Was World War II worth it? (Buchanan barf alert)

WorldNetDaily ^ | May 11, 2005 | Patrick J. Buchanan

[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?

[bruin66]

Oh, right. He'd have stayed in Germany if the Czechs, Poles, etc. hadn't provoked him.

Same argument is used today, ie, by attacking Saddam, we brought AQ into Iraq.

[rdb3]

Same argument is used today, ie, by attacking Saddam, we brought AQ into Iraq.

Which is precisely what we wanted.

[dervish]

Please make the argument.

On one level it is a hard comparison to make since Hitler was stopped. What would the world have looked like had he not? That is speculation. But is it hard to believe that the killing machine that was Nazi Germany would not have outdone Stalin? In a time versus killing ratio Hitler was supreme.

[SJackson]

Same argument is used today, ie, by attacking Saddam, we brought AQ into Iraq...Which is precisely what we wanted.

As the arguement goes, AQ's no threat to America, we have an ocean to protect us.

[sheik yerbouty]

Pat is mourning his long gone, strutting poofter of a fuhrer. Pat wishes he was in the bunker in those last days...

[WestVirginiaRebel]

Patty was against the war in Iraq, too. He never met a dictator he didn't like.

[SJackson]

Patty was against the war in Iraq, too. He never met a dictator he didn't like.

Including the first one, which had nothing to do with the invasion of Kuwait, rather the defense of Israel, and was supported only by Jews and Amen Corner Christians.

[RightWhale]

OUR COUNTRY WASN'T INVADED BY EITHER OF THESE COUNTRIES! ! !

True, Alaska was a territory then, not a state, but Japanese were in the Aleutian chain.

[malakhi]

Pat is mourning his long gone, strutting poofter of a fuhrer. Pat wishes he was in the bunker in those last days...

Ya think that when he's home, alone, he dresses up like Eva Braun? ;o)

[Blessed]

"The French and British had signed a treaty which would have obligated them to intervene. <

The point Pat made was that when they obligated themselves they were not capable of backing up their words.This was proven by subsequent events.(Dunkirk)If they had not made the issue over Poland Hitler would not have had an excuse for invading Western Europe and in any event they would have had more time to prepare.

[Finalapproach29er]

Pat was a Anti-Communist who was a Republican for that reason only when he met Nixon in the mid-sixties.

Pat actually has always had conservative Democrat leanings.

He's trying to be the contrarian intellectual here but it just sounds idiotic.

Pat shouldn't be talking about Germany....period.

[Reaganwuzthebest]

Pat is right on when talks issues like secure borders and national sovereignty but when he writes columns such as this he makes it impossible to defend him.

[malakhi]

Destroying one evil monster (Hitler), then handing half of Europe over to an even worse monster (Stalin)

By what measure do you determine that Stalin was a "worse monster" than Hitler?

[WestVirginiaRebel]

Uh, what are you smoking?

[katana]

Old proverb from the Cold War (comparing the Soviet Union and East Germany): No one has ever invented a system which the Germans couldn't make work, and no one has ever invented a system which the Russians could make work.

That being said, having had the chance to fraternize with both nationalities I'd much rather "socialize" with Russians. De Tocqueville was right about Americans and Russians. Stalin, on the other hand, was a Georgian from the Caucasus and they are a whole separate category of cat.

[dervish]

I always wonder at those who treat the evil "isms" as zero sum contests. Poor Pat. Did he ever consider that if Naziism was not defeated we would have Communism and Naziism.

[familyop]

That is nothing new from Pat Buchanan. He has been spouting the kind of Nazi propaganda often issued by the older Nazis--very insidious--for a long time. And as the rest of his kind are, he is currently on the side of our terrorist enemies. Save the following for copying and pasting.

Buchanan referred to Capitol Hill as "Israeli-occupied territory." (St. Louis Post Dispatch, 10/20/90)

During the Gulf crisis: "There are only two groups that are beating the drums for war in the Middle East -- the Israeli defense ministry and its 'amen corner' in the United States." ("McLaughlin Group," 8/26/90)

In a 1977 column, Buchanan said that despite Hitler's anti-Semitic and genocidal tendencies, he was "an individual of great courage...Hitler's success was not based on his extraordinary gifts alone. His genius was an intuitive sense of the mushiness, the character flaws, the weakness masquerading as morality that was in the hearts of the statesmen who stood in his path." (The Guardian, 1/14/92)

Writing of "group fantasies of martyrdom," Buchanan challenged the historical record that thousands of Jews were gassed to death by diesel exhaust at Treblinka: "Diesel engines do not emit enough carbon monoxide to kill anybody." (New Republic, 10/22/90)

Buchanan's columns have run in the Liberty Lobby's Spotlight, the German-American National PAC newsletter and other publications that claim Nazi death camps are a Zionist concoction. Buchanan called for closing the U.S. Justice Department's Office of Special Investigations, which prosecuted Nazi war criminals, because it was "running down 70-year-old camp guards." (New York Times, 4/21/87)

Buchanan was vehement in pushing President Reagan -- despite protests -- to visit Germany's Bitburg cemetery, where Nazi SS troops were buried. At a White House meeting, Buchanan reportedly reminded Jewish leaders that they were "Americans first" -- and repeatedly scrawled the phrase "Succumbing to the pressure of the Jews" in his notebook. Buchanan was credited with crafting Ronald Reagan's line that the SS troops buried at Bitburg were "victims just as surely as the victims in the concentration camps." (New York Times, 5/16/85; New Republic, 1/22/96

After Cardinal O'Connor criticized anti-Semitism during the controversy over construction of a convent near Auschwitz, Buchanan wrote: "If U.S. Jewry takes the clucking appeasement of the Catholic cardinalate as indicative of our submission, it is mistaken. When Cardinal O'Connor of New York seeks to soothe the always irate Elie Wiesel by reassuring him 'there are many Catholics who are anti-Semitic'...he speaks for himself. Be not afraid, Your Eminence; just step aside, there are bishops and priests ready to assume the role of defender of the faith." (New Republic, 10/22/90

---

Pat Buchanan on History & Philosophy

Hitler was no threat to US; sought mastery of Europe only

Following his victory [over France in 1940], Hitler made no overt move to threaten US vital interests. As of mid-1940, his actions argue that beneath the overlay of Nazi ideology, he was driven by a traditional German policy of “The Drive to the East.” In this analysis, Hitler had not wanted war with the West. Hitler saw the world divided into four spheres: Great Britain holding its empire; Japan, dominant in East Asia; Germany, master of Europe; and America, mistress of the Western Hemisphere.
Source: “A Republic, Not an Empire,” p.268-9 Oct 9, 1999

FDR forced Japan to attack US as back door to WWII

In early 1941, FDR froze all Japanese assets, cutting off trade, including oil. Without oil, the Japanese empire must wither & die.. The oil embargo was “economic war” against an oil-starved nation. FDR knew the consequences of an oil embargo & approved, because he wanted Japan to attack. A war with Japan was the only way he could take us to war in Europe. FDR seemed anxious to get into the war, [but was] elected on a promise to stay out, [so] FDR needed to maneuver Japan into firing the first shot.
Source: “A Republic, Not an Empire,” p.285-7 Oct 9, 1999

American leaders obsessed with Jewish influence
In a chapter of his book criticizing the power of numerous American ethnic groups over foreign policy, Buchanan writes, “After WWII, Jewish influence over foreign policy became almost an obsession with American leaders.” Buchanan responded to critics that the observation was lifted from a complex criticism directed at numerous groups. “One paragraph discussing the power of the Israeli lobby is not only legitimate, it is necessary,” he declared.
Source: Francis X. Clines, New York Times, p. A20 Sep 21, 1999

Hitler was no direct threat to the US after 1940

In his book, Buchanan says that Hitler offered “no physical threat to the US” as of late 1940, after his defeat in the Battle of Britain. Buchanan questions whether Hitler sought war with the West or was driven to it. “Hitler made no overt move to threaten US vital interests” after his initial victories across Europe, Buchanan writes. Americans had no choice but to fight once Hitler declared war on the US, but Hitler was primarily interested in building an empire to the East, not westward toward toward the United States.
Source: Francis X. Clines, New York Times, p. A20 Sep 21, 1999

[The KG9 Kid]

"... If it was to keep Hitler out of Western Europe, why declare war on him and draw him into Western Europe?"

Buchanan also ignores the fact that while Pearl Harbor lay in still-smoking ruins, Hitler took the initative in declaring war on the United States at the same time the Nazis were conducting the 'Wannsee Conference' which planned the extermination of all European Jews after the German invasion of all European nations.

The Japanese carriers were still steaming back East when Hitler's SS death squads were starting their program of genocide, yet Pat Buchanan says that we provoked Hitler.

Pat Buchanan can't die soon enough for me.

If this were 1942, I'd call for charges of treason to be brought against him.

[Iscool]

He's a complete nut. How anyone could argue that our actions during WW II should be questioned is all I need to hear.

I doubt that anyone would question the men and women of the 'West' that fought this war...And I am certainly no historian but I think I can see where Pat is going with this...

It's common knowledge that we didn't go to war to free the Jews...FDR refused to go to war even tho he knew about the holocaust...As I understand it, the American people wanted no part of the war, until our interests were attacked...

Pat, and George Bush make some good points...And some of those points are 'who did we liberate'??? Did the Germans want to be liberated??? Did the other countries join Hitler to defend against Britain and ultimately the U.S.??? Was the Eastern bloc better off under Stalin than it would have been with Hitler???

So as I see it, Pat's question is; was it worth 50,000,000 dead people to liberate people who didn't want to be liberated while handing over numerous countries with millions of people to a gov't that was as bad as the one they were facing??? We did get Hitler and thank God for that...But then came Stalin...

Are the people in Latvia and Lithuania glad that we 'won' the war??? I think it's a question worth considering...