 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
History Forum / General / General Topics / May 2005World War II: A Needless Tragedy
Was WWII Worth It? For Stalin, yes by Patrick J. Buchanan Bush told the awful truth about what really triumphed in World War II east of the Elbe. And it was not freedom. It was Stalin, the most odious tyrant of the century. Where Hitler killed his millions, Stalin, Mao, Ho Chi Minh, Pol Pot, and Castro murdered their tens of millions. Leninism was the Black Death of the 20th century. Other questions arise. If Britain endured six years of war and hundreds of thousands of dead in a war she declared to defend Polish freedom, and Polish freedom was lost to communism, how can we say Britain won the war? Continued: http://www.antiwar.com/pat/?articleid=5899 Terror Bombing: The Crime of the 20th Century: http://www.ety.com/HRP/rev/terrorbombing.htm There Was No Need for World War II There was no need for World War II. Adolf Hitler was doing everything he could to come to peace terms with Britain, but Winston Churchill would not have it. Churchill knew of the many peace offers coming from the German government. He knew that neither Hitler nor any other Nazi leaders wanted to fight Britain. Winston Churchill wrote to Josef Stalin on January 24, 1944, to tell him that Britain was going to continue the fight to the complete destruction of Germany no matter what. He should have been more exact and said that Britain was going to stay in the war as long as the United States was willing to do most of the fighting and all of the financing. Hitler expressed this opinion: "A European war would be the end of all our efforts even if we should win, because the disappearance of the British empire would be a misfortune which could not be made up again." He told the Dutch fascist leader Anton Mussert: "We have not the slightest reason to fight Britain. Even if we win, we gain nothing." Hitler was such an admirer of the British empire that he offered to defend the empire anywhere in the world with German troops should Britain ever need them. Continued: http://www.rense.com/general63/ride.htm This post does not mean that I agree with his isolationism, though I acknowledge his non-centrist, non-establishment versions of reality are for study/discussion. Pat is a gifted polemicist, and in this column he shows it. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/587875/posts Robert - take a look at Seigfreid's address of Siegfriedson@stormfront.org , and then take a look at http://www.stormfront.org/ and see what you think. It's a site that advocates repealing the MLK Jr holiday, including words from Jesse Helmes in it's argument. It's a site that complains about how the White racist isn't getting a fair deal, and isn't compared favourably with black scholar or a sensitive and talented homosexual. He's a f.cking white supremacist nutter. 1. The Nazi's made peace treaties then broke them (costing Chamberlain his job), invading country after country. The Nazis could NOT be trusted. 2. Even if the UK could have sat back & done nothing - that would have been tacit approval of the holocaust. The Nazi's opened the first extermination camps in 1933 & for 6 years, the world tried to stop them peacefully. 3. When the USA got involved in the war Hitler was maybe a couple of years from having nuclear weapons & maybe the same time from having (V3?) delivery systems, giving him the opportunity to make the entire East coast of the USA glow in the dark for the next thousand years. 4. The Soviets already occupied Poland (along with the Nazi's) in September 1939 - BEFORE Britain declared war. It was FDR's acceptance of the Soviet division of Europe that finally "gave" Poland to the Soviets. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/07/AR2005050701232.html The idea that Hitler didn't need to take Britain is obviously false. The strategic position was such that to secure Western Europe, Briatin HAD to be taken. It provided the ideal staging point for a counterattack - as history shows. Also Britain didn't create it's empire by being "nice guys". Brits get nasty, when it's time to get nasty. Hitler knew, after the Dunkirk evacuation, that Britain wasn't out of the war - he HAD to (try to) take Britain. As for - "Adolf Hitler was doing everything he could to come to peace terms with Britain, but Winston Churchill would not have it. ", I suggest anyone who believes this should visit my home city of Coventry. Hitler tried bombing Britain for August 1940 onwards, for as long as his aircraft could reach their targets - trying to kill civilians, rather than attacking military targets. > This post does not mean that I agree with his isolationism, though I > acknowledge his non-centrist, non-establishment versions of reality are [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/587875/posts |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.