Posted on 05/11/2005 9:08:36 AM PDT by EveningStar
If the objective of the West was the destruction of Nazi Germany, it was a "smashing" success. But why destroy Hitler? If to liberate Germans, it was not worth it. After all, the Germans voted Hitler in.
If it was to keep Hitler out of Western Europe, why declare war on him and draw him into Western Europe? If it was to keep Hitler out of Central and Eastern Europe, then, inevitably, Stalin would inherit Central and Eastern Europe.
Was that worth fighting a world war with 50 million dead?
(Excerpt) Read more at worldnetdaily.com ...
Point taken. But sometimes it takes several paragraphs before one gets the full intent of the article. My goal is to get optimum readership of the entire article.
Pat's exposition in the second half of the article rests on the assumption that Hitler's ambitions would have been sated by the destruction of Poland and a successful defeat of Stalin, leaving Western Europe untouched. Naive, imo.
In 1930, Germany didn't have the ability to invade and conquer France. In 1935, the United States didn't have the ability to invade and defeat Nazi Germany. We developed the ability, and the Germans would have done the same. They weren't that far behind us on development of the atomic bomb, either.
Interesting... The "lesser of two evils" theory. That very mindset or "point" is what allowed Hitler to rise to power. He was able to convince the German citizens that this was the case and he was also able to convince Wall Street of the same thing. Whether German communism would have produced more carnage in Europe then Nazism is debatable.
And most Americans aren't even aware that Wall Street took a large role in the financial backing of Hitlers rise to power. We will never know if WW II could have been prevented if such US financial support did not exist for Hitlers embryonic NAZI party. US foreign policy, and the willingness of US power elites to financially back foreign entities while ignoring the political views and actions of those governments (lesser of two evils scenario) continues to haunt this country to this very day. Most recently Iraq (Saddam), Afghanistan (Bin Laden), North Korea (via Clinton's Sunshine Policy) and the biggest mistake of all IMHO... China.
I fear we will someday pay a huge price for ignoring what China says and does politically... just to keep the shelves at Wally World stocked with cheap goods.
WW III???? Time will tell...
Actually I don't think you have to excerpt from Worldnet Daily. Anyway, people can click the link. The arguement that anyone opposed to Pat can't or didn't read is a strawman.
France and Germany were quite capable of honoring their treaty obligations. The problem is that in September 1940, they did NOTHING.
They were quite capable of honoring their treaty obligations. The problem is that in September 1940, they did NOTHING.
Naive?....No my good friend..Buchannan and his conspiracy minded robots are dangerous to a free world.
It just drives some people berserk that we dare denounce National Socialism and (gasp) Hitler in the same breath that we denounce Communism.
I get a kick out of seeing them sputter and pratically burst a blood vessel with their cap locks, exclamation points and convoluted arguments. Notice most are careful not to go the next step; the one where they talk about what the Jews did to Germany after WWI; lest their rantings are removed by moderator.
Oooh! You used bad words. I'm tellin' Mama!
I'd like to see you post a quote from Churchill's Vol. VI to illustrate your claim. I'm betting you can't.
If you post a quote, you must include the page number.
Ew!
What's that gurgling sound?
Is it allergy sufferers dealing with pollen?
Is someone or something being choked to death?
No.
That's Pat Buchanon spitting on 50,000,000 soldiers' graves.
I guess hindsight isn't 20/20 for everybody.
You may be right. Sometimes I'm overly cautious.
Anyway, people can click the link. The arguement that anyone opposed to Pat can't or didn't read is a strawman.
I agree. Thank you.
Exactly. Pat Buchanan doesn't seem to get that, and implies this notion that because Communism still exists, than Nazi Germany should have been allowed to as well. It's just so unfair that Nazism was destroyed in 12 years whereas the USSR lasted 74 years! What better world we would have lived in if Nazi Germany was allowed to continue on its merry way! This is an irrational and immoral view. Just because Communism isn't villified as much as Nazism is in the media, doesn't mean the crimes of Nazism were phantasms and fictions. Talk about a stupid @$$ way to fight the Left--it is the "Let's not demonize Nazism too much!" rationale of people like Pat Buchanan who drive people into the gaping arms of the Left.
You want more Leftists, well then argue that ending Hitler's gas chambers wasn't worth it. If Pat Buchanan was President and he suggested that it there was no pressing need to defeat an ideology bent on exterminating Jews, Poles, Catholics, blacks, and eventually, Anglo Saxons, he would have about 15% approval rating, and by 2008 Moveon.org and the Green Party would be running the country w/ a 100 seat majority in the House and a filibuster proof Senate. It's just mindboggling stupid, culturally tone deaf, not too mention historically innacurate and immoral, to come to the defense of Hitler's Germany in ANY way. Plays right into the REAL Communists hands.
I have a question for those who are defending this view that it wasn't worth it to fight Hitler. Forget the Holocaust, forget the war itself and these rationales you've concieved that it was Churchill's fault that WWII started (I get sick just conceding those "what ifs")...just one question: what's your opinion of the Terri Schiavo case? I assume you think it's a great moral tragedy, right? Well, the extermination of "undesirables" was the PUBLIC POLICY of Nazi Germany, before the whole war mess started. Not a couple of judges off the reservation, and not one victim, but public policy that led to TENS OF THOUSANDS of victims. If the Schiavo case is the fulcrum which American cultural history turned for the worst, and I know many of you Pat supporters believe this, then what the heck was Nazi Germany and its policies of targeted exterminations of thirty thousand Terri Schiavos?
Oh, and 6 million Jews dead and 4-5 million Poles. And the brutal torture of children in atrocious human experiments. And the declaration of war on the U.S. And the declaration of war on the free market and democracy and individual liberty. And the dismantling of Christianity, replacing it w/ "MeinKampf"ianity, w/ baby Jesus replaced in manger scenes w/ baby Hitlers and Bibles on altars replaced w/ Mein Kampf. And the decapitation of Tibetan children in pagan rites of human sacrifice. And Himmler and the S.S.'s outright worship of SATAN.
Clearly, clearly it wasn't worth it. Crimes of Nazism = overrated, how can a good Christian complain about Nazism?!?
>They were quite capable of honoring their treaty obligations. The problem is that in September 1940, they did NOTHING.<
Are you now saying Dunkirk didn't happen.
Yes. Next question.
Pls see # 48. Thx.
You may be right about this, but that wasn't the point of that string of posts you've referenced. The poster originally made the following statement:
Any legitimate scholarship and analysis would lead one to the conclusion that WWII had to be fought unless we all wanted to be speaking German and saying "Heil Hitler."
Any statement about what a victorious Germany could have or would have done after World War II is little more than speculation. Even if a compelling case could be made along those lines, it hardly amounts to any legitimate scholarship and analysis leading to the conclusion that Americans would all be "speaking German and saying 'Heil Hitler.'"
Any foreign leader in the middle of the 20th century who had any intention of conquering the United States would have had one huge obstacle to overcome. As a largely agrarian, sparsely-populated nation (in comparison to Western Europe) with a wide array of geographical features and long coastlines on two oceans, and filled with armed citizens -- this country could barely be governed by our own government, let alone an outside invader.
The French and British had signed a treaty which would have obligated them to intervene.
But in September 1939, they did nothing. I meant to say 1939.
Mr. Buchanan is only concerned with feeding his specific niche red meat, much like Michael Savage.
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.