Posted on 05/11/2005 9:08:36 AM PDT by EveningStar
I wonder how many people complaining actually took the time to read the article?
I suppose you all are great fans of the Soviets and were so glad they dominated Poland, but I agree with Mr. Buchanan that WWII started out to help Poland, but it's a shame that Poland got lost in the whole deal.
Once we were in, we had to fight it, but there were many mistakes that took us in...he asks interesting questions.
If Hitler had been left alone, he probably wouldn't have had any reason to attack France.
One of the untold stories of World War II was that the United States actually "liberated" France from the Nazis. The reality is that a substantial portion of the French population was perfectly content to live under the influence of the Third Reich -- particularly in light of the strong Marxist influence in France in the 1930s.
The Blum government in France, in fact, was cobbled together in 1936 under the Socialist, Communist, and Radical Socialist parties -- and during much of the next ten years France was essentially in a state of a quiet civil war. Leon Blum himself was imprisoned by the Vichy government for the duration of World War II.
The only reason it was worse was because Communist rule lasted longer. Eastern Europe under 50 years of Nazi rule would have been as much of a hell as under 50 years of Communist rule.
Worse for who?
Anyway you're wrong, nazism (national SOCIALISM) was just as bad as communism.
This guy has got to be the stupidest, most ignorant, assinine piece of garbage on the planet.
Don't feel bad. I voted for Clinton..twice (ducks, puts hands over head)
DU'ers read the talking points and spout.
FReepers DON'T read the article and spout.
I'm beginning to wonder which is worse!
Frankly, it was a rotten job of excerpting. Methinks EveningStar was intentionally misleading casual readers about the point of the article...to slur Buchanan.
If no, the question of whether we should have entered the war hinged on whether the Germans would have invaded Western Europe had we not entered. Buchanan thinks no, I think the obvious answer is yes.
You have a typo of some type here, I think. I'm not sure what you're saying...France was invaded well before we (I take it you're an American as well as a Texan ;-) entered.
This is the same thought process that liberals follow. It is "fun" to debate but do we really believe what we are saying?
I doubt he really believes it considering the consequences of not stopping the Japanese and Germans.
I'm not sure that Germany is really as denazified as we would like to think it is, but Russia is even less decommunized. Italy was a whole different ballgame. When they finally got the chance, they settled Mussolini's hash in a rather decisive fashion. More than any other occuppied country, they resisted Nazi racism, and when the USA finally came calling the Italian army just said "F*($ it", and vanished. Why fight to the death for something you don't believe in?
The error of FDR and Churchill was a strategic one, not merely tactical. Also, there were more than one error (Churchill's obsession with Balkans come to mind) And as for him making several valid points - I would tend to agree.
Pinging for later reading. The web site is not responding.
I disagree, so we'll have to leave it at that. Basically, Britain and France were bound by treaty to defend Poland if it were attacked. They did nothing in its defense, but Hitler had to know that invading Poland would trigger a declaration of war by France and Britain.
Relax..they are both evil. Does it bother you that Nazism is considered evil?
Why no, Pat, better that Nazism and the Japanese Empire have taken over the planet.
Moron.
Just sickening.
It's easy to look back in hindsight at history, but it's lazy to use specious reasoning and "post hoc, ergo propter hoc" fallacious. Fighting Hitler didn't turn Eastern Europe into Communist dictatorships, the naivety of FDR at Yalta did. Fighting Hitler didn't give the USSR the nuclear bomb (which is what turned the USSR into a more dangerous opponent in the 50s than Nazi Germany was in the 40s), poor homeland security of our energy research labs did. Fighting Hitler might not have saved the Poles from 40 years of Communism, but it saved them from 6 years of gas chambers that led to roughly 4 million Poles killed. And if Nazi Germany had been allowed to stay in power, there might not have been a Poland able to rise from the ashes in the late 80s and early 90s. Oh, and that little thing about 6 million Jews dead.
Why Buchanan thinks that it would have been good to have two anti-capitalist, anti-Christian, anti-American dictatorships swallowing the whole of continental Europe--and both on the path to owning nukes--instead of only one w/ half of Europe (and the poorer half mind you) dominated, I won't understand, except to suggest that he really wanted one of those Governments to survive and finish what it started.
Pat: if you really want to wear your arm band to the Bund meetings, you're free to do so. But I'd suggest wearing a coat if you want to walk through my neighborhood. By the way, are those your birds up on the roof?
I used to defend Buchanan against the claims that he was a closet Nazi.
But it turns out he really is.
No. I don't like Pat because he is a Jew-hater. No real conservative would write off Israel.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.