Posted on 10/31/2011 9:36:59 PM PDT by WilliamHouston
All Buchanan and your arguments rest on assumptions that are false or preposterous:
1. Poland should have ceded Danzig to Germany. a) Danzig was already controlled by Nazis. Poland wanted to keep some purely trade-related rights to a port. Giving Poles nonmilitary access to ports is so offensive to Germans, that they are justified carving up Poland with the USSR. (meanwhile, they already controlled Danzig, and could have merely blocked access to the ports. They didn’t do that, they conquered the whole country. So, that definitely must be Britain’s fault)
2. Buchanan’s whole argument rests on the fact that Hitler would have “played nice,” if he just could have had Danzig. Well, what is your proof? I think there is plenty of proof that wasn’t the case. There was Austria. There was Czechoslovakia. There was Poland. The fact of the matter there was a lot of intelligence that Nazi Germany had aggressive plans besides that. We know now that Hitler was only prevented from kidnapping Pius XII by the Italian military.
I would never argue that Churchill is beyond criticism, but you need a lot more proof than you have given me to show that Hitler was peaceful beyond just wanting Danzig, who was pushed by a bloodthirsty Churchill.
“Danzig was a free city, not part of Poland, and it was undemocratically controlled by Nazis after 1933. You might as well asked why Poland didn’t cede control of Jupiter.”
That’s utter nonsense.
The so-called “Free City of Danzig” was under the control of neither Germany or Poland, but both states had rights to the city, and the war came about because Germany was determined annex Danzig after 1938 and Poland refused to cede its rights to the city.
“Since Nazis already controlled Danzig in 1939, when they invaded Poland, it was obviously a nonsensical pretext to invade Poland.”
Again, this makes no sense at all: Poland had signed a non-aggression pact with Germany just a few years before, and Poland had invaded Czechoslovaka with Hungary.
“Don’t you get that? They were taking Danzig, which was already controlled by an nonDemocratic Nazi government, they were taking Poland.”
If Poland had ceded its rights to Danzig and acquiesced in the annexation of Danzig by Germany, then Hitler would have never invaded Poland and treated Poland like just another one of its satellites like Hungary, Croatia, and Slovakia.
(1) Danzig was “controlled” by the Nazis, but it was, as you have pointed out the “Free City of Danzig.” Unlike Hamburg or Berlin, Danzig was not part of Germany, and it wasn’t part of Germany because Poland also claimed the “Free City of Danzig.”
(2) If Poland had ceded its stupid rights to a city that was destroyed anyway in WW2, then Germany would have never invaded Poland.
(3) Danzig should have never been made into the “Free City of Danzig” in the first place. 95 percent of Danzig was German. It was German than Los Angeles is American.
(4) Germany carved up Poland with the USSR because, because the Poles struck an alliance with Britain who gave them the war guarantee. Had not Britain not given the war guarantee, Poland would have ceded that stupid city, and history would have taken a different course.
(5) Austria was a German state. The Sudetenland, the Rhineland, and Danzig were indisputably part of Germany. That wasn’t a Nazi position either.
(6) Poland invaded Czechoslovakia in league with Germany and Hungary to annex the Poles who lived under Czech rule.
(7) No, Hitler never had “aggressive plans” against Britain. In fact, he wanted an alliance with Britain. He wrote a whole book about foreign policy that was based on his proposed alliance with Britain.
(8) You said earlier that Buchanan wanted Hitler to kidnap the Pope. Then you retreated from that argument and admitted you made up the story.
(9) Churchill was a buffoon who destroyed the British Empire. It was his actions that lost the Empire. British historians like Barnett and Taylor have made these arguments for years now.
(10) Hitler wanted Danzig and the Polish Corridor and for Poland to play a satellite role (similar to Croatia, Romania, Hungary, and Slovakia) in his war against the Soviet Union.
In hindsight, we know that Hitler invaded Poland and struck the alliance with Stalin (an alliance with communists that he despised) because of the Polish war guarantee that Chamberlain had foolishly issued.
If the Poles had not taken that worthless war guarantee from Chamberlain, and if the Poles had ceded Danzig which was 95 percent German anyway, which was destroyed in the course of the war anyway, then Hitler and Stalin wouldn’t have invaded Poland, but would have probably gone to war with each other.
Britain would have never gone to war with Germany. France wouldn’t have gone to war with Germany. America wouldn’t have gone to war to bailout Germany. Japan wouldn’t have dared attack America by itself.
Instead, the worst case scenario unfolded, a war that could have been prevented, an unnecessary war.
You have no proof Hitler never would have invaded. If Germany had merely not allowed Poland access to Danzig, then maybe you could make that argument. If Germany just wanted Danzig, and that's all, they had no need to carve up Poland with the USSR. The U.K. would most likely NOT have intervened in that circumstance. The fact is Hitler toadies were ALREADY running Danzig. Germans weren't being oppressed by Poles. At most, Poles were given an access to a port. But all Hitler had to do was say the word and that would have ended. Hitler, in effect, already controlled Danzig.
I will be the first person to agree that the Versailles Treaty was unjust and a mistake. But that in no way excuses the action of the Nazis. Versailles aside, Germany had no right to Austria or Czechoslovakia. That had nothing to do with the Treaty. Austria had a far longer tradition and existence than Germany.
By the way, I notice you have studiously avoided the Catholic question. You can’t acknowledge Pacelli or Pius XI, because your whole argument would fall apart. Will you accuse the Catholic Church of being a warmonger, because they were way out in front of Churchill in identifying Nazi Germany. Pius XI called Hitler, “an insane and arrogant prophet,” although the phrase was probably written by Pius XII. Pacelli was in Germany since 1917, and saw Hitler first hand. He obviously didn’t agree that Hitler just wanted a little German territory and he would go away. Meanwhile, he was suppressing the Catholic Church in Germany.
I didn't say Hitler "wanted" to kidnap the Pope. (he was only a baby at the time, and unaware of what was going on) Buchanan knows Hitler planned to kidnap the Pope and actually ordered the kidnapping. (He was frustrated by his own people , as well) Buchanan opposed stopping Hitler, ergo he had no problem with it. Buchanan's inability to acknowledge or criticize Hitler and Pius XII's mutual hatred of each other is kind of at odds with your description of him as pro-Catholic. Both Pius XI and Pius XII thought Hitler was the most dangerous man in the world, not to mention a complete threat to the existence of Catholicism in Germany.
So Buchanan's position is that he knew more about Hitler that Pius XI and Pius XII, and they were incompetent?
Thanks, I have just started reading it on kindle.
“You have no proof Hitler never would have invaded. If Germany had merely not allowed Poland access to Danzig, then maybe you could make that argument.”
It is clear from the German archives that Hitler had no grand design on Poland and was only reacting to circumstances after he failed to get what he wanted which was Danzig and the Polish Corridor.
Hitler wanted an alliance with Poland, which is why he signed a non-aggression pact with Poland, not unlike the one he signed with the other countries in the region like Slovakia, Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria.
“If Germany just wanted Danzig, and that’s all, they had no need to carve up Poland with the USSR.”
You are confusing the timeline.
Hitler sought out the alliance with Stalin because Poland refused to cede Danzig to Germany because it had been given the war guarantee from Chamberlain.
“The U.K. would most likely NOT have intervened in that circumstance.”
The UK intervened because it gave Poland the war guarantee. Poland refused to back down over Danzig because it had the war guarantee. Germany brokered the alliance with the Soviet Union because of that stupid war guarantee and partitioned Poland with the Russians.
It all goes back to the foolishness of the British and Polish governments. Chamberlain’s pride and the stupidity of Poland’s leaders.
“The fact is Hitler toadies were ALREADY running Danzig.”
The fact is, Danzig was not a part of Germany, even though it was a German city that wanted to be a part of Germany. The war came about because Poland which had a ridiculous whopping minority of 5 percent of the city refused to cede their rights to Germany.
“Germans weren’t being oppressed by Poles.”
If Boston was severed from Massachusetts and turned into a “free city” by a consortium of European powers, America wouldn’t have acted any differently from the Germans. The Germans were completely justified in annexing Danzig and the whole world would have been infinitely better off had they been allowed to do so.
“At most, Poles were given an access to a port. But all Hitler had to do was say the word and that would have ended. Hitler, in effect, already controlled Danzig.”
Danzig was not part of Germany. All the Poles had to do was to cede the stupid city - it was destroyed anyway in the war.
It was a GERMAN city. Danzig was more German than Chicago, New York City, Boston, Miami or Los Angeles are American. Even the United States recognized the injustice that had been done to Germany by Britain and France after WW1 by rejecting the Versailles Treaty.
“I will be the first person to agree that the Versailles Treaty was unjust and a mistake.”
You are defending the Versailles Treaty which was rejected as a vindictive and punitive treaty by the United States.
It was the Versailles Treaty that created that clusterfuck in Europe and it was British and French foreign policy that tried to preserve the unsustainable and which made the war inevitable.
If Danzig had simply been returned to the Germans (it was 95 percent German, everyone in Germany including the communists agreed that it was German),l then there would have never been a war with Poland.
“But that in no way excuses the action of the Nazis.”
Why was Hitler so popular? Because everyone in Germany - liberals, conservatives, Nazis, communists, moderates, monarchists, democrats - agreed that Danzig was a German city and that it should be annexed to Germany.
The Polish position was ridiculous. Danzig was 95 percent German. Its people were German and the city had been part of Germany. It should have been returned to Germany.
Instead, it was separated from Germany by the British and the French which allowed it to become the occasion of a world war.
“Versailles aside, Germany had no right to Austria or Czechoslovakia.”
“Czechoslovakia” wasn’t a real country. It was a tyranny dominated by the Czechs (like “Yugoslavia” in the Balkans) that had been created to reward the “good guys.”
Slovakia didn’t want to live under Czech rule. Neither did the German, Hungarian, or Polish minorities. Even today, Czechoslovakia doesn’t exist.
Austria was a German state that had been destroyed by the Western Allies after WW1. The Austrians were hardly oppressed and their union with Germany was a sensible arrangement.
“That had nothing to do with the Treaty. Austria had a far longer tradition and existence than Germany.”
Yeah, the Habsburg Empire came out of WW1 being punished by an even more stupid and vindictive and unwise treaty than the one that had been forced upon Germany.
Just look at what happened to “Yugoslavia.”
“By the way, I notice you have studiously avoided the Catholic question.”
The only “Catholic question” you have created is your argument that Buchanan said in his book that Hitler should have kidnapped the Pope, which you later admitted was a straw man, and then that Buchanan is “anti-Catholic” even though Buchanan himself is not only a Catholic but a Catholic traditionalist and has always consistently defended the Catholic Church like in his recent column.
As for Poland, it was Winston Churchill who gave away Poland to Stalin along with the rest of Eastern Europe at the Yalta conference, where he was joined by his pal FDR who would do anything to appease “Uncle Joe” because his own administration was full of a communist infiltrators.
“Buchanan’s inability to acknowledge or criticize Hitler and Pius XII’s mutual hatred of each other is kind of at odds with your description of him as pro-Catholic.”
I don’t think we have read the same book. Buchanan spends most of his time (like many other British historians) criticizing the stupidity of British foreign policy that resulted in the destruction of the British Empire.
The idea that Buchanan is “anti-Catholic” is risible. Buchanan himself is a Catholic and spends much of his time in this book, you know, the one that I actually reviewed above bemoaning the decline of the Catholic Church in America.
“Both Pius XI and Pius XII thought Hitler was the most dangerous man in the world, not to mention a complete threat to the existence of Catholicism in Germany.”
Hitler has been dead since 1945.
What happened to the Catholic Church after the triumph of the victorious Allies? Hitler lost you know. Was that a victory for the Catholic Church? Is the Catholic Church stronger in Italy and Spain today than it was under Franco and Mussolini?
Is the Catholic Church stronger today in America? Is it stronger today in France?
“So Buchanan’s position is that he knew more about Hitler that Pius XI and Pius XII, and they were incompetent?”
Buchanan’s position, which is really not his own position, but a position which has been advanced by number of British historians, is that giving the war guarantee to Poland was a foolish decision that resulted in the destruction of Poland, arguably a more foolish decision than the Stamp Act or the Quebec Act which ignited the American Revolution.
Even mainstream historians no longer take seriously the absurd idea that Hitler was out to “conquer the world” or that he was going to “invade America.” Hitler couldn’t even conquer Britain and his own writings make clear that he admired Britain and actually wanted an alliance with Britain.
The only country that Hitler really wanted to go to war with was Josef Stalin’s Soviet Union. Instead of a Second World War, there could have been a Nazi-Soviet war, which would have been infinitely better for America, for Poland, for Britain, and France than the world war which came out of the Polish war guarantee.
Nietzsche was right. He saw all this coming over a century ago. Inevitably.
How about believing in a strong military ? That’s something Pitchfork Pat DOES NOT believe in.
BTW, one can be a Conservative without being a Christian. After all, Mark Levin and Michael Savage are certainly Conservatives and both are Jewish. SE Cupp is an atheist and is most certainly a Conservative, as was Ayn Rand. (And let’s not forget, many of your fellow FReepers are Jewish.)
Pitchfork Pat plays the same sickening identity politics of the Ignorant Left.
“It doesn’t matter.”
Oh, it matters when you collect a paycheck from the same people that pay Ed “The Red” Schultz who organized a rally that was endorsed by the Communist Party USA and the Democratic Socialists of America(DSA). That matters a great deal.
“Buchanan has consistently opposed third world immigration, abortion, multiculturalism, diversity, affirmative action, the welfare state and has stood up and taken a forthright stand for Christianity.”
So does Rush Limbaugh, Mark Levin, and Glenn Beck. So does every FReeper on this site.
“Instead of Buchanan, we got Poppy Bush, Bob Dole, W., and John McCain. Now we all have to live with the consequences of those foolish decisions.”
Correct me if I’m wrong, but didn’t Herr Buchanan serve in the same Nixon administration that gave us the EPA ? That’s certainly a consequence that we’re all living with, isn’t it ?
It’s a nice ad hominem. False, in so far as Pat is a committed Catholic. But where is he wrong here?
Are you argueing that Hitler’s Leibernsraum politcy or irridentist and revanchist expansion was anything but consquest after the annexation of Czechoslovalkia and not just the Sudenland? Becuase if you are, you and PAt are both either purposely ignorant or lying for politics.
Nice review. I agree with the premise: the Left has taken what was once a genuinely free country and corrupted it with a system of perpetual dependence on the government and decadence. Unless somehow the American people wake up to the failure of socialism and multiculturalism and act quickly, the United States will certainly go the way of Rome.
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.