Question
•
General Government, Politics & Law
In a new book titled Churchill, Hitler, and the Unnecessary War, former presidential candidate Patrick J. Buchanan, whose columns appear in The Bulletin, takes a sledgehammer to the glass houses of history and turns a critical eye to the men and policies credited with defeating one of the world's most formidable tyrants.
"My argument is fundamentally this: [Winston] Churchill told FDR [World War II] is the unnecessary war right after Pearl Harbor," Mr. Buchanan stated on the "Today Show." "This deals with the horrendous blunders of British diplomacy from 1905, but especially 1938 and 1939 ... which led to a war in which 400,000 Americans died, 400,000 Brits, the Holocaust, the Stalinization of Europe - all of these happened and they need not have happened."
Mr. Buchanan cites a great deal of historical documentation to support the claim the British diplomacy, which became a mixture of hawkish and panicked policies, had begun to fail the empire by the beginning of the 20th century and such failures where expounded on by Mr. Churchill.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=44210
"My argument is fundamentally this: [Winston] Churchill told FDR [World War II] is the unnecessary war right after Pearl Harbor," Mr. Buchanan stated on the "Today Show." "This deals with the horrendous blunders of British diplomacy from 1905, but especially 1938 and 1939 ... which led to a war in which 400,000 Americans died, 400,000 Brits, the Holocaust, the Stalinization of Europe - all of these happened and they need not have happened."
Mr. Buchanan cites a great deal of historical documentation to support the claim the British diplomacy, which became a mixture of hawkish and panicked policies, had begun to fail the empire by the beginning of the 20th century and such failures where expounded on by Mr. Churchill.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=44210
Loading...-
Answered No. Buchanan's criticism is incorrect.
From a purely strategic viewpoint, the Germans were planning a jet bomber that could strike NYC from bases in northern France. No amount of territory consigned, matériel delivered or policies changed to fit Nazi ideals could stop them from using it.
If one looks deeper into things, one will find that not going to war, rather would've allowed the Holocaust to extend indefinitely, and far beyond the Third Reich's high-water mark. Is that what Pat's after? His sick little fantasies of a triumphant Germany have no place 2008's America, and I'd like to see that Fascist disseminator of hate speech deported to somewhere where they can prosecute him for this racist trash. -
Answered No. Buchanan's criticism is incorrect.
he is an idiot...total..he said that the polish people were to bl;ame..they should have just given up poland....he is a sorry excuse for a human being...in fact i wish they would kick him out of the US permamently...lot better people around than him! Sorry but his words in furiated me. He beats all the yahoos that have been yapping lately! -
Answered No. Buchanan's criticism is incorrect.
hind sight is a great thing and is used the most by the idiots who were no there and can't really do anything (like get a real job) but talk and keep themself in the news so other stupid people will support them -
Answered No. Buchanan's criticism is incorrect.
With 20/20 hindsight many things can be considered preventable.
The war in Iraq was preventable.
Had Jimmy Carter allowed his envoy to meet with the Ayatolla in Paris during the Iranian uprising our Embassy staff wouldn't have been held hostage and we would have had much better relations with Iran. Being Aryans, they relate more to Europeans than Arabs.
If we had better relations with Iran, we would have backed them in the war with Iraq and Saddam wouldn't have had the material and political support from Washington.
Iran would have unseated Saddam and we would have another powerful ally in the Middle East and never had to go to war there.
Isn't it amazing what hindsight will do?
Of course, the above, like Buchanan's BS is just speculation. -
Answered Undecided. I have quite a bit of respect of Pat Buchanan but I certainly don’t agree with everything he says.
Actually I dont agree on most things with Buchanan but I think WWII could have been prevented and reduced to minor altercations if proper foreign policy had been employed- especially forcing Germany to stick to its treaty signed after WW1 which Europe as a whole did not hold Germany to which is why Hitler was able to do what he did-he was largely allowed to clearly violate treaties and like the UN with Iraq, euro nations refused to take a stand and force Hitler to comply by force. If they had, there would have been some resistance but Germany had no army in the early 1930's and was in economic ruin,until Hitler came along promising change and hope. He openly challenged Europe to resist but like good liberals they sought only diplomatic means to resist him, and Hitler lied to them again and again. -
Answered No. Buchanan's criticism is incorrect.
If we had turned the other cheek after Pearl Harbor, we would have been setting ourselves up for further attack. Hitler needed to be stopped, and I don't think a simple "hey, stop that!" was going to do it. -
Answered No. Buchanan's criticism is incorrect.
World War II was necessary unless it would have been better for the world to be ruled by two or three raving maniacs instead of the two or three hundred raving maniacs that now rule only part of the world. -
Answered No. Buchanan's criticism is incorrect.
What stupid commentary from Mr Buchanan. Noone was going to control Hitler. WW2 was going to happen no matter what and if someone attacks you(Pearl Harbor) you have to kick their ass. Or would you like to be ruled by Japan? -
Answered Yes. WWII should of never happened.
Could possible have been avoided if the British took a stand sooner and let Hitler know he could not conquer country after country with no repercussions. Instaed England stayed neutral and uninvolved until many countrys had fallen and it began to feel threatened. Point is England and France should have stood up against hitler from the start of his expanionist movement. -
Answered No. Buchanan's criticism is incorrect.
I have not read his book so I do not know all the facts but one thing is for sure in my mind and that Hitler would have invaded all of Europe and eventually us, thru their allie Mexico. The agreements were alread made.
![Regulus [99 - INSHALLAH]](http://images.sodahead.com/images/profiles/0/0/0/0/1/2/0/5/7/profiles_1212099063871_5526_68726_media_small.jpeg)
![Samuel[raccoon]](http://images.sodahead.com/images/profiles/0/0/0/0/3/9/7/6/0/profiles_me_4407_940227_media_small.jpeg)
Answered No. Buchanan's criticism is incorrect.
Pat Buchanan is unnessesary.