[Free ThinkerNY]

Link to article: "Bush Plays the Hitler Card" http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=26606/

[Cacique]

btt

[Bender2]

I well remember not too many years ago when Pat Buchanan gave a speech at the 1992 Republican convention, the one Molly Ivins quipped was "better in the original German."

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!

[PghBaldy]

WOW. The point I see is how can one negotiate with a stronger, malevalent nation?Is negotiation better than what ultimately happened? Does anyone honestly believe that a man capable of the things Hitler did would have negotiated in good faith?

[cowdog77]

Pat has a long history of being a Jew basher.

[dfwgator]

Pat Buchanan is dead to me.

[woofie]

I think Hitler was a pretty decent fellow and would have come around if we had only gotten to know him better. We should have put more effort into understanding him

[Luke21]

Pat has lost his mind. I have always defended him and thought he was a great guy. I met him once.

He is defending Neville Chamberlain and the barbaric invasion of Poland? What next? The Warsaw Ghetto?

[liberallarry]

If the Slavs and Jews had moved east of the Urals, and the Chinese north into Mongolia, war would have been completely unnecessary. Or, the Germans could have been completely extirminated following their loss in WWI.

Hard to believe someone as bright as Buchanan could think this way.

[Little Ray]

The part about “...in violation of Wilson’s 14 Points...” is pretty absurd all by itself.

[jwalsh07]

PAt is losing the rest of his mind.

When Germany invaded in 1939, they did so as partners in the German-Polish Non Aggression Pact of 1934. Evidently, the Poles had negotiated with Germany. Hitler decided those negotiations weren't worth the paper they were written on. All that negotiating did not pan out too well for the Poles.

Simple and elegant evidence that negotiating with lunatics benefits only the lunatics.

[Rebelbase]

“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.”

Riiight, and the invasions of Belgium, France, Norway and Russia had not even been contemplated by Hitler before he invaded Poland, they happened as an afterthought, I’m sure.

“Since vee haf unvaded Poland, vee might as vell take over ze rest of Europe!” Does that sound about right?

[firebrand]

Not defending Pat here, because I don't think you can ravel and reknit history into what-should-have-been the way he does. But his book coming out Tuesday does go into the history and the reasons for the war very thoroughly. He knows his history and is a good writer. Could be worthwhile reading just to see all the mistakes that were made.

[AndyJackson]

Now that we have analyzed this pretty thoroughly it is not inappropriate to go back to the original posting of Taranto's argument and show how he did it. Taranto states:

If you think that’s an ahistorical pretzel of monumental proportions, though, you ain’t seen nothin’ — because here comes Pat Buchanan. [an irrelevant ad hominem to prepare you to accept the metaphorical pretzel of logic that Taranto is about to twist Pat's article into.] According to old Pat [another gratuitious ad hominem just to keep the juices flowing lest attention start to flag and to distract you from the even more outrageous trick of inserting unuttered words into Pat's mouth], 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.

Of course, none of these words actually appear in Pat's article.

Pat never stated that the Anschluss was "not a problem" [and Taranto in his own linguistic imprecision leaves us to speculate in what a sense to take the unbeingness of the Anschulss problemwise]. Pat also never stated that "Hitlers's invasion of Poland was also perfectly understandable [again leaving us in the lurch in what sense to understand "understandable" i.e. does Toranto put the suggestion in Pat's mouth that Hitler's invasion of Poland was morally justifiable [he has certainly succeeded in this]; or a reasonable cause and effect consequence of Polish behavior; or merely rationally calculable in the sense of being the logical next step in Hitler's execution of his murderous scheme for Europe." Pat also nowhere states "those darned stubborn Poles were responsible for starting World War II." Having clearly stated that German irredentism was an issue and that Germany had made threats against Poland which it subsequently carried out, Pat has laid the factual basis for indicting Germany for starting the war. It would not have been necessary for Pat to draw explicitly the logical conclusion that follows immediately on the heels of the facts that he asserted, except that this short logical step is a leap too far for Pat's readership, in general and Taranto in particular.

Taranto completely dodges and excerpts what Pat's article "Bush plays the Hitler Card" was actually chastising Bush for.

In short whatever Pat may or may not have done, Taranto stands as a self-confessed wire-fraud and forger of the Mary Mapes/Dan Rather kind.

[SunkenCiv]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molotov-Ribbentrop_Pact

[snip] Helping Germany grow strong had accordingly been Soviet policy from 1920 to 1933. A fourth partition of Poland was suggested at regular intervals, satisfying Lenin’s imperative that Versailles be undermined by destroying Poland. Once Hitler renounced the military cooperation between Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia that Hans von Seeckt had arranged, Stalin adopted the Popular Front policy, trying to draw the Western powers into war with Germany. [end]

[Matt_DZ_PL]

Mr.Buchanan, if you have any brain, make use of it from time to time. Here’s special to you so you might see what an idol of yours, a Mr. Hitler, did to my homeland, Poland.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0H5dUsMjt5M

[Cronos]

Pat's an idiot with no idea of history "Hitler had not wanted war with Poland. He had wanted an alliance with Poland in his anti-Comintern pact against Joseph Stalin. " --> yeah right. Evidently Pat has never read Mein Kampf.

Also, Danzig may have been mostly German, like Wrocław and even Poznan, but the surroundings were Polish. It was the same in Romania with Hungarians in the plains and ROmanians in the mountains.

In any case, this was land that was tossed between Poles and Germans and Baltics for centuries. Hitler wanted something worse -- he wanted to eliminate Slavs as a whole.

[John S Mosby]

Pat Buchanan was speech writer. He could not run a lemonade stand. He missed his time as a pro-nazi IRA member in the 30’s.

One wonders how he relegates his Catholic faith with the clear anti-Catholicism, anti-Christian Statism of the Nazis— the equal opportunity destroyers of all and any religion except the Nazi State and Hitlerism.

It is just such idiotic statements as this one that gives away where Buchanan would have fit in pre-WWII Germany/Europe. Also exemplary of why our Founding Fathers designed the US to be free of European styles of government— wonderfully exhibited today by the EU (the dream of the nazis and marxists realized after so much death and destruction— and now they have their eyes on us, the U.S.)

[central_va]

I am sure if the Danzig corridor had been annex back to Germany then it would have been all unicorn farts and skittles.

[Mashood]

Funny... you mention Pat Buchannan on this forum and it sends FRbloggers into hysterics. Reminds me of the horses when the words “Frau Blucher” is mentioned.