Buchanan Bashes Bush

Discussion in 'Miscellaneous' started by pettyfog, May 21, 2008.

  1. pettyfog

    pettyfog Well-Known Member

    Jan 4, 2005
    I'm a 'conservative', Pat Buchanan is a 'Conservative', though by most definitions he is a Paleo-Conservative.

    I dislike Buchanan.. Why?

    Read this:Patrick J. Buchanan: Bush Plays the Hitler Card

    If you read it CAREFULLY, he really does not directly counter Bush's statement before the Knesset, he PARSES Hitler's actions in absorbing the Sudetenland and invading Poland. He states that Danzig properly belonged to Germany because of it's germanic population but Poland, having been given the port as 'punishment against German actions in WWI refused to negotiate it..

    So, it all comes down to the fact that the allies inflicted too-harsh penalties upon Germany as conditions of the WWI Armistice.
    That is absolutely 100% correct. And the reason the US created the Marshall Plan after WWII.

    So where's the rub?

    In The BIG Picture, Buchanan's article is GARBAGE! He accepts that Chamberlain 'appeased' Hitler on the Czech question, and that was after all the point Bush was making, but shifts the facts of appeasement to the ALLIES assuring Poland that they would support them unconditionally if invaded.
    While this may not have been the right thing to do in the end game, what he proposes indirectly is that all mutual defense treaties are garbage.

    So, end point is that if ONLY we had appeased Hitler JUST ONE MORE TIME and given him Danzig, WWII might never have happened.

    OR.. Hitler would have been EXPOSED when he went ahead and took the rest of Poland despite that.

    Yes, I see, Pat. And Saddam would have been all hugs and kisses if only we had just let him keep Kuwait. Because it was an artificial border, taken from Babylonian precedential borders.. and none of our business.

    Oh, wait... that was really your position at the time, wasnt it!

    International trade is no longer done with ships under sail, Pat.

    I can agree with probably 80-90 percent of Buchanan's views; trade, taxes, immigration.. etc. But his view of National Security and the proper response to threats assume that we are working within a framework of reasonable peers. And that, when we vacate a space, nothing adverse to our national interests rushes in to fill the vacuum.

    Which brings us back to Hitler.. who would not even have COME to power if the US had intervened during the treaty and refused to allow France to take revenge by ruining the German economy, or allowing England to accede to France's revenge.

    In other words, we missed a great window to prevent a future war by meddling in foreign affairs.

    Pat Buchanan is a frequent foreign affairs commenter on MSNBC.

    Figures, huh!

    - - - -- - - - -- -- - - - -- - - -

    UPDATE: No sooner I write this than LGF reminds me that Buchanan met last year with BNP Belgian fascist pals from Vlaams Belang.

Share This Page