In Defense of WWII: Chapter 2 of 5

[coogeebearinbriz]

By definition yes, but I still cannot see much value in having such an approach. Both those professing their opinions and analysis take the same view. The host struggles to try and recall what the author wrote! It is lame duck.

[coogeebearinbriz]

I personally find it odd that the author of the book is not even there to engage in the debate.

[nyomythus]

It's not a debate... (A formal contest of argumentation in which two opposing teams defend and attack a given proposition.)

...it's a discussion. (A formal discourse on a topic; an exposition.)

[byron84]

Since Hitchens loves using Mein Kampf, why doesn't he say that Hitler, as he stated in the book, should have been let loose to continue his eastward expansion towards the USSR, and allow the two beasts of national socialism and Stalinistic communism to devour each other while the Western democracies re-arm and peacefully observe the death match?

[nyomythus]

I'm stuck on your statement, "Since Hitchens loves using Mein Kampf..." I can't seem to get beyond that.

[byron84]

Why? He invokes it when it suits his purposes and ignores it when it doesn't.

[Hazardous117]

First of all, Mein Kampf exhibits a substantial hatred for Democracy and Liberalism, not just Communism. Secondly, as shown in every war its fought since 1870, the German military establishment would have never allowed the traditional continental enemy (France) to rearm unmolested while it got involved in a long and protracted war in the East.

[byron84]

Does anyone think that it's fair to start to get into hypotheticals about the fate of European Jewry with a self-righteous Trotskyist cum right-wing neoconservative militarist like Hitchens? His political affiliations alone make Hitler look like a Girl Scout.

[MitchofSmeg]

what kind of idiot would kill people who could become soldiers and fight for the nation in a war unless they were going to do it anyway?

[bombilla42]

Oh. My. God. This. Is. So. Freeking. Boring. I wish Hitch would like through a chair or something.

[heymossy]

Oh. My. God. This. Is. So. Freeking. Interesting.

Real topics, actual discussion and the freedom to explore ideas. How come nobody is frantically yelling at the other guy in order to cut him off. If this topic is boring, then so be it. But the discussion itself is wonderful.

[eirefrance]

This might have better if they had Buchanan on to defend his own points.

[shikagonga]

this compere is pretty lame and unbiased. the servility towards buckley was pathetic, when hitchens was handing it to them both

[amazingfuton]

I've seen this interviewer before; he gets very involved.

It's almost like he reads a book, gets completely influenced by it and ten decides to debate it with leading figures. Maybe this is the style of the program, but he doesn't come across very well.

[Epic878787]

It seems all he is doing is representing Buchanan's arguments and letting the guests explain why they disagree. He isn't following up and pressing Buchanan's position imo.

[DammitSteve]

it's called a discussion

[drmodestoesq]

I would have to respectfully disagree. I see so many shows that are like that Monty Python sketch where the person pays to have an argument and all the person does is disagree with everything he says without any facts or reasoning. I wish my local PBS affiliate still carried this show. Its such a relief to see people speaking in complete sentences. Shouting contests automatically favour the viceral jingoistic hosts like Bill O'Reilly. Eventually you don't want to waste your time with that.