rangers, and agents of the FBI.[13] McLaren's wife, Evelyn, convinced him to surrender peacefully after a week-long standoff. The McLarens and four other Republic of Texas members were sent to prison.[14]
A 1999 US Department of Justice analysis of the potential militia threat at the Millennium conceded that the vast majority of militias were reactive (not proactive) and posed no threat.[15] The Hutaree militia of Michigan was in fact prevented from killing a police officer and bombing his funeral by the FBI in cooperation with another local militia.[16] In January 2000, the FBI Project Megiddo report stated:
Most militias engage in a variety of anti-government rhetoric. This discourse can range from the protesting of government policies to the advocating of violence and/or the overthrow of the federal government. The majority of militia groups are non-violent and only a small segment of the militias actually commit acts of violence to advance their political goals and beliefs. A number of militia leaders, such as Lynn Van Huizen of the Michigan Militia Corps Wolverines, have gone to some effort to actively rid their ranks of radical members who are inclined to carry out acts of violence and/or terrorism. Officials at the FBI Academy classify militia groups within four categories, ranging from moderate groups who do not engage in criminal activity to radical cells which commit violent acts of terrorism. It should be clearly stated that the FBI only focuses on radical elements of the militia movement capable and willing to commit violence against government, law enforcement, civilian, military and international targets.[17]
By 2001, the militia movement seemed to be in decline, having peaked in 1996 with 858 groups.[18] With the post-2007 global financial crisis and the election of Barack Obama to the United States presidency in 2008, militia activity has experienced a resurgence.[16][19][20]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militia_organizations_in_the_United_States