Actually he makes several valid points, even if you disagree with his conclusion. However, everyone on this board sees fit to regress to DU'ers and just call him an idiot rather than rebut his argument.
I do think that he is correct that communism was worse than Nazism. And I agree that the Eastern European fall to communism was a major defeat. The question is, could we have won the war against the Germans without allying with the Russians? If yes, FDR and Churchill were right to enter the war, but made a serious tactical error. 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.
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.
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.
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.