Posted on 03/23/2014 3:35:36 PM PDT by shepardspie33
Stupidity and ignorance rule the world. The trouble is that the stupid and the ignorant think that they are clever and well-informed.
Take Mrs Hillary Clinton, next President of the United States and former chief of American foreign policy. She has directly compared Russia’s Vladimir Putin to Hitler. And she has compared events in Crimea to the Czech crisis of 1938.
Dozens of other politicians and grandiose journalists are currently doing the same.
It’s the one thing they think they know about history – that Britain’s pathetic Neville Chamberlain didn’t stand up to evil Adolf Hitler in 1938 at Munich over Czechoslovakia, so making Hitler believe that he could take over the world. And that the brave Winston Churchill then saved the world.
Almost no part of this legend is true. Even those bits that are true are misleading, with one exception. Hitler was certainly evil. But so was Stalin, the communist mass-murderer who ended up as our main ally in the fight against Hitler.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
I’d love to see him make McCain explode.
This was a super weird article. Apparently, he thinks we half-educated Americans can’t wait to get into a ruckus with Mother Russia. All because the stupid Mrs. Clinton mewls about the now cliché Neville Chamberlain/Munich. And for him to fall back on the the ole “I have friends who are Russian!” is pathetic. Brother Christopher must be rolling his eyes wherever the hell he is. This is a complicated situation and America is certainly in no mood to go to war with creepy Putin.
Remember, he’s a Tory, which is very different from a conservative in the American tradition. I never knew he flirted with Trotskyism, though. Are you sure you aren’t mixing him up with brother Christopher?
total BS.
When things get slow flog the past extrapolated into a bogus future
Nope. If there had been war in 1938, Germany would have lost. As you said, the French army was formidable. And the main reason Hitler wanted the Sudetenland is that it was a well-fortified mountainous region. If the Czechs hadn't been betrayed, they could have held back the Germans.
And suppose the Poles got involved. They had a decent army as well. Hitler would have been bloodied, and then overthrown by a military coup.
I’ve been following his blog for a couple of years now; he readily admits it. Very interesting participants on the blog; many of them quite intelligent, with well-informed commentary.
In 1938, either Hitler or Stalin could have beaten us, but fortunately for us, they fought each other over who would do it, and it left both of them too weak to finish the job.
neither hitler nor stalin could have beaten us because they were both in Europe.
Only Japan had the Navy to be a threat. They were. Stalin and Hitler were not
Stalin and Hitler were definitely a threat in 1938.
This is a fairly long movie, but it’s a well done historical document, and well worth viewing.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LyJkZegSJQE
From a purely selfish point of view Britain would have been much better off staying out of WWII, they bankrupted themselves and lost their empire and gained what? Nothing.
There were three Axis powers and in descending order the threat they posed to the British Empire was Japan, a massive threat, Italy, a substantial threat, Germany no real threat at all, yet the Brits put their war effort into precisely the reverse order.
What did the Brits achieve for fighting the war? The Jews of Europe were still murdered and Poland and Czechoslovakia remained occupied by a genocidal totalitarian regime.
If there was no shame in fighting a “Cold War” against the murderous tyrant Stalin post-1945, where would the shame in Britain fighting a similar cold war against the Nazis?
Build up a massive army and air force, use them and the navy to protect the island and let the International Socialists slog it out with the National Socialists. Would the end result have been any different? The Germans and the Russians carve up central and eastern Europe, Germany imposes a German dominated economic union on France and the rest of western Europe, peace eventually prevails.
Meanwhile the Brits can concentrate their forces in Malaya and Hong Kong to fight the Japanese. Tanks, modern fighters and heavy bombers roaring up and down the Malayan peninsula backed up with hundreds of thousands of Australian and Indian troops would have put up bit of a better show defending Singapore than the lightly armed skeleton forces that Churchill was forced to allocate there.
The Brits lost everything in WWII and gained nothing.
Wouldn't have really mattered...Britain declared war on Japan with us...So there went any restrictions we had on arming Britain...eventually the Nazis would have attacked our ships, and we would have had our Casus Belli for going to war with Germany.
In the end, I became a real fan of Christopher Hitchens and have had him autograph many of his books. He was always a gentleman during these book signings - while puffing on cigarettes and chugging vodka to the horror of the Barnes & Noble employees!
If Hitler stayed put in the East, Stalin would have been ready to go on the offensive by 1943-44.
That was what he gained by signing the Non-Aggression Pact, he got that much closer to Germany.. Originally the Generals were upset with the Pact for that very reason. Of course, Hitler beat Stalin to the punch, mainly because France fell so soon, which in retrospect, may have been a blessing in disguise. A long protracted war in France, may have bled all three armies dry, making all of Europe easy pickings for Stalin.
Sorry, but Putin is a hardcore Communist through and through. Now what is true is that weak socialism loses 100% of fights against strong Communists.
And he always had some mighty fine choom
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.