Page 1 of 11 123456 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 108

Thread: Did Hitler want War? [Pat Buchanan]

  1. #1
    Account Inactive

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    German
    Ancestry
    Germanic
    State
    Teutonic Order Teutonic Order
    Gender
    Politics
    GPWW
    Posts
    1,630
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    4
    Thanked in
    4 Posts

    Arrow Did Hitler want War? [Pat Buchanan]

    Did Hitler Want War?
    by Patrick J. Buchanan, September 01, 2009
    On Sept. 1, 1939, 70 years ago, the German Army crossed the Polish frontier. On Sept. 3, Britain declared war.

    Six years later, 50 million Christians and Jews had perished. Britain was broken and bankrupt, Germany a smoldering ruin. Europe had served as the site of the most murderous combat known to man, and civilians had suffered worse horrors than the soldiers.

    By May 1945, Red Army hordes occupied all the great capitals of Central Europe: Vienna, Prague, Budapest, Berlin. A hundred million Christians were under the heel of the most barbarous tyranny in history: the Bolshevik regime of the greatest terrorist of them all, Joseph Stalin.

    What cause could justify such sacrifices?

    The German-Polish war had come out of a quarrel over a town the size of Ocean City, Md., in summer. Danzig, 95 percent German, had been severed from Germany at Versailles in violation of Woodrow Wilson’s principle of self-determination. Even British leaders thought Danzig should be returned.

    Why did Warsaw not negotiate with Berlin, which was hinting at an offer of compensatory territory in Slovakia? Because the Poles had a war guarantee from Britain that, should Germany attack, Britain and her empire would come to Poland’s rescue.

    But why would Britain hand an unsolicited war guarantee to a junta of Polish colonels, giving them the power to drag Britain into a second war with the most powerful nation in Europe?

    Was Danzig worth a war? Unlike the 7 million Hong Kongese whom the British surrendered to Beijing, who didn’t want to go, the Danzigers were clamoring to return to Germany.

    Comes the response: The war guarantee was not about Danzig, or even about Poland. It was about the moral and strategic imperative “to stop Hitler” after he showed, by tearing up the Munich pact and Czechoslovakia with it, that he was out to conquer the world. And this Nazi beast could not be allowed to do that.

    If true, a fair point. Americans, after all, were prepared to use atom bombs to keep the Red Army from the Channel. But where is the evidence that Adolf Hitler, whose victims as of March 1939 were a fraction of Gen. Pinochet’s, or Fidel Castro’s, was out to conquer the world?

    After Munich in 1938, Czechoslovakia did indeed crumble and come apart. Yet consider what became of its parts.

    The Sudeten Germans were returned to German rule, as they wished. Poland had annexed the tiny disputed region of Teschen, where thousands of Poles lived. Hungary’s ancestral lands in the south of Slovakia had been returned to her. The Slovaks had their full independence guaranteed by Germany. As for the Czechs, they came to Berlin for the same deal as the Slovaks, but Hitler insisted they accept a protectorate.

    Now one may despise what was done, but how did this partition of Czechoslovakia manifest a Hitlerian drive for world conquest?

    Comes the reply: If Britain had not given the war guarantee and gone to war, after Czechoslovakia would have come Poland’s turn, then Russia’s, then France’s, then Britain’s, then the United States.

    We would all be speaking German now.

    But if Hitler was out to conquer the world – Britain, Africa, the Middle East, the United States, Canada, South America, India, Asia, Australia – why did he spend three years building that hugely expensive Siegfried Line to protect Germany from France? Why did he start the war with no surface fleet, no troop transports, and only 29 oceangoing submarines? How do you conquer the world with a navy that can’t get out of the Baltic Sea?

    If Hitler wanted the world, why did he not build strategic bombers, instead of two-engine Dorniers and Heinkels that could not even reach Britain from Germany?

    Why did he let the British army go at Dunkirk?

    Why did he offer the British peace, twice, after Poland fell, and again after France fell?

    Why, when Paris fell, did Hitler not demand the French fleet, as the Allies demanded and got the Kaiser’s fleet? Why did he not demand bases in French-controlled Syria to attack Suez? Why did he beg Benito Mussolini not to attack Greece?

    Because Hitler wanted to end the war in 1940, almost two years before the trains began to roll to the camps.

    Hitler had never wanted war with Poland, but an alliance with Poland such as he had with Francisco Franco’s Spain, Mussolini’s Italy, Miklos Horthy’s Hungary, and Father Jozef Tiso’s Slovakia.

    Indeed, why would he want war when, by 1939, he was surrounded by allied, friendly, or neutral neighbors, save France? And he had written off Alsace, because reconquering Alsace meant war with France, and that meant war with Britain, whose empire he admired and whom he had always sought as an ally.

    As of March 1939, Hitler did not even have a border with Russia. How then could he invade Russia?

    Winston Churchill was right when he called it “The Unnecessary War” – the war that may yet prove the mortal blow to our civilization.

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Ward's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Last Online
    6 Days Ago @ 09:58 PM
    Ethnicity
    Vinlandic
    Ancestry
    1/2 German, 1/4 Norwegian, 1/4 Irish
    Country
    Vinland Vinland
    Location
    The Wild Frontier
    Gender
    Posts
    703
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    48
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    66
    Thanked in
    42 Posts
    This article should be required reading for all Americans (and indeed everyone else in the Western world).

    Hats off to Buchanan for having the nerve to expose the mainstream account of WWII for the complete and utter sham that it is.

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Liemannen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Last Online
    Friday, June 15th, 2012 @ 05:22 AM
    Ethnicity
    Swedish
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Country
    Sweden Sweden
    State
    Vastergotland Vastergotland
    Gender
    Age
    58
    Family
    Single adult
    Occupation
    Research
    Posts
    220
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1
    Thanked in
    1 Post
    There's a very interesting video on this subject at Google videos called "Patrick Buchanan on his book 'Churchill, Hitler, and the Unnecessary War'".

    There's another interesting video at FORA.tv.
    Victor Davis Hanson and Christopher Hitchens counter the essential claims in Buchanan's book "Churchill, Hitler, and the Unnecessary War". "Uncommon Knowledge: Hitchens and Hanson"
    (It could also be found at a torrent-tracker close to you.)

    Though I may not agree with everything Buchanan says I think he makes much more sense than Hanson and especially Hitchens.

  4. #4
    Lost in Melancholia
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Funding Membership Inactive
    Thusnelda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Bavarian tribe
    Ancestry
    Bavarian
    Subrace
    Nordid-Borreby
    State
    Bavaria Bavaria
    Location
    Over the hills and far away
    Gender
    Age
    35
    Occupation
    Breathing the forest
    Politics
    Regionalist-conservative
    Religion
    Ásatrú/Forn Siðr
    Posts
    4,392
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    70
    Thanked in
    57 Posts
    Pat Buchanan should´ve become the American president when he ran for presidency some years ago. But he had no chance against more famous and neo-con Republican candidates. He´s a good man.

    "Judge of your natural character by what you do in your dreams" - Ralph Waldo Emerson

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    prodeutsch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Online
    Saturday, July 28th, 2012 @ 12:36 PM
    Status
    Prolonged Absence
    Ethnicity
    German
    Ancestry
    Deutschland
    Country
    United States United States
    Gender
    Politics
    Conservative
    Religion
    Christian
    Posts
    282
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    8
    Thanked in
    7 Posts
    Most Americans did not want to go to war with Germany, that is very true. I still feel the same way. The only trouble is, legally Germany sealed its fate by declaring war against the U.S. not the other way around. I for one would have been more than happy to ground Japan into dust.

    Besides the Jewish-Marxist alliance wanted to defeat Germany. I have no facts but I think it is them that are supporting and encouraging the third world immigration to the West, a sort of punishment for what Jews suffered the last 2000+ yrs.

  6. #6
    Anachronism
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Funding Membership Inactive
    Huginn ok Muninn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Germanic
    Ancestry
    Germany, Norway, England
    Subrace
    Nordeby
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    Texas Texas
    Gender
    Zodiac Sign
    Leo
    Family
    Single adult
    Politics
    Farther right than you.
    Posts
    3,140
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    801
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    916
    Thanked in
    456 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by prodeutsch View Post
    Most Americans did not want to go to war with Germany, that is very true. I still feel the same way. The only trouble is, legally Germany sealed its fate by declaring war against the U.S. not the other way around. I for one would have been more than happy to ground Japan into dust.

    Besides the Jewish-Marxist alliance wanted to defeat Germany. I have no facts but I think it is them that are supporting and encouraging the third world immigration to the West, a sort of punishment for what Jews suffered the last 2000+ yrs.
    Essentially, FDR had already declared war with Germany, via the shoot on sight order. If you will read the wording of the German declaration, you will see that it essentially is an acknowledgment of established fact.

    FDR was a communist and a cancer for our people. It's a pity he didn't have his thrombosis ten years earlier.

  7. #7
    Account Inactive

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    German
    Ancestry
    Germanic
    State
    Teutonic Order Teutonic Order
    Gender
    Politics
    GPWW
    Posts
    1,630
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    4
    Thanked in
    4 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Huginn ok Muninn View Post
    Essentially, FDR had already declared war with Germany, via the shoot on sight order. If you will read the wording of the German declaration, you will see that it essentially is an acknowledgment of established fact.

    FDR was a communist and a cancer for our people. It's a pity he didn't have his thrombosis ten years earlier.
    Yes! It is largely forgotten that the USA was already in a shooting-war with Germany-Italy from April 1941. Only on the sea though, thus no US-Army divisons or Air-Force wings were deployed , but the Navy was already engaged.

    See also.
    President Roosevelt's Campaign To Incite War in Europe
    http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v04/v04p135_Weber.html
    Not so well known is the story of Roosevelt's enormous responsibility for the outbreak of the Second World War itself. This essay focuses on Roosevelt's secret campaign to provoke war in Europe prior to the outbreak of hostilities in September 1939. It deals particularly with his efforts to pressure Britain, France and Poland into war against Germany in 1938 and 1939.

    Franklin Roosevelt not only criminally involved America in a war which had already engulfed Europe. He bears a grave responsibility before history for the outbreak of the most destructive war of all time
    Quote Originally Posted by Valkyrie View Post
    Pat Buchanan should´ve become the American president when he ran for presidency some years ago. But he had no chance against more famous and neo-con Republican candidates. He´s a good man.
    He would not have a chance inside the Republican Party. The SPLC, ADL and the "jewish" media (thus: MSM) rates him as anti-semite and "Nazi-apologist", which is equivalent to a death sentence to any further career. In reality he is just a conservative Irish-Catholic, but his alleged anti-semitism brings the Nazi stigma over him.
    "As an author, media figure, and political commentator, Patrick Buchanan publicly espouses racist, anti-Semitic, anti-Israel and anti-immigrant views. At one time an influential staff member in the Nixon and Reagan Administrations, Buchanan has gone on to write a number of books and articles that focus on the decline of Western civilization due to what he refers to as the “invasion” of non-European immigrants in the United States and Europe. His books, along with his weekly appearances on NBC’s The McLaughlin Group, have given him substantial mainstream exposure. Buchanan has affiliated himself with extremists in the United States and abroad, including deceased racist Sam Francis and the leaders of the Vlaams Belang, a xenophobic, racist political party in Belgium." ADL statement
    http://www.adl.org/special_reports/b...anan_intro.asp

  8. #8
    New Member

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Online
    Friday, September 11th, 2009 @ 04:45 PM
    Ethnicity
    German
    Ancestry
    Mecklenburg-Schwerin
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    Washington Washington
    Gender
    Age
    51
    Occupation
    Investment Management
    Politics
    Conservative
    Religion
    Evangelical
    Posts
    4
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts
    American's are uncomfortable with black and white truth, and any politician that sees the world through a black and white lense, will never get elected.

    Many of Pat's positions on America in the world have proven prophetic, but few voting Americans are knowledgable enough to recognize where the credit is due.

    American's have been conditioned to believe that Hitler and Germany were the root of all evil. And "Valkyrie" hit it right on when she posted the comment about the shame of Ethnic-German American's fighting in a war against their German brother's without consideration. Valkyrie, you have no idea how long that very question has haunted my thoughts. And especially in WW I when many of them had only been in this country for less than a dozen years.

    I too was guilty of this view until I recently spent time researching my family history. My grandfather came to the US in 1909 from Mecklenburg and by the early 70's, after he died, all contact had been lost between the two families.

    When the Scorpions came out with their, "Winds of Change" song, it made me wonder how the reunification of Germany might effect their lives since some were in Brandenburg and others in Nord-Rhine.

    Just recently I tracked them down and have been spending time, via skype, getting to know them and their side of history (I hope to make my first trip to Germany next year to meet them all). As a result, my understanding of the events between the U.S and Germany from 1914 - 1950 are no longer what is portrayed here in the U.S.. And sadly, too many American's, despite their German heritage, are clueless of the facts (the U.S. census, as of 2000, reported that nearly 120 million Americans are of German ancestry).

    To me the greatest crime the U.S. has committed in the world was siding with the Soviet Union in WW I and the participation of the murder of millions of Germans and freedom seeking Russians that resulted (Operation Keelhaul).

    And today, when I proudly share stories about my cousins in Germany, many are skeptical because of the years of 'conditioning' they have unknowingly been exposed to. But I cherish the opportunity to educate them despite the risks of being labeled a radical. Nevertheless, anti-German movies will continue to be produced in Hollywierd, CA USA.

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Aptrgangr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Last Online
    Friday, June 26th, 2020 @ 08:14 PM
    Ethnicity
    -
    Ancestry
    Alemanni-Suebi/Irish
    Subrace
    Dalophælid-Nordid
    State
    Hessen-Darmstadt Hessen-Darmstadt
    Location
    Starkenburg
    Gender
    Family
    Hagestolz
    Politics
    reactionary ancap
    Posts
    1,007
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    102
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    172
    Thanked in
    81 Posts
    The usual amateurish approach to history that can be seen with many, if not most revisionists, making revisionism a bad joke.

    Why did Warsaw not negotiate with Berlin, which was hinting at an offer of compensatory territory in Slovakia?
    Danzig was under the control of the League of Nations, no negotiation with Warshaw ever would have changed that fact. Hitler´s decision to leave the League of Nations did not necessarily were helpful in the causa Danzig.
    And Germany can not promise someone a part of a third country´s land.

    Because the Poles had a war guarantee from Britain that, should Germany attack, Britain and her empire would come to Poland’s rescue.
    Indeed, and what made GB (and France) to take this measure? Because Hitler broke the Munich Agreement, saying he wanted no Czechs and invading the Czech Republic soon after that. This caused the Brits to join the anti-German camp - before that GB, under French protest, agreed to all German demands, like sovereignity, they withdrew from the Rhineland and agreed to crack up the Versailles Treaty country Czechoslovakia (with agreement of France), giving the German part of Bohemia (Sudetenland) to Germany.

    But why would Britain hand an unsolicited war guarantee to a junta of Polish colonels, giving them the power to drag Britain into a second war with the most powerful nation in Europe?
    Because the Brits traditionally do not want to exist on the grace of a continental power that sooner or later would turn it's weapons against them.

    Now one may despise what was done, but how did this partition of Czechoslovakia manifest a Hitlerian drive for world conquest?
    It does not. There was no attempted world domination, but an attempt to become a continental superpower and the hegemonial power in Europe.

    But if Hitler was out to conquer the world — Britain, Africa, the Middle East, the United States, Canada, South America, India, Asia, Australia — why did he spend three years building that hugely expensive Siegfried Line to protect Germany from France? Why did he start the war with no surface fleet, no troop transports and only 29 oceangoing submarines?
    The Siegfried Linie was very powerful - in NS propaganda shows. In reality defensive measures were neglected - there was, for example, no counter part of the Siegfried Linie in the east, despite the permanent Bolshevik threat in the east the NS kept talking about - but weapons for offensive warfare were preferred. The fact Germany´s navy was not very powerful compared to e.g. GB´s does not mean the army and airforce were weak. They weren´t.
    There is a NS song "Es zittern die morschen Knochen". "the frail bones tremble", with it´s refrain "wir werden weiter marschieren, und wenn alles in Scherben fällt, heute gehört und Deutschland, und morgen die ganze Welt." "we will continue to march on, even if everything cracks in sherds, today Germany belongs to us, and tomorrow the whole world." This song is no evidence Hitler wanted to invade the whole world, but evidence the NS movement actually did not care about the nation and civilisatory rules. They only used the "national" as prefix to please the bourgeoisie and their financiers, the high finance and industry.

    Why did he let the British army go at Dunkirk?
    He did not. Göring promised to annihilate the British Expeditionary Force on the continent with the Luftwaffe, the RAF with it´s Hurricanes and Spitfires, the Royal Navy and countles private supporters with their boats did not allow it to happen but helped to evacuate the troops, including French troops.

    Why did he offer the British peace, twice, after Poland fell, and again after France fell?
    Because he wanted GB to accept his hegemony over Europe, which GB rejected, and his main interest was conquering land in the east, not to fight war with GB which did not constitute a bargain.

    Why, when Paris fell, did Hitler not demand the French fleet, as the Allies demanded and got the Kaiser’s fleet?
    Because he knew the French never would surrender their fleet to the Germans anyway. The French navy fiercely defended itself against British and American attacks too.
    Why did he not demand bases in French-controlled Syria to attack Suez?
    Maybe because French soldiers would not have listened to his orders? They, however, tried their best to defend themselves from British attacks in that region.
    Why did he beg Benito Mussolini not to attack Greece?
    Mussolini did not tell him he plans to invade Greece, it was a big and nasty surprise for all.

    Hitler had never wanted war with Poland, but an alliance with Poland such as he had with Francisco Franco’s Spain, Mussolini’s Italy, Miklos Horthy’s Hungary and Father Jozef Tiso’s Slovakia.
    Why was Poland destroyed and cut in pieces, ending her existence as political enity? What is with the Volkstumskampf, the fight for land for German settlers, driving Poles out of their homes, leaving millions of them dead? Franco was no ally, he was neutral. Mussolini was a wannabe Roman emperor and a bad ally, Horthy and Tiso were cohorts without an own foreign policy.

    Indeed, why would he want war when, by 1939, he was surrounded by allied, friendly or neutral neighbors, save France. And he had written off Alsace, because reconquering Alsace meant war with France, and that meant war with Britain, whose empire he admired and whom he had always sought as an ally.
    With the exception of Switzerland (which was threatened into submission), all neighbouring countries have been invaded by Germany, no matter they were neutral or hostile. NS are attracted by anything pompous and monstrous, such as the British Empire, built on the bones of countless innocent people, GB pursued a policy of appeasement and did not accept the terms of an alliance: the German hegemony over Europe.

    As of March 1939, Hitler did not even have a border with Russia. How then could he invade Russia?
    Neither does the USA have a border with Germany, still the USAAF annihilated almost any German town; US troops invaded Germany...hello from the US occupied zone in FRG next to some of the most important US military installations in Europe.
    Counter question: how could Stalin and his Bolshevik scum pose a threat to Germany, the USSR had no border with Germany...
    Hitler was a genius and acted methodically. The situation was as following: France was allied with GB and the Versailles Treaty countries Poland and the Czech Republic. France had to fall, in order to get the back free for a further expansion into the east -> Russia. That´s why the Czech Republic was invaded, the Slovak Republic made a vasall, and Poland divided in a German occupied and a Soviet occupied part. There was the border between Germany and the USSR. [GB did not play a role in these considerations, hence the peace offers].

    Winston Churchill was right when he called it “The Unnecessary War” — the war that may yet prove the mortal blow to our civilization.
    Winston Churchill saw the catastrophy coming, and was labelled a war-monger before the outbreak of war.
    When men cease to fight — they cease to be — Men.
    “Critics are like eunuchs in a harem; they know how it's done, they've seen it done every day, but they're unable to do it themselves.” Brendan Behan

  10. #10
    New Member
    MichaelOH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Online
    Thursday, August 18th, 2016 @ 03:46 PM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-American
    Ancestry
    Irish, Anglo-Irish, French, German, Bohemian
    Subrace
    Keltic Nordid
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    New Mexico New Mexico
    Location
    Albuquerque
    Gender
    Age
    68
    Family
    Single adult
    Occupation
    Law
    Politics
    Conservative
    Religion
    Catholic
    Posts
    10
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Buchanan's Germany

    http://westernperspective.blogspot.com/

    Pat Buchanan's latest column is entitled "Did Hitler Want War?". Of course Hitler did not want to go to war. Only a fool would want to start a war that would cause great loss to one's own country. This would better describe the attitude of American neo-conservatives who wanted to start American wars that could not be won in Iraq.

    What Buchanan overlooks is that the victorious powers of the first World War essentially boxed Germany into a corner by imposing unreasonable demands on the German people and creating an untenable democratic structure of the Weimar Republic. Hitler, who was somewhat of a war hero, gave Germany a way out of the dilemma.

    In the former Austrian Crown lands including Bohemia, most of the people including those who were German speaking resisted unification with Germany and wanted to maintain the status quo. It was only after the Nazi Anschluss in which there was a de facto annexation of Austria to greater Germany in 1938 that the German speaking people in the Slavic countries, who considered themselves Austrians, went along with Hitler's takeover of the former Czechoslovakia, although there had always been support for unification among the more extreme factions.

    Europe was always united culturally. As far as France had strayed from its Christian roots during the French Revolution, France had to stand for something against the neo-paganism of the Nazi Reich. Britain, France and America went to war not to save Poland, Russia and the Jews, but to save what was left of Christianity in Germany.

Page 1 of 11 123456 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Your Opinion on Pat Buchanan?
    By The Dragonslayer in forum The United States
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: Monday, May 10th, 2010, 05:06 AM
  2. "Churchill, Hitler and the Unnecessary War" [Pat Buchanan]
    By Leo in forum Modern Age & Contemporary History
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: Friday, August 15th, 2008, 08:22 PM
  3. We did it to Ourselves [Pat Buchanan]
    By NorthernDawn in forum The United States
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: Wednesday, September 12th, 2007, 06:51 PM
  4. Truman (the Mad Bomber) started the Cold War [Pat Buchanan]
    By friedrich braun in forum Modern Age & Contemporary History
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: Wednesday, December 29th, 2004, 09:51 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •