MSNBC's Buchanan problem: Is he blaming Great Britain for WW2?
September 02, 2009 5:18 pm ET by Media Matters staff
From MSNBC political analyst Pat Buchanan's September 1 Creators Syndicate column, headlined, "Did Hitler Want War?":
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?
Previously:
What would Pat Buchanan have to say to get himself fired from MSNBC?
The other right-wing media mogul you should worry about
Palin's book and Obama's bow: a media week to forget
Media Matters: The Palin chronicles
Oh no he didn't.
Maybe because they didn't?
Cute.
We coulda had Hitler instead!
Srsly! Goose steppin' SS would have been way way better than Red Army hordes......er...wait a sec?
Do you suppose he got that out of one of those special new textbooks they use at Regents University?
If this was a spat over some seaside town, how does he explain Germany rolling into the rest of Europe?
You don't build up a war machine such as was created in Germany in the Thirties without plans to use it eventually. After iron diplomacay, and out right threats have stalled out, well its time to start irrigating the land with blood. Libenstrum, (sp) land for a romantic image of the good german farmer family. A pretty lie.
Reminds me of some current political rhetoric. Cept with our new modern media we now have hundreds of pretty lies. To be fair, both sides in WWII engaged in lots of lies. Futher though, they were parts of an actual declared war.
There is some arguement that Struassian/neocon elites have in fact declared war on the american system of government. Certainly there is not much awareness on their opponets part that a serious conflict is, and continues to take place.
By May 1945, Red Army hordes occupied all the great capitals of Central Europe:
You have to watch out for the red army hordes, not to beconfused with the mongolian hordes.
the Bolshevik regime of the greatest terrorist of them all, Joseph Stalin.
Yup, he was a bad man. Killed his own people and a lot of others who got in his way. Well, except he wasn't a terrorist as much as a muderous dictator.
50 million Christians and Jews had perished -- A hundred million Christians were under the heel of the most barbarous tyranny in history:
I guess that Hitler would have passed on the whole death camp thing, if only Britain hadn't gotten uppity and gone to war with him. And, I guess it is pretty obvious that Pat is a professing christian, since they seem to play a large role in his view of who suffered. Never mind the gypsies, trade unionists, underground members, Poles, French, etc, etc.
Nothing wrong with being a christian, just seems odd to single them out when pretty much everyone suffered in WWII.