In Defense of WW2 Part 2 of 5
Top Comments
All Comments (39)
-
The Holocaust was inevitable as soon as Hitler got power. Whether Germany was at war or not, Hitler was going to kill them all eventually. Also, Germany wasn't surrendering till Hitler was dead.
-
The Morgenthau Plan was rejected by both the Department of State and the Department of War, it was soon recjected and shelved by FDR, and it was never an official document, position, or policy of the United States.
-
People on the right have their revionsism as well, as in the case of the south/civil war, calling the North "aggresors". What a joke.
-
5:04- It is not Munich that led to the Hitler-Stalin Pact, it was Britain giving a war guarantee to keep German's under Polish rule that shoved Hitler into his enemy.
5:34- Hitler invaded Russia to militarily stop one of Britain's two potential allies from co-invading Germany with Britain.
6:18- Giving a war guarantee to keep German's under Polish rule is the act of a warmonger.
-
1:02- Hitler blamed the war on Jews, so he committed an ethnic war crime in response. No war, no war crime. If Britain would have dealt with Versailles when Germany was run by democrats Hitler would never have come to power.
3:50- That was in response to the war, there was no Holocaust before the British invasion.
4:23- If Britain and France had not gangraped Germany during Versailles there never would have been a Hitler in Germany.
-
Russia were the ones who showed Hitler about Mass Murder, only Hitler thought he could be more "efficient" than them with chemicals/gases which he later learned from the Allies thru covert ops, which u can find thru other books..we made the nerve gas, and Hitler and others developed it further, just like Anthrax. Later, Hitler came across Heavy Water and was about to have nuclear materials.. the holocaust would've happened anyway with or without war. With war, we know about it, w/o it, we don't
-
all you needed to do is lay down a copy of mein kampf. wrote in the early 30s, tells his whole plan
-
I expect your error is that you're under the false pretence that fascism was a response to Bolshevik socialism. Fascism was a counter-revolution of the ancien regime in Europe against liberal democracy. They were to use the fear factor of 'Bolshevik socialism' in a McCartyist, propagandist way to subvert the rule of parliament which they could no longer control by legal means. Spanish fascism was not a counter-revolution against Stalinism but against the democracy of the 1931 constitution.
-
The Fascist 'Revolution' was a coup détat against the rule of parliament, aided and abetted by Conservative 'statesmen' such as Salandra, the House of Savoy, the Roman Catholic Church and the security forces who could no longer maintain their hegemony through the democratizing parliament. Clearly 'liberal' Italy was becoming too liberal for its own good.
Calling Hitchens a neo-con shows how little a person saying those things knows about Hitchens. On topic though, VDH and Hitchens sure gave that dumbshit bigot Pat Buchanan a beatdown.....and this is coming from a conservative such as myself. Pat Buchanan is a paleoconservative who shouldn't be taken seriously by anybody on Earth.
holt2k 3 years ago 9
Quite so. The political Left is built on shifting sands, Cohen has highlighted this hypocrisy fairly comprehensively in his excellent writing. People shouldn't conflate Hitchens' views as a betrayal of certain traditional Leftist values, but frequently of a bold affirmation of them.
PrivateEye8 3 years ago 7