couldn't help but noticed your username bears a semantic similarity to u/TallestSkil, and usually that means that the account is trying to subvert him, then checked your history and your oldest content is all "Comment removed upon the user being banned." but here you are now
So now I am left with.. why?
So now I am left with.. why?
>The term holocaust was not coined until the 1960s so that's why he never spoke to it.
Okay, why didn't he mention the 6m jews who were killed without using the term "holocaust" then?
>Churchill struggled with mentioning the jews who were killed because he likely felt guilt in whether he could have done more to prevent it or not so it was a difficult subject to approach
Brah, if this was even halfway true and he felt guilt over it, the whole book would have been about easing his guilt. This is the worst cope ever.
>He does mention it. See, listen to this part of some letter he sent to someone: "There is no doubt in my mind that we are in the presence of one of the greatest and most horrible crimes ever committed." "It has been done by scientific machinery by nominally civilized men in the name of a great state and one of the leading races of Europe. I need not assure you that the situation has received and will receive the most earnest consideration from my colleagues and myself but, as the Foreign Secretary said, the principal hope of terminating it must remain the speedy victory of the Allied Nations."
That's the best you've got? He could be speaking of how the Germans were going to put lemon instead of milk in their morning tea.
Also that [the books by Eisenhower and De Gaulle](https://files.catbox.moe/olu48i.jpg) supposedly don't say anything about it either. I haven't actually read them, but I should ctrl F them at some point to check some terms.
WW2 clearly happened, but for an event as big as the holocaust, you’d think there would be more evidence and almost any counter arguments to all the noticing. They got too greedy with the numbers and stories.