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?

[hineybona]

what a tragically moronic article by Pat..So ignorant of history.

[SJackson]

And this bastard is back in the Republican party, with all his Birchite/Lindbergh/Henry Ford hordes. Just what we needed!!!

No, he's not a Republican, other than to the media, though non-FR Republican's need to speak out on that a bit more.

[WoofDog123]

"In a time versus killing ratio Hitler was supreme"

What numbers are you using for Stalin's total kills in the USSR during the purges? I have seen numbers as high as 10 million or more, though I suppose the truth is not known.

[SJackson]

Gosh, I hope Iran is next! ...(sigh)...

There are some scores left to settle with Iran and their Lebanese proxies.

[SJackson]

Patty doesn't make me scratch my head; he makes me want to tear my hair out by the roots : )

That you have hair left to pull out is a good thing!

[WoofDog123]

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

Well, in 1945, a major terrorist attack by islamic terrorists with evidence of cells operating in the US may very well have resulted in all arabs/muslims being deported or put in camps and our borders being closed. It does change the equation some.

[SJackson]

Not enough Jews died for Pat's taste. What a loon.

Never Enough!

[Rembrandt_fan]

I read the article, and I'm sure many others lambasting Buchanan for his barely veiled pro-Hitler sympathies have also read the article. His writings--particularly of late--show good Buchanan sliding further and further into the black hole he's been orbiting for years now. One day soon, the darkness will swallow him up completely, and then (hopefully) he'll finally stop being identified as an archetypal conservative. Buchanan may be a number of things, but 'conservative' isn't one of them.

[WoofDog123]

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

The only one I can think of is that by winning WWII stalin would become far stronger than hitler ever was.

[SJackson]

The tragedy of World War II was indeed as Pat suggests. Britain and France went to War to save Poland--truly an admirable course. But in the event, Poland was enslaved by Russia for the next almost half a century. Why is it unthinkable to question that outcome?

Whereas if they hadn't, they would have been enslaved either by Hitler, Stalin, or half and half. Presuming we never confronted either evil, and America defeated both, still today.

[SJackson]

I read the article, and I'm sure many others lambasting Buchanan for his barely veiled pro-Hitler sympathies have also read the article.

They're not veiled. Presuming without English, French, American intervention Europe settled down to a Nazi-Communist conflict, not involving the rest of western Europe (imo, naive at best), we're discussing the liquidation of the Polish people under Hitler or Stalin. I think both options stink, and despite decades of persecution I think the Polish people are better off today. Pat prefers the Hitler model, slave labor camps for ethnic Poles and planned communities for imported Aryans, and Poles who could establish Aryan heritage.

[SJackson]

"As the arguement goes, AQ's no threat to America, we have an ocean to protect us."...Well, in 1945, a major terrorist attack by islamic terrorists with evidence of cells operating in the US may very well have resulted in all arabs/muslims being deported or put in camps and our borders being closed. It does change the equation some.

Don't know about 1945. The issue is the English/French to an attack on Poland, and the American response to an attack on Pearl Harbor, and subsequent declaration of war by Hitler.

Better example, our response had Stalin dropped a bomb on NY in 1946, if he'd had one. Oceans to protect us, after all.

Actually, the "we're protected by oceans" arguement died under President Monroe and his doctrine.

[WoofDog123]

"and some are being adde by people that didn't read the thread before commenting."

Buchanan threads tend to get long...it is not unusual to reply to a comment rather than read 250 comments then reply. I was baffled at the number of people who didn't realize when/why WWII started until I realized the person who posted the article selectively excerpted provocative comments without context.

[familyop]

Hello! You might want to have a look at comments 178 and 201, if you haven't already done so.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1401044/posts?page=178#178

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1401044/posts?page=201#201

[Tailgunner Joe]

Actually Ludendorff was pretty confused in his old age, he just knew Hitler well.

[COEXERJ145]

The sad thing is there are people on FR who worship this bozo.

[EveningStar]

Thank you. I do know what elipses are. I usually use them when I'm removing words from within an excerpt. In retrospect, I probably should have used them before and after this excerpt (although it probably still wouldn't have made a difference with some people).