30.09.2009, 01:33
This is not meant as a personal attack--Deac
You need a PhD to be a historian and Irving doesn't have one.
I know that makes me sound like a jerk, but if you are going to put forward theories that contradict a consensus among historians you should know what you are talking about. Clearly, Irving has a political agenda. He is pro-fascist and anti-Semitic. (and that is saying it nicely)
So, there is no historical element here.
Sure the Nazis wanted a nuclear device.
Sure they knew what is was.
But the reason the Nazis didn't achieve a nuclear weapon was because Hitler instructed his physicists to dismiss Einstein's work as "Jewish" physics and so they went in a totally different direction. (Thank God). In short, the went down a blind ally.
If anyone is interested: there was a meeting in 1941 in Copenhagen between physicists Niels Bohr and Werner Heisenberg where they discuss the ethics of atomic research. See: Copenhagen, which is a play by Michael Frayn about their meeting.
(Irving is a complete bastard)
You need a PhD to be a historian and Irving doesn't have one.
I know that makes me sound like a jerk, but if you are going to put forward theories that contradict a consensus among historians you should know what you are talking about. Clearly, Irving has a political agenda. He is pro-fascist and anti-Semitic. (and that is saying it nicely)
So, there is no historical element here.
Sure the Nazis wanted a nuclear device.
Sure they knew what is was.
But the reason the Nazis didn't achieve a nuclear weapon was because Hitler instructed his physicists to dismiss Einstein's work as "Jewish" physics and so they went in a totally different direction. (Thank God). In short, the went down a blind ally.
If anyone is interested: there was a meeting in 1941 in Copenhagen between physicists Niels Bohr and Werner Heisenberg where they discuss the ethics of atomic research. See: Copenhagen, which is a play by Michael Frayn about their meeting.
(Irving is a complete bastard)