Buchanan: Hitler Didn't Want War.....

Nonno

Habari Na Mijeldi
"Usually, historical revisionist arguments of the "Hitler Was Actually A Man Of Peace" variety are confined to the kind of poorly designed and little-read white supremacist and neo-Nazi websites that Holocaust Museum shooting suspect James Von Brunn patronized.

But that doesn't account for the mainstream media's token Hitler sympathizer, Pat Buchanan. To mark the 70th anniversary of the Nazi invasion of Poland, Buchanan, a frequent commentator on MSNBC, has written a syndicated column entitled "Did Hitler Want War?"

Summarizing the argument of the column -- which appears, among other places, on Yahoo! News -- is almost beside the point. But here goes:

According to Buchanan, Hitler's invasion of Poland -- which led to Britain's declaration of war on Germany, and the start of World War II -- was motivated merely by Germany's desire to regain the city of Danzig, which had been given to Poland in the Versailles Treaty. Had Poland simply negotiated with Hitler, war could have been averted. In fact, Hitler wasn't bent on world, or even European, domination. He would have been happy with just Danzig, Austria, and the Sudetenland, you see. Hitler "wanted to end the war in 1940, almost two years before the trains began to roll to the camps." It was only thanks to the aggression of Britain, Russia, and the U.S. that the conflict was expanded. So, goes the implication, any deaths that occurred after 1940 -- including the 6 million that comprised the Holocaust -- are on the Allies' heads. "

In fact, the column is just a bite-size version of an argument Buchanan made last year in book form. (Really, it's a chance to tout the book.)

It's not shocking that Hitler apologists exist. And this is hardly the first time we've seen evidence that Buchanan is one of them. But it boggles the mind that a person who believes this has been given such a prominent media platform, such that his writing appears on one of the web's most highly-trafficked news site, and he himself appears regularly on a major -- and supposedly liberal-leaning! -- cable news station.

An MSNBC spokesman did not respond when asked by TPMmuckraker about the network's decision to continue to showcase a Hitler apologist."

Source: Buchanan: Hitler Didn't Want War -- MSNBC Mum On Employing Hitler Sympathizer | TPMMuckraker
 
C

czygvtwkr

Guest
Im sure he would have rather everyone just bended to his will and conquered the world without any blood (of Aryan origin) spilled.
 

Bavarian

New Member
Pat Buchanan speaks the truth. If England had not propped up a despotic Polish Government, they would have returned the majority German city of Danzig to Germany. Hitler was trying to let German people who were forcibly separated from Germany by the unjust Versailles Treaty, in direct violation of Wilson's 14 Points. If the US had stayed out of the First World War, it would have been settled quickly as all sides were at a stalemate, Germany would not have been so unjustly treated, Hitler would never have been elected.

Pat also tried, in his book, to show the analogy to present times where NATO is giving war gaguarantees to former Soviet countries, such as the Baltic States and Georgia, which have now vital interest to the US. In violation of Washington's admonition to avoid foreign entanglements.

If you have not yet read Pat's book, buy it and read it!
 

TurboK9

New Member
Pat Buchanan speaks the truth. If England had not propped up a despotic Polish Government, they would have returned the majority German city of Danzig to Germany. Hitler was trying to let German people who were forcibly separated from Germany by the unjust Versailles Treaty, in direct violation of Wilson's 14 Points. If the US had stayed out of the First World War, it would have been settled quickly as all sides were at a stalemate, Germany would not have been so unjustly treated, Hitler would never have been elected.

Pat also tried, in his book, to show the analogy to present times where NATO is giving war gaguarantees to former Soviet countries, such as the Baltic States and Georgia, which have now vital interest to the US. In violation of Washington's admonition to avoid foreign entanglements.

If you have not yet read Pat's book, buy it and read it!

Well and then there is also Austria and the Sudetenlad (given to Czechoslavakia).

How the heck can anyone know what would have happened if the US had stayed out? ROFL. :killingme Hindsight is 20/20, but only the results of what you DID, not the results of what you could have done as an alternative. Hitler may well have found another track to the head of Germany.
 

Larry Gude

Strung Out
Pat Buchanan speaks the truth. If England had not propped up a despotic Polish Government, they would have returned the majority German city of Danzig to Germany. Hitler was trying to let German people who were forcibly separated from Germany by the unjust Versailles Treaty, in direct violation of Wilson's 14 Points. If the US had stayed out of the First World War, it would have been settled quickly as all sides were at a stalemate, Germany would not have been so unjustly treated, Hitler would never have been elected.

Pat also tried, in his book, to show the analogy to present times where NATO is giving war gaguarantees to former Soviet countries, such as the Baltic States and Georgia, which have now vital interest to the US. In violation of Washington's admonition to avoid foreign entanglements.

If you have not yet read Pat's book, buy it and read it!

Pat's critics may want to try a copy; Churchill and Hitler; the unnecessary war. Requited reading, in my view.

You won't find much sympathy for Hitler in there. The thing people don't like about Pat, why he gets attacked so much, is that he takes Churchill to account for his foolish actions and people don't like that. They like their good guys and bad guys cut and dried.

As to Danzig, there was nothing wrong with trying to help Poland per se. The problem was Churchill, fool that he was, did not make clear to Poland that, when push came to shove, England would not, because she could not, fight for Poland. Then, Poland makes a deal with Germany and maybe things are different.

In any event, we could not agree more about the US staying the hell out of WWI.
 

Larry Gude

Strung Out
Well and then there is also Austria and the Sudetenlad (given to Czechoslavakia).

How the heck can anyone know what would have happened if the US had stayed out? ROFL. :killingme Hindsight is 20/20, but only the results of what you DID, not the results of what you could have done as an alternative. Hitler may well have found another track to the head of Germany.

It's obvious, even a cursory understanding of the situation pre US intervention, what would have happened had we stayed out of WWI; no Hitler, no WWII, no Stalin, no Soviet domination of Europe for 50 years.

Hitler was an ultra nationalist whose ONLY credibility came about as a direct result of the desolation and shame and desperation that was Germany post Versailles. It was ripe for an extremist. It is fair to say 'too bad, they lost' but, that is no more intelligent than say 'too bad, Hitler came to power and the Holocaust happened'.
 

Nonno

Habari Na Mijeldi
Pat's critics may want to try a copy; Churchill and Hitler; the unnecessary war. Requited reading, in my view. You won't find much sympathy for Hitler in there. The thing people don't like about Pat, why he gets attacked so much, is that he takes Churchill to account for his foolish actions and people don't like that. They like their good guys and bad guys cut and dried. As to Danzig, there was nothing wrong with trying to help Poland per se. The problem was Churchill, fool that he was, did not make clear to Poland that, when push came to shove, England would not, because she could not, fight for Poland. Then, Poland makes a deal with Germany and maybe things are different.In any event, we could not agree more about the US staying the hell out of WWI.


77 five star reviews on Amazon!

"22 of 24 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars Decent, well written. For WW2 buffs., June 19, 2008
By J. Thomas - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)
After 44 reviews (I'm #45) the only thing for me to add is this: I believe most people are far too reactionary over this book. Hot topics inside, indeed! But it is written well, and further, with respect for the subject. This publication is a review and analysis of the political decisions that led to war with a little academic 'what if..?' exercised. It is written from the political point of view, not the ethnic, social, cultural point of view. The book only wishes to discuss these areas within the greater political questions which arise from this history. Of course not everyone will love this book! Even I have some issues, but it is a success as a contribution to the WW2 buffs book shelf. Do not read books on potentially sensitive subjects that cover a great breadth if your emotions are centered to your own proclivities or you read to reaffirm your own beliefs. The book is decent and worth reading for it's different point of view alone!
To the people who are writing that the author is a Hitler apologist, you obviously never heard the saying," What you bring to the table helps determine what you take from it." To everyone who has yet to read it, do so without pretensions from these idiots. Any balanced person can see the book is not rooted in Nazi glorification, rather an attempt at political autopsy on a 63 year old body. If anything, the author has written a thought provoking book worthy of friendly discussion. "
[amazon]030740515X[/amazon]
 
Last edited:

TurboK9

New Member
It's obvious, even a cursory understanding of the situation pre US intervention, what would have happened had we stayed out of WWI; no Hitler, no WWII, no Stalin, no Soviet domination of Europe for 50 years.

Hitler was an ultra nationalist whose ONLY credibility came about as a direct result of the desolation and shame and desperation that was Germany post Versailles. It was ripe for an extremist. It is fair to say 'too bad, they lost' but, that is no more intelligent than say 'too bad, Hitler came to power and the Holocaust happened'.

Or perhaps if we had stayed out of WWI it would have remained a stalemate for years, furthering the economic decline of Europe. By the time the US entered WWI it was 1917 and the damage had already been done.

Perhaps if Germany had not sunk the Lusitania, or reopened unrestricted submarine warfare, or sent Uboats to patrol our coastal waters, or do I even need mention the Zimmerman telegraph? Perhaps we may not have become involved. I know! Let's blame it on Mexico!

Looking back, you may not see these things as valid reasons. The people of the day did, however, and to hold the Allies resposible for the everything that occurred afterward and Hitler's actions is... well, ridiculous.

Why are we holding people of history responsible for the unforeseen consequences of actions that resulted in actions that resulted in situations that resulted in actions (LOL).... and divesting the opposing historical figures of responsibilty for the direct consequences of immediate actions?

Blah. Whatever. I forgot, the entire concept of personal responsibilty went out the window a long time ago... everything is always, conveniently, someone elses fault even when there is an obvious perpetrator.
 

Larry Gude

Strung Out
Or perhaps if we had stayed out of WWI it would have remained a stalemate for years, furthering the economic decline of Europe. .

It does not sound like you are very familiar with the circumstances of the time and the mind sets of both sides.

Everything I've read, and I've read plenty, suggests both sides desperately looking for a way to peace.
 

Larry Gude

Strung Out
Looking back, you may not see these things as valid reasons. The people of the day did, however, and to hold the Allies resposible for the everything that occurred afterward and Hitler's actions is... well, ridiculous.

Why are we holding people of history responsible for the unforeseen consequences of actions that resulted in actions that resulted in situations that resulted in actions (LOL).... and divesting the opposing historical figures of responsibilty for the direct consequences of immediate actions?

Blah. Whatever. I forgot, the entire concept of personal responsibilty went out the window a long time ago... everything is always, conveniently, someone elses fault even when there is an obvious perpetrator.

That is an outstanding piece of non sense you got going there. Personal responsibility? That's what we're talking about here, the people who were responsible for the decisions that shaped history!
 

Larry Gude

Strung Out
Or perhaps if we had stayed out of WWI it would have remained a stalemate for years, furthering the economic decline of Europe. By the time the US entered WWI it was 1917 and the damage had already been done.

:lol:


Really? How 180,000 US dead? How about bringing the flu home that killed millions of Americans? Who cares if there had been a stalemate forever? It was NONE of our business.

Name one US national interest that was served by ignoring our founders sound advice and getting embroiled in others affairs?
 

TurboK9

New Member
How so? Hitler was pretty specific about his disdain for them and the blame who placed on them.

OK wait... Pat's book tries to place the blame for the holocaust on allied shoulders... this is what I mean by personal responsibilty. You can't blame the WWI Allies for the deaths of 6 million jews in WWII.

I wasn't referring to the immediate consequences of WWI, I was referring to how the whole shmeal was being linked together to absolve Hitler of responsibility. THAT is BS.
 

Bavarian

New Member
If the US had stayed out of WWI, the stalemate would not have continued in warfare. The Empires, headed by cousins, would have quickly found a way to end, shake hands, and return to their old borders.
Who won the Second World War? It was the Soviet Union who enslaved half of Christian Europe! What was the reason for Churchill starting the Second World War? Ensuring the territorial integrety of Poland? And what happened to Poland? It was moved East and enslaved by the USSR.
 

Bavarian

New Member
Hitler was a Conservative Republican...

Actually, the Democrat Party in the US is aligned with Hitler's Party. Nazi was abbreviation for National Socialist Democrat Arbeiter Partei, or NSDAP. The current Democrats are The National Socialist Democratic Abortion Party.
 

chernmax

NOT Politically Correct!!
Actually, the Democrat Party in the US is aligned with Hitler's Party. Nazi was abbreviation for National Socialist Democrat Arbeiter Partei, or NSDAP. The current Democrats are The National Socialist Democratic Abortion Party.


The Democrats were also the party of slavery, except now they just keep the chains on their voter cattle's brains!!!
 
Top