It ticked me off to no end... 
Yet, by golly, as time has passed...
I find my anger was for naught... 
Pat has shown repeatedly since then that he has way far more than marbles loose in his belfry!
Posted on 05/21/2008 6:49:34 PM PDT by Free ThinkerNY
Last week we noted the bizarre arguments of Seattle Times editorial writer Bruce Ramsey, who tried so hard to defend Barack Obama against President Bush’s “appeasement” speech that he actually ended up defending Hitler for annexing Austria. His exact words were: “What Hitler was demanding was not unreasonable.”
If you think that’s an ahistorical pretzel of monumental proportions, though, you ain’t seen nothin’ — because here comes Pat Buchanan. According to old Pat, not only was the Anchluss not a problem, Hitler’s invasion of Poland was also perfectly understandable, given the Poles’ refusal to negotiate.
Those darned stubborn Poles were responsible for starting World War II, according to Pat: Bush Plays the Hitler Card.
German tanks, however, did not roll into Poland until a year later, Sept. 1, 1939. Why did the tanks roll? Because Poland refused to negotiate over Danzig, a Baltic port of 350,000 that was 95 percent German and had been taken from Germany at the Paris peace conference of 1919, in violation of Wilson’s 14 Points and his principle of self-determination.
Hitler had not wanted war with Poland. He had wanted an alliance with Poland in his anti-Comintern pact against Joseph Stalin.
But the Poles refused to negotiate. Why? Because they were a proud, defiant, heroic people and because Neville Chamberlain had insanely given an unsolicited war guarantee to Poland. If Hitler invaded, Chamberlain told the Poles, Britain would declare war on Germany.
From March to August 1939, Hitler tried to negotiate Danzig. But the Poles, confident in their British war guarantee, refused. So, Hitler cut his deal with Stalin, and the two invaded and divided Poland.
The cost of the war that came of a refusal to negotiate Danzig was millions of Polish dead, the Katyn massacre, Treblinka, Sobibor, Auschwitz, the annihilation of the Home Army in the Warsaw uprising of 1944, and 50 years of Nazi and Stalinist occupation, barbarism and terror.
Since when did FReepers put knee-jerk emotion over facts and logic?
When you lose a war the winner get to decide what territory you get to keep.
Pat’s wrong, by his standard every country that was ever punished by lost territory should wage war to get it back if the new owners of said property don’t negotiate to get it back.
It has been going on for quite a while. It is very very sad to watch. The vanguard of conservatism is slipping into some very sloppy habits.
Pat states this prescription exactly where?
btt
Maybe the Poles saw what happen to Czechoslovakia after the Munich Agreement. That is the reason Chamberlain gave up appeasement and GB along with France backed Poland
There was no two millenia Germany
That part of Europe was a bunch of petty dukedoms and minor Kingdoms until first Napoleon, then Prussia "unified" it.
Second, while it is all well and good to point out that Charberlain changed is view of the effectiveness of appeasement, his policy towards Poland was irrelevant, since he lacked the means to back up his policies and promises. This irresponsible act merely encouraged Poland to commit political suicide.
Furthermore, learning from history requires a clear-eyed, honest understanding of the facts as they actually happened. That is often nearly impossible in and of itself. Wishful thinking, moralizing and other kinds of factual distortions lead to misapprehension and error. We have enormous problems that are vital to our survival. Getting our facts straight is essential. It is a fundamental moral obligation of those who would wish to guide our policy.
It ticked me off to no end... Yet, by golly, as time has passed...
I find my anger was for naught... Pat has shown repeatedly since then that he has way far more than marbles loose in his belfry!
There is a faction here that wants to believe Pat said something he did not say so they can work themselves up over it. They want him to be an anti-semite so they can play Atticus Finch, and forget for awhile the specter of Barack Hussein Obama in charge of Middle East policy. A lot of energy has been wasted on hating Pat. Mel will be next.
So was he is using some other bench mark for why Hitler was right to invade besides the Danzig corridor?
By his standard If the Peace treaty that put Danzig in Poland was illegal because it didn’t conform to Wilson’s 14 points, then what I said is what he is trying to prove.
Pat has just made every treaty ever signed after a war null and void if the losing side doesn’t agree to the terms, or can find some one that doesn’t agree to the terms for them.
The next thing you know he will be encouraging the British to retake the east coast as their lost 13 colonies since the treaty of Paris was never signed by the United States Government.
Using the argument that Nazi Germany had the right to take back territory lost in WW1 Pat is actually giving Mexico justification to reclaim the Southwest US. Since they can't do so militarily it must ok in Pat's mind then for them to invade illegally as they are. Of course he argues the opposite when it comes to that but I guess he doesn't see the hypocrisy or double standard in what he's saying.
BS, especially as it applies to WWI. The Treaty of Versailles was one of the harshest post-war treaties of all time. What did you expect Germany to do?
How about don’t start yet another war for one thing?
They chose poorly how to deal with losing.
It was far worse than useless. It was validation and appeasement of that great mass murderer Mao Zedong. We have been paying a price for that bit of stupidity ever since and the full evil fruit of it is yet to come. It was an invitation to rape us and it was gladly accepted.
Even though I don’t always agree with Pat Buchanan I always liked him. But on this, he is downright silly.
I still like and respect him though. Pat is a good guy.
Start another war and lose more territory. How'd that work out for them?
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.