You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Home Front: Politix
Defending Obama by defending Hitler--again???
2008-05-20
James Taranto, "Best of the Web" from the WSJ

Yesterday we noted that Seattle Times editorialist Bruce Ramsey had responded to President Bush's Knesset speech last week by defending the appeasement of Hitler at Munich. Now Ramsey has been one-upped by Pat Buchanan. Whereas Ramsey says the March 1939 conquest of Czechoslovakia marked the point at which appeasement ceased to be viable, Buchanan argues that Poland, because it failed to appease Hitler, is to blame for his invasion of it in September:

Why did the tanks roll? Because Poland refused to negotiate over Danzig, a Baltic port of 350,000 that was 95 percent German and had been taken from Germany at the Paris peace conference of 1919, in violation of Wilson's 14 Points and his principle of self-determination.

Hitler had not wanted war with Poland. He had wanted an alliance with Poland in his anti-Comintern pact against Joseph Stalin.

But the Poles refused to negotiate. Why? Because they were a proud, defiant, heroic people and because Neville Chamberlain had insanely given an unsolicited war guarantee to Poland. If Hitler invaded, Chamberlain told the Poles, Britain would declare war on Germany.

From March to August 1939, Hitler tried to negotiate Danzig. But the Poles, confident in their British war guarantee, refused. So, Hitler cut his deal with Stalin, and the two invaded and divided Poland.

The cost of the war that came of a refusal to negotiate Danzig was millions of Polish dead, the Katyn massacre, Treblinka, Sobibor, Auschwitz, the annihilation of the Home Army in the Warsaw uprising of 1944, and 50 years of Nazi and Stalinist occupation, barbarism and terror.

Pardon the interruption, but this is ahistorical nonsense on high stilts. As Wikipedia explains, "The Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, . . . signed in Moscow in the early hours of August 24, 1939, dated August 25, . . . included a secret protocol dividing the independent countries of Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, and Romania into Nazi and Soviet spheres of influence, anticipating "territorial and political rearrangements" of these countries' territories. All were subsequently invaded, occupied, or forced to cede territory by Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union, or both."

In other words, Pat, the fix was in. Hitler didn't need or want Poland as an ally against the USSR because Hitler and Stalin were allies.. Poland was going to be chopped up by the Soviets and the Nazis no matter what it did

One wonders if there is any point at which Buchanan would have said, "This time, Herr Fuehrer, you've gone too far!"

Here we see yet another example of Blair's Law in action: the "right-wing" pro-Jihadi BDS-afflicted surrender monkey Pat Buchanan and the left-wing pro-Jihandi BDS-afflicted surrender monkey Seattle Times, both attacking President Bush on behalf of Obama by defending Adolf Hitler.
Posted by:Mike

00:00