NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.
On August 27 2025 00:58 Jankisa wrote: The problem with Dave Smith's whole notion is that he, just like Joe Rogan, especially at the time of that interview was very, very firmly engaged in the process of Trump's re-election.
Not only that, he's a part of a libertarian clique which is basically the libertarian version of tankies, anti-interventionist guys who blame the US for everything. Of course, as we Croats would say, even a blind chicken will find an occasional grain, so he can be right on Israel policy or opposition to Iraq, but he's dead wrong here.
Dave Smith is also part of that libertarian group that was arguing that Winston Churchill was the real villain of the war (WWII). Now, he will be quick to add that Hitler was also a villain, and then also backtrack, saying it was hyperbole.
However, the only way I can see a person making such a claim without being a full on Nazi apologist is that they are so anti-intervention on behalf of Ukraine that they backwards rationalize everything else in history to try and have a 'consistent' worldview. I think it is no coincidence that there has been a sudden and precipitous rise in villainizing Churchill's stand against Hitler amongst the anti-interventionists.
What is their argument there?
I’ve heard many anti-Churchill arguments in the past, many that seem to have validity to me that he’s a bit of a monster (India for example), but his anti-Hitler stance isn’t generally one I’ve run into.
Tucker carlson and some pseudo historians cant seem to think that genocide and ethnic purity and plans to conquer Europe and eventually Russia were well documented in the nazi plannings. surely churchhill was the big bad. the whole point is to muddy the waters for dumbasses to question WW2. ww2 is about as black and white as things get in terms of the main players, Japan invades in 1937 on their own ethnic cleansing horror show, Nazi's follow a few years later
It's all part of the "just asking questions" and "both sides" crew where they look at stuff "objectively" and then give a little bit of context and then just throw up their hands and raise their eyebrows while looking intensely at you with a smirk that says: how about that, hmmmm?? Isn't that weird, hmmmmm? Then when pressed they claim they're not an expert and weasel their way out of it like that. Dave Smith's antics were exposed on a JR podcast by Douglas Murray and they just couldn't grapple with what they were doing. It was quite interesting to see the twists and turns he was attempting to defend himself. In any case, it's always funny that people can just come in a room, claim: but what if 1+1 was actually 3, completely undermining established, centuries fundaments, but don't want to do the work to prove how that works out for all the rest of maths. We're living in a world where these people can make these claims, get a platform, get exposure and then muddy the established narrative because asking questions is now something that we can and should do? It's extremely insidious. It seems history and psychology and social sciences are easier targets because it's softer and easier to destabilize scientific consensus so let's shake the tree and see what falls down I guess?
Also, it's hilarious to me that these Russian puppets come into these threads talking about a "I see both sides" and "what about the West?", blaming us for not being able to see both sides when they are literally allowed to do exactly that here. I wonder how both sidesing it in Russia would go, lol. That's one of the differences.
"you see I found two Americans talking the same thing as my propaganda, therefore it can't be Russian propaganda, are you guys dumb or what? All Russians thinks the same, all American thinks the same, ok?"
On August 27 2025 09:59 Falling wrote: Oh, there is lots of things to criticize Churchill on and that's nothing new. But they specifically blame him for causing WWII. In their minds, Churchill escalated and I guess, he should have let Poland fall? Dave Smith very specifically rips a quote out of context from Churchill's historical memoirs. Like, completely flips Churchill's meaning.
They then talk about how many people died during WWII and that they are anti-people dying. So by choosing to fight Hitler, more people died I guess? (You can see the Ukraine argument lurking here- if only Ukraine would surrender, people would stop dying. The West is evil for propping up Ukraine and so the West is pro-death.)
Falling, Churchill wasn’t PM during that time.
But he was at the end. Poland can forgive a lot but not the Yalta Conference. After we shed blood to defend Britain as pilots, did the impossible storming of heavily fortified positions like Monte Cassino etc. we got backstabbed hard.
Looks like they are not expecting to fight a long war anymore.
Favourable: It was/is a very unpopular policy and was probably not deemed necessary anymore.
Unfavourable: It was so deeply unpopular, it actually made desertions much more likely and tanked moral so hart, they rather deal with an even bigger manpower shortage.
Blaming Churchill for ww2 is one of the more common claims that Russians and other nazi sympathizers love to make. My favorite version of that claim is very similar to their fantasy about Boris Johnson preventing a peace deal in Ukraine. They believe that Hitler was very close to making a great peace deal with Poland in 1939 but Britain somehow forced the Polish government to somehow force Germans to attack. Churchill wasn't even a PM when the war started but they don't seem to care about such unimportant details.
On August 27 2025 23:51 Sent. wrote: They believe that Hitler was very close to making a great peace deal with Poland in 1939 but Britain somehow forced the Polish government to somehow force Germans to attack.
Yeah, that is wild. This line of thought would make sense if England capitalized on Germany attacking Poland. They did declare war on them immediately but dropped leaflets instead of bombs and thus showed Germans where their defenses needed bolstering (instead of ending the war right then and there).
On August 27 2025 09:59 Falling wrote: Oh, there is lots of things to criticize Churchill on and that's nothing new. But they specifically blame him for causing WWII. In their minds, Churchill escalated and I guess, he should have let Poland fall? Dave Smith very specifically rips a quote out of context from Churchill's historical memoirs. Like, completely flips Churchill's meaning.
They then talk about how many people died during WWII and that they are anti-people dying. So by choosing to fight Hitler, more people died I guess? (You can see the Ukraine argument lurking here- if only Ukraine would surrender, people would stop dying. The West is evil for propping up Ukraine and so the West is pro-death.)
Falling, Churchill wasn’t PM during that time.
But he was at the end. Poland can forgive a lot but not the Yalta Conference. After we shed blood to defend Britain as pilots, did the impossible storming of heavily fortified positions like Monte Cassino etc. we got backstabbed hard.
He wasn’t PM at the end either actually. Also Churchill was a junior partner by then and wasn’t happy about the fate of Poland.
On August 27 2025 23:51 Sent. wrote: Blaming Churchill for ww2 is one of the more common claims that Russians and other nazi sympathizers love to make. My favorite version of that claim is very similar to their fantasy about Boris Johnson preventing a peace deal in Ukraine. They believe that Hitler was very close to making a great peace deal with Poland in 1939 but Britain somehow forced the Polish government to somehow force Germans to attack. Churchill wasn't even a PM when the war started but they don't seem to care about such unimportant details.
I mean, if Great Britain and France had said "Yeah, we don't care if you attack Poland", then WW2 probably wouldn't have started with Germany attacking Poland. Poland might even have said "Okay" to Danzig or War, only to get the Czechoslovakia treatment a few weeks later.
Depending on specifics, Germany might then still not attack France, and attack the Soviet Union successfully due to not having to fight on two fronts, and basically do a piecemeal WW2 where they only fight Britain and France after the soviets are defeated. Probably a good thing for Nazis, not a good thing for anyone else.
So honestly, i can't think of a worse decision from a non-nazi perspective. A better decision would have been to react more strongly after Austria, or after/during the Sudentenlang crisis.
My understanding is that the Black Orchestra, a group of senior Prussian junkers in the military, were all agreed that Hitler needed to be removed the moment the Sudetenland crisis moved into war. That Germany was hopelessly unready to fight France, given her military was limited to a tenth of the size of the French one, and that Hitler was overplaying his hand. The plan was to wait until Britain and France declared war, remove and shoot Hitler, and then sue for peace. The whole thing would be over with no blood spilled.
France refusing to honour her treaty obligations to the Czechs unless Britain came too and Britain being too gutless to fight absolutely fucked it.
Obviously Hitler was the instigator but he wasn't exactly subtle about his intentions. He wrote a book about what he was going to do and then paid to have it published and distributed. The fact that his plans somehow caught Chamberlain off guard is insane. It's very creditable to love peace, to strive for peace, to seek out compromise and so forth and in another era Chamberlain might have been remembered fondly. But in the era in which he lived he absolutely fucked it.
The German economy was already falling apart by 1938, Germans would deposit their money in banks and the banks would be forced to loan it to the government for IOUs so that the government could spend it to pay the Germans. It was the national banks of the governments they conquered, the gold of Czechoslovakia, that propped them up. The German tank columns parading into Austria during the Anschluss literally broke down on the way, they were new, untested, and defective. It was Czech tanks (Panzer 35(t) and Panzer 38(t)), built to oppose Germany in alliance with France, that subsequently broke France in the Blitzkrieg, not German ones.
There are a thousand futures in which WW2 is over before it starts and Chamberlain found the single one where it escalates as badly as it did. He was determined to make war the last possible resort and in doing so he made it the most costly and destructive one possible. No wonder Hitler didn't believe that Chamberlain was serious about stopping him after first giving him all the gold and tanks, surely if Chamberlain wanted to stop Hitler he'd have done it when it would have cost Britain nothing, not when it would drag Britain into a war of mutual annihilation.
Though Chamberlain did make it extremely clear to everyone that he was absolutely serious. In a futile attempt at finding peace through deterrence he publicly committed himself and Parliament to a declaration of war if Germany invaded Poland. There was absolutely no going back at that point, no back room communiques or memorandums on policy, it was printed in the newspapers and sworn on his personal honour and the honour of the British government, no chance of retraction or misunderstanding.
Nice highlight of Ukraine's overall strategy targeting Russian supply chain when it comes to munitions. Including news of 2 major gunpowder production facilities being obliterated.
On August 27 2025 00:07 zatic wrote: To everyone's surprise the 20 min video provides zero new information and it's the same drivel we have heard for a decade now.
I would love to see the written assurance against NATO expansion which everyone present at the time says doesn't exist though.
I think it was pretty clear that the video isn't worth watching by it being a video from the Joe Rogan podcast. Not that it isn't entertaining or anything but bringing that stuff up as some sort of evidence or factual information is not a good idea when JR constantly hosts conspiracy theories, people trying to convince us that 1 * 1 = 2, aliens are behind everything, reptilians are running the government etc.
Even if by some miracle you had a credible source of information hosted on JR podcast it would be immediately undermined by association with all the other outlandish stuff he's been presenting for years.
Don't get me wrong, I like some wild conspiracy theories or lunatic claims from time to time for some fun and entertainment and JR is the place to go for those. I know better though than to go looking there for anything relevant to any serious discussion.
I listen to some Joe Rogan because he does by far the best MMA interviews. And the thing with him is when ever he gets questioned about the misinformation he spews his response is always pretty similar. Do not take anything you hear here as fact, we are comedians talking about shit we find interesting, we are not experts.
I get this is a cop out because tons of people take it as fact, as this conversation showed. But people like Eek need to realize that if they want to take what JR says as fact, then do it. He is a comedian, so is Dave Smith. Their only goal is to be interesting, they play fast and loose with the facts. If you hear something on there, go out and find actual sources and check it out. There is plenty of take downs online.
The ancient peoples ones are always interesting because far back history and places like Gobekli Tepe have lots of mystery behind them. Who knows what is exactly true. But if you treat the guy who is Joe speaking with total authority about this with out finding out why 99% of the archeologists disagree you ahve a very high chance of being very wrong.
Like maybe the spinx was built by aliens, or maybe they have figured out levitation, or any of the other theories I've heard on the pod cast. But do not treat it as fact, because even JR has dissenting opinions on these things so if you trust each guest implicitly your head will explode.
Hell Joe Rogan just came out and said he doesn't believe the 2020 election was stolen and that Trump was up to some shit on the Epstein list.
He is not certain on anything, his podcast is not science or fact, its wild entertainment.
On August 27 2025 00:07 zatic wrote: To everyone's surprise the 20 min video provides zero new information and it's the same drivel we have heard for a decade now.
I would love to see the written assurance against NATO expansion which everyone present at the time says doesn't exist though.
I think it was pretty clear that the video isn't worth watching by it being a video from the Joe Rogan podcast. Not that it isn't entertaining or anything but bringing that stuff up as some sort of evidence or factual information is not a good idea when JR constantly hosts conspiracy theories, people trying to convince us that 1 * 1 = 2, aliens are behind everything, reptilians are running the government etc.
Even if by some miracle you had a credible source of information hosted on JR podcast it would be immediately undermined by association with all the other outlandish stuff he's been presenting for years.
Don't get me wrong, I like some wild conspiracy theories or lunatic claims from time to time for some fun and entertainment and JR is the place to go for those. I know better though than to go looking there for anything relevant to any serious discussion.
I listen to some Joe Rogan because he does by far the best MMA interviews. And the thing with him is when ever he gets questioned about the misinformation he spews his response is always pretty similar. Do not take anything you hear here as fact, we are comedians talking about shit we find interesting, we are not experts.
I get this is a cop out because tons of people take it as fact, as this conversation showed. But people like Eek need to realize that if they want to take what JR says as fact, then do it. He is a comedian, so is Dave Smith. Their only goal is to be interesting, they play fast and loose with the facts. If you hear something on there, go out and find actual sources and check it out. There is plenty of take downs online.
The ancient peoples ones are always interesting because far back history and places like Gobekli Tepe have lots of mystery behind them. Who knows what is exactly true. But if you treat the guy who is Joe speaking with total authority about this with out finding out why 99% of the archeologists disagree you ahve a very high chance of being very wrong.
Like maybe the spinx was built by aliens, or maybe they have figured out levitation, or any of the other theories I've heard on the pod cast. But do not treat it as fact, because even JR has dissenting opinions on these things so if you trust each guest implicitly your head will explode.
Hell Joe Rogan just came out and said he doesn't believe the 2020 election was stolen and that Trump was up to some shit on the Epstein list.
He is not certain on anything, his podcast is not science or fact, its wild entertainment.
Its an attitude that I don't think can work anymore or belong in the 21st century. Thanks to the internet and social media a bunch of people talking about literally anything in a basement can and does reach millions of people. "We're just talking, no one should take us serious" shouldn't exist anymore. Your responsible for the shit you put out into the world.
On August 27 2025 00:07 zatic wrote: To everyone's surprise the 20 min video provides zero new information and it's the same drivel we have heard for a decade now.
I would love to see the written assurance against NATO expansion which everyone present at the time says doesn't exist though.
I think it was pretty clear that the video isn't worth watching by it being a video from the Joe Rogan podcast. Not that it isn't entertaining or anything but bringing that stuff up as some sort of evidence or factual information is not a good idea when JR constantly hosts conspiracy theories, people trying to convince us that 1 * 1 = 2, aliens are behind everything, reptilians are running the government etc.
Even if by some miracle you had a credible source of information hosted on JR podcast it would be immediately undermined by association with all the other outlandish stuff he's been presenting for years.
Don't get me wrong, I like some wild conspiracy theories or lunatic claims from time to time for some fun and entertainment and JR is the place to go for those. I know better though than to go looking there for anything relevant to any serious discussion.
I listen to some Joe Rogan because he does by far the best MMA interviews. And the thing with him is when ever he gets questioned about the misinformation he spews his response is always pretty similar. Do not take anything you hear here as fact, we are comedians talking about shit we find interesting, we are not experts.
I get this is a cop out because tons of people take it as fact, as this conversation showed. But people like Eek need to realize that if they want to take what JR says as fact, then do it. He is a comedian, so is Dave Smith. Their only goal is to be interesting, they play fast and loose with the facts. If you hear something on there, go out and find actual sources and check it out. There is plenty of take downs online.
The ancient peoples ones are always interesting because far back history and places like Gobekli Tepe have lots of mystery behind them. Who knows what is exactly true. But if you treat the guy who is Joe speaking with total authority about this with out finding out why 99% of the archeologists disagree you ahve a very high chance of being very wrong.
Like maybe the spinx was built by aliens, or maybe they have figured out levitation, or any of the other theories I've heard on the pod cast. But do not treat it as fact, because even JR has dissenting opinions on these things so if you trust each guest implicitly your head will explode.
Hell Joe Rogan just came out and said he doesn't believe the 2020 election was stolen and that Trump was up to some shit on the Epstein list.
He is not certain on anything, his podcast is not science or fact, its wild entertainment.
Its an attitude that I don't think can work anymore or belong in the 21st century. Thanks to the internet and social media a bunch of people talking about literally anything in a basement can and does reach millions of people. "We're just talking, no one should take us serious" shouldn't exist anymore. Your responsible for the shit you put out into the world.
I mostly agree, but I do think it is a very strong argument that if the person you are sources as fact says, don't treat this as fact I'm just a comedian, you should listen to him.
On August 27 2025 00:07 zatic wrote: To everyone's surprise the 20 min video provides zero new information and it's the same drivel we have heard for a decade now.
I would love to see the written assurance against NATO expansion which everyone present at the time says doesn't exist though.
I think it was pretty clear that the video isn't worth watching by it being a video from the Joe Rogan podcast. Not that it isn't entertaining or anything but bringing that stuff up as some sort of evidence or factual information is not a good idea when JR constantly hosts conspiracy theories, people trying to convince us that 1 * 1 = 2, aliens are behind everything, reptilians are running the government etc.
Even if by some miracle you had a credible source of information hosted on JR podcast it would be immediately undermined by association with all the other outlandish stuff he's been presenting for years.
Don't get me wrong, I like some wild conspiracy theories or lunatic claims from time to time for some fun and entertainment and JR is the place to go for those. I know better though than to go looking there for anything relevant to any serious discussion.
I listen to some Joe Rogan because he does by far the best MMA interviews. And the thing with him is when ever he gets questioned about the misinformation he spews his response is always pretty similar. Do not take anything you hear here as fact, we are comedians talking about shit we find interesting, we are not experts.
I get this is a cop out because tons of people take it as fact, as this conversation showed. But people like Eek need to realize that if they want to take what JR says as fact, then do it. He is a comedian, so is Dave Smith. Their only goal is to be interesting, they play fast and loose with the facts. If you hear something on there, go out and find actual sources and check it out. There is plenty of take downs online.
The ancient peoples ones are always interesting because far back history and places like Gobekli Tepe have lots of mystery behind them. Who knows what is exactly true. But if you treat the guy who is Joe speaking with total authority about this with out finding out why 99% of the archeologists disagree you ahve a very high chance of being very wrong.
Like maybe the spinx was built by aliens, or maybe they have figured out levitation, or any of the other theories I've heard on the pod cast. But do not treat it as fact, because even JR has dissenting opinions on these things so if you trust each guest implicitly your head will explode.
Hell Joe Rogan just came out and said he doesn't believe the 2020 election was stolen and that Trump was up to some shit on the Epstein list.
He is not certain on anything, his podcast is not science or fact, its wild entertainment.
Its an attitude that I don't think can work anymore or belong in the 21st century. Thanks to the internet and social media a bunch of people talking about literally anything in a basement can and does reach millions of people. "We're just talking, no one should take us serious" shouldn't exist anymore. Your responsible for the shit you put out into the world.
I mostly agree, but I do think it is a very strong argument that if the person you are sources as fact says, don't treat this as fact I'm just a comedian, you should listen to him.
Yeah, but as always, the problem is that not everyone hears everything. There are going to be a lot of people who hear Rogan, but not his disclaimer that he is just constantly spouting bullshit with random insane people.
I don't think it should be that easy to cop out of the responsibility. You are responsible for what you produce, and the effect it has on the world.
On August 27 2025 00:07 zatic wrote: To everyone's surprise the 20 min video provides zero new information and it's the same drivel we have heard for a decade now.
I would love to see the written assurance against NATO expansion which everyone present at the time says doesn't exist though.
I think it was pretty clear that the video isn't worth watching by it being a video from the Joe Rogan podcast. Not that it isn't entertaining or anything but bringing that stuff up as some sort of evidence or factual information is not a good idea when JR constantly hosts conspiracy theories, people trying to convince us that 1 * 1 = 2, aliens are behind everything, reptilians are running the government etc.
Even if by some miracle you had a credible source of information hosted on JR podcast it would be immediately undermined by association with all the other outlandish stuff he's been presenting for years.
Don't get me wrong, I like some wild conspiracy theories or lunatic claims from time to time for some fun and entertainment and JR is the place to go for those. I know better though than to go looking there for anything relevant to any serious discussion.
I listen to some Joe Rogan because he does by far the best MMA interviews. And the thing with him is when ever he gets questioned about the misinformation he spews his response is always pretty similar. Do not take anything you hear here as fact, we are comedians talking about shit we find interesting, we are not experts.
I get this is a cop out because tons of people take it as fact, as this conversation showed. But people like Eek need to realize that if they want to take what JR says as fact, then do it. He is a comedian, so is Dave Smith. Their only goal is to be interesting, they play fast and loose with the facts. If you hear something on there, go out and find actual sources and check it out. There is plenty of take downs online.
The ancient peoples ones are always interesting because far back history and places like Gobekli Tepe have lots of mystery behind them. Who knows what is exactly true. But if you treat the guy who is Joe speaking with total authority about this with out finding out why 99% of the archeologists disagree you ahve a very high chance of being very wrong.
Like maybe the spinx was built by aliens, or maybe they have figured out levitation, or any of the other theories I've heard on the pod cast. But do not treat it as fact, because even JR has dissenting opinions on these things so if you trust each guest implicitly your head will explode.
Hell Joe Rogan just came out and said he doesn't believe the 2020 election was stolen and that Trump was up to some shit on the Epstein list.
He is not certain on anything, his podcast is not science or fact, its wild entertainment.
Its an attitude that I don't think can work anymore or belong in the 21st century. Thanks to the internet and social media a bunch of people talking about literally anything in a basement can and does reach millions of people. "We're just talking, no one should take us serious" shouldn't exist anymore. Your responsible for the shit you put out into the world.
I mostly agree, but I do think it is a very strong argument that if the person you are sources as fact says, don't treat this as fact I'm just a comedian, you should listen to him.
If people had common sense the world wouldnt be in the state it is today.
On August 27 2025 00:07 zatic wrote: To everyone's surprise the 20 min video provides zero new information and it's the same drivel we have heard for a decade now.
I would love to see the written assurance against NATO expansion which everyone present at the time says doesn't exist though.
I think it was pretty clear that the video isn't worth watching by it being a video from the Joe Rogan podcast. Not that it isn't entertaining or anything but bringing that stuff up as some sort of evidence or factual information is not a good idea when JR constantly hosts conspiracy theories, people trying to convince us that 1 * 1 = 2, aliens are behind everything, reptilians are running the government etc.
Even if by some miracle you had a credible source of information hosted on JR podcast it would be immediately undermined by association with all the other outlandish stuff he's been presenting for years.
Don't get me wrong, I like some wild conspiracy theories or lunatic claims from time to time for some fun and entertainment and JR is the place to go for those. I know better though than to go looking there for anything relevant to any serious discussion.
I listen to some Joe Rogan because he does by far the best MMA interviews. And the thing with him is when ever he gets questioned about the misinformation he spews his response is always pretty similar. Do not take anything you hear here as fact, we are comedians talking about shit we find interesting, we are not experts.
I get this is a cop out because tons of people take it as fact, as this conversation showed. But people like Eek need to realize that if they want to take what JR says as fact, then do it. He is a comedian, so is Dave Smith. Their only goal is to be interesting, they play fast and loose with the facts. If you hear something on there, go out and find actual sources and check it out. There is plenty of take downs online.
The ancient peoples ones are always interesting because far back history and places like Gobekli Tepe have lots of mystery behind them. Who knows what is exactly true. But if you treat the guy who is Joe speaking with total authority about this with out finding out why 99% of the archeologists disagree you ahve a very high chance of being very wrong.
Like maybe the spinx was built by aliens, or maybe they have figured out levitation, or any of the other theories I've heard on the pod cast. But do not treat it as fact, because even JR has dissenting opinions on these things so if you trust each guest implicitly your head will explode.
Hell Joe Rogan just came out and said he doesn't believe the 2020 election was stolen and that Trump was up to some shit on the Epstein list.
He is not certain on anything, his podcast is not science or fact, its wild entertainment.
Its an attitude that I don't think can work anymore or belong in the 21st century. Thanks to the internet and social media a bunch of people talking about literally anything in a basement can and does reach millions of people. "We're just talking, no one should take us serious" shouldn't exist anymore. Your responsible for the shit you put out into the world.
I mostly agree, but I do think it is a very strong argument that if the person you are sources as fact says, don't treat this as fact I'm just a comedian, you should listen to him.
Yeah, but as always, the problem is that not everyone hears everything. There are going to be a lot of people who hear Rogan, but not his disclaimer that he is just constantly spouting bullshit with random insane people.
I don't think it should be that easy to cop out of the responsibility. You are responsible for what you produce, and the effect it has on the world.
Yep, but now you are armed with the information to readily confront the people you talk to with a counter point that they have a much stronger chance of listening too than being called mush brain idiots.
EPT
