Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Thursday, June 05, 2008
Victor Davis Hanson :: Townhall.com Columnist
The Bad War?
by Victor Davis Hanson
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Was the Copenhagen Global Warming Summit Walk-Out a Win for the U.S.?


NORMANDY, France -- Questioning the past is a good thing, but rewriting it contrary to facts is quite another. In the latest round of revisionism about the Second World War, the awful British and naive Americans, not the poor Germans, have ended up as the real culprits.

Take the new book by conservative pundit Patrick Buchanan, “Churchill, Hitler and ‘The Unnecessary War’: How Britain Lost Its Empire and the West Lost the World.” Buchanan argues that, had the imperialist Winston Churchill not pushed poor Hitler into a corner, he would have never invaded Poland in 1939, which triggered an unnecessary Allied response.

Maybe then the subsequent world war, and its 50 million dead, could have been avoided. Taking that faulty argument to its logical end, I suppose today a united West might live in peace with a reformed (and victorious) Nazi Third Reich!

On the left, the novelist Nicholson Baker in a book of nonfiction, "Human Smoke: The Beginnings of World War II, the End of Civilization," builds the case that the Allied bombing of German cities was tantamount to a war crime.

Apparently there was no need to, in blanket fashion, attack German urban centers and the industry, transportation and communications concentrated inside them. From Baker's comfortable vantage point, either the war was amoral or unnecessary -- or there must have been more humane ways to stop the flow of fuel, crews and equipment for the Waffen SS divisions that invaded Europe and Russia.

In the luxury of some 60 years of postwar peace and affluence -- and perhaps in anger over the current Iraq war -- Buchanan and Baker and other revisionists engage in a common sort of Western second-guessing. The result is that they always demand liberal democracies be not just better and smarter than their adversaries, but almost superhuman in their perfection.

Buchanan and others, for example, fault the Treaty of Versailles that ended World War I as too harsh on a defeated Germany and thus an understandable pretext for the rise of the Nazis, who played on German anger and fear.

Those accords may have been flawed, but they were far better than what Germany itself had offered France in 1871 after the Franco-Prussian War, or Russia after its collapse in 1917 -- or what it had planned for Britain and France had it won the First World War. What ultimately led to World War II was neither Allied meanness to Germany between the two wars nor an unwillingness to understand the Nazis' pain and anguish.

The mistake instead was not occupying all of imperial Germany after the first war in 1918-19. That way, the Allies would have demonstrated to the German people that their army was never "stabbed in the back" at home, as the Nazis later alleged, but instead defeated by an Allied army that was willing to stay on to foster German constitutional government and its reintegration within Europe. The Allies later did occupy Germany after World War II -- and 60 years without war have followed.

Had Nicholson Baker been alive in 1942, I doubt he would have had better ideas of how to stop the Nazi and Japanese juggernauts that had ruined Eastern Europe, Russia and large parts of China and southeast Asia other than using the same clumsy tools our grandfathers were forced to employ to end fascist aggression.

A Nazi armored division or death camp stopped its murderous work not through reasoned appeal or self-reflection, but only when its fuel, supplies and manpower were cut off.

I am currently visiting military cemeteries in France, Luxembourg and Belgium, some of the most beautiful, solemn acres in Europe. The thousands of Americans lying beneath the rows of white crosses at Normandy Beach, at Hamm, Luxembourg, and at St. Avold in the Lorraine probably did not debate the Versailles Treaty or worry too much whether a B-17 took out a neighborhood when it tried to hit a German rail yard.

Instead, our soldiers were more worried that they had few options available to stop Nazi Germany and imperial Japan -- other than their own innate courage. The dead in our cemeteries over here in Europe never bragged that they were eagerly fighting the "good" war, but rather only reluctantly finishing a necessary one that someone else had started.

They and those who sent them into the carnage of World War II knew Americans could do good without having to be perfect. In contrast, the present critics of the Allied cause enjoy the freedom and affluence that our forefathers gave us by fighting World War II while ignoring -- or faulting -- the intelligence and resolve that won it.

Gen. William Tecumseh Sherman once scoffed at the peacetime wisdom of postwar critics that came across as mass-produced, feel-good "bottled piety." Others might call it ingratitude.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Victor Davis Hanson is a classicist and historian at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, and a recipient of the 2007 National Humanities Medal.

Be the first to read Victor Davis Hanson's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com delivered each morning to your inbox.

And when Hitler took over Russia
As usual, VDH is right on the money.

Had Hitler been left alone his Reich would have grown in strength and defeated Russia. One can read William F. Shirer's "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich" and see that The Reich Church had a 30 point platform. In there is contained a point calling for the eradication of all religion from German lands save for what it had constructed from one of the two items on the Nazi Church altars. One item is a sword and the other is Mein Kampf, which they hailed as the greatest book ever written.

Russia would likely have been defeated by Germany and Hitler would have taken over its means of production and its vast resources. Assuming just for a moment that Hitler would stop his expansion there, we would have an Adolph Hitler pass away within a few years and he would have been deified. We would have fought a very different cold war against in the vicinity of 1 billion believers in St. Adolph. It is unlikely that America would not have eventually been at war, and Churchill would surely have surrendered England, or at least kept to his word of fighting "until we lay in the gutter chocking on our own blood". You have to give it to Winston as he sure had a way with words!

Buchanan has extended his isolationist agenda to now trying to rewrite history, and I for one am glad that VDH has chosen to take him to task on it.

Thank you Dr. Hanson,
Steve in Charlotte, NC

WEAPONS of MASS DESTRUCTION NOT found!
No WEAPONS of MASS DESTRUCTION were found in Germany (their Nuke program never got off the ground)!
FDR should be IMPEACHED retroactively!

Blowhard Buchanan
Pat's an old Irish Catholic bigmouth and inveterate isolationist who has always hated the British-- and the Jews.To him, both are stereotypically perfidious. (I'm surprised he didn't quote some old time Catholic bigots he probably hard of when he was a kid, like Father Coughlin and Father Feeney who liked to call the New Deal the Jew Deal and the war the Jews' war.)
While I share Pat's current fears for the decline of America, i.e., white Xian America, what with the neo-paganism and dumbing down of this generation and what with the barbarians at (or inside ) the gate, it's a total stretch to make Churchill the villain (and Hitler the victim) in this overtly polemical revision of history.
Pat's forte is spirited,simplistic, reductionist debate of current politics, definitely not History with its many nuances and complexities.

In Hitler's Own Words
Even Hitler disputed this insanity in his book "Mein Kamph"(sp), long before these delusional "thinkers" came up with their version of the reasons for the war.
Palleeesssee!

D-Day SURGE has FAILED! WITHDRAW!
July 16, 1944

Dear President Roosevelt:

It is time to withdraw our incompetent military (itemized below).

Pearl Harbor/Hickam Field Attack:
- Word of sinking a nearby 1 man sub, and radar detection of the attack, did not reach those in charge.
The Atlantic:
- Germans sank numerous ships within miles of our coast.
- We’ve lost over 3,000 ships and 25,000 merchant marines.
The Pacific:
- We’ve failed to sink numerous ships due to faulty torpedoes.
- It took 6 months just to take Guadalcanal.
- We lost thousands at Tarawa for virtually nothing.
- The new B-29 is over budget, behind schedule, and a lemon’s lemon.
Africa:
- It started with the French firing on our troops.
- There were a plethora of disasters before we turned it around.
Europe:
- Our Navy shot down numerous paratrooper loaded C-47’s near Sicily.
- We’ve suffered huge losses in the “Soft Under Belly of Europe”.
- Air raids on the likes of Ploesti were unmitigated disasters.
- Germany has a new “jet” plane 100 mph faster than our planes.
- Intelligence claims a new “V-2” rocket will attack England soon.
The Normandy Surge:
- Our best general, Patton, was sidelined for SLAPPING A SOLDIER.
- Our bombers and naval guns were of very little help at the beaches, but killed plenty of the French.
- Brave Rangers died taking out log “guns” at Pointe Du Hoc.
- Many troops were unloaded hundreds of yards from planned points.
- Many troops were unloaded too far out to sea and drowned.
- Most of our “floating” tanks sank.
- Many gliders and paratroopers came down far from planned locations.
- We lost over 6,000 dead on D-Day alone.
- Thank Goodness Rommel was away and Hitler was asleep.
- Our Sherman tank gets blown to bits by German tanks.
Boondoggles:
- Extreme money’s being wasted on a farfetched “A” bomb.
Civil Rights:
- Tens of thousands of Japanese-Americans are interred in California.
- Reports/Letters from fronts are highly censored.

Sinator Benedict Bombast


One reply to ReadyK
There is one point which was a complete wrong, and I hoep FDR realised it too...

-Tens of Thousands of Japanese Americans are interred in California.

While they did horrible things (especially to the Chinese!) no one is their brother's keeper when that "brother" is a soldier in someone else's army, that you've moved away from because you want to live in another country that values rights and freedoms... but only if you're white.

And while we're on that historical buff note, I say General Bradley or Ridgeway takes the "Best General" gong, closely followed by General Hodges... :)


And not to trivialize the horrors which face soldiers today in Iraq, but I am fairly sure the Wehrmacht was a far scarier force to fight than a bunch of losers in rags who cowardly attack civilians most of the time...

Unleashing the Hounds of War
Victory is not determined by which combatant used "just barely" enough force to eke out a concession from the other guy.

War is hell. Winning requires overwhelming brutality to stop the enemy and dissuade several generations from another attempt.

He who fights a "kind" war will, at worst, lose.
At best, he invites the next challenger.

Excellent Analysis by VDH
Excellent analysis by one of the clearest thinkers around, Victor Davis Hanson.

#3
Actually, Buchanan is somewhat more complex & nuanced than you seem to think. He's of German, English, Scots-Irish & Irish ancestry. Sounds almost American to me.

Puzzled.

Victor, great analysis as usual. But why would you want to include someone like Pat Buchanan in your late nite reading...???

Unless, of course, you think some people out there still take that isolationist blow-hard way too seriously.

Personally, I don't.

readyk
Apart from Blowhard Buchanan, the Left has awakened to the inescapable conclusion that since Bush is a criminal whose faulty intelligence led to the battle deaths of some 5-6,000 Americans and that the JOOOOOOOOOOOZ are the evil oppressors of the poor, poor Palestinian Arabs, WWII had to have been wrong, and not even its having made the world safe for Stalinism can excuse it.

After all, FDR's incompetent generals lost us tens of thousands between D-Day and the Elbe at a rate of roughly 500 per day; Trumans uniformed dopes lost us 12,000 on Okinawa alone.

I think that sums up the reasoning of the Left revisionists.

Still, I might just read Buchanan's book. But I suspect that a soft spot for Hitler (who was a truly evil a man as Mao or Stalin) might appear.

Pat Pukechanan
Should try and tell my former German landlord, Herr Germann, that it was unnecessary for the US to swoop in and save them. He fought against the (sounded like he was saying)"lrooskies" for Hitler and talked about starving, etc.... He spoke maybe five words of Englsih, but I spoke German. He told me, "Thank God for America, America is Great. I would not be here, otherwise."
I. hate. revisionist. history.

VDH, Buchanan both make good arguments
I don't know where VDH gets his information on terms or accords offered to a post-war Russia.

There were none.

There was, however, a Bolshevik revolution.

And I might quibble a bit with VDH's apparently sanguine view that the allies should have "occupied" Germany after WW1.

France was sick of war. She was not about to occupy anything, let alone any other nation.

Hell, she could not even put up a fight 20 years later to save herself, when the Nazis rolled into Paris.

Except for that, VDH offers a nice rebuttal to Buchanan.

I am not swayed entirely by VDH's arguments, just as I am not entirely swayed by Buchanan's either, and I think both writers do score points.

I think the Nazis would never have been able to exploit the productive capacities of Russian factories had they defeated that nation in WW2.

Russian people were most adept at sabotaging any facilities they thought the Nazis would use(when the Germans advanced into Russia).

And a German "occupation" of such a vast nation as Russia would have kept the Nazis totally absorbed with that, making a western advance by the allies a much easier undertaking.

Overall, VDH wrote a nice article...just as Buchanan did.

blanket bombing of german cities
please do what you accuse the ones you are writng about of not doing and do a little researh into what you are saying.
in january 1946 the air forces had run out of major industrial targets to bomb. the only strategic thing that they could think of was keep bombing and that way their air force would have to come up and try to stop us and we could get rid of them that way. not enough
other than thet they looked around for a legitimate way to keep 1000s of bamber crews busy. they couldnt come up with one . so the official policy from that day on was blanket bomb the cities with the ultimate puropse of destroying the german peoples morale. this is what they did until the end of the war. this is not guesswork, its in the offical record. blanket bome the cities, kil enough civilians and end the war r sooner. it didnt work by the way any more than the german carpet bombing of england wrorked in 1941. but they had a lot of fun doing it. many airmen, by the way, refused to do the missions and for awhile they had trouble gettting enough crews to fly the missions. to their everlasting credit. what else are you wrong about?
but

Why or Why
Do the revisionist idiots always blame the Good Guys, Us!, and not the Bad Guys? Buchanan has lost it big time. What about the Axis monstrous acts prior to the invasions, the overt spying and sabotage. The propaganda regarding our mongrel race.




WWI Mistake
A few years back a newspaper supposedly asked its readers for the most shocking healine imaginable. The winner was "Ferdinand found alive in ____, WWI a mistake." Mr. Buchannan is not alone in laying the blame for the 20th century at the feet of WWI. Nor is Buchannan the only historian to note that had Britain stayed out of WWI then it would have been over in about six months with Germany occupying Paris as they nearly did in 1871. Kegan makes these points (though not so forcefully) in his WWI, and the same is true of Castles of Steel (I don't remember who wrote that one).

No one has successfully explained to me why three of Queen Victoria's grandsons ended up on two sides of WWI (Although Buchannan comes closest by quoting private letters).

As for isolationism we find ourselves in the position of the Spartans after winning the Peloponessian War with overseas commitments that we really don't want.

Hitler Intelligence
Bill Clinton once stated that Hitler was the most intelligent man born in the 20th Century. He modeled his Goals 2000 educational program after Hitler's Youth Corps (which became the SS Troops during the war).

It appears that Buchanan and MRCMRC agree with him.

History is not simple
I don't care for the tone or oversimplifications of VDH's essay (I suspect that Buchanan's book is not at Hitler Good/Churchill Bad as the critics say) Still, Hansen makes a good point with:
"The mistake instead was not occupying all of imperial Germany after the first war in 1918-19."
IMHO, the problem with the WWI accords was that they were at once too punative and not punative enough. We bankrupted and humbled Germany, but then left them alone to form their own Weimar government and stew in their own juices.

Impeachment
Robert Sherwood, FDRs speech writer and author of Roosevelt and Hopkins, long ago reported that FDR was well aware of the reality that he could be impeched between beginning in 1938 and continuing into 1941. In violation of the Neutrality Acts, which FDR signed in 1946, he had Marshall met with the British to plan our entry into the war in Europe. I recall that when the German battleship Bismarck left Norway for the North Atlantic, FDR played sick for more than a month and was incommunicato in the White House. FDR knew that he would be impeached if he sent the US Navy to sink this behemouth but that he could not allow the shipping lanes to England to be dominated by it. The British were able to destroy the Bismarck and saved FDR from being impeached.

We also have to remember that the Communists - after the German invasion of the Soviet Union - were desperate to get the US in the European War to save the great socialist paradise! We forget that the Communists also wanted the US to intercede against the fascists in Spain. Since WW2, the Communists demonized the US and loudly opposed all American military actions. The "Unity" of WW2 was only because the Communists needed US military forces to save the Soviet Union. The Soviets used diplomacy (particularly at Yalta) to gain hegemony and enslave Eastern Europe for generations before their silly, but murderous, regime collapsed. Today when some very naive politicians speak of diplomacy, they have forgotten that historically America usually loses at conference tables. Or maybe they actually know that?

Nazis and the japs
Buchanan has really stepped into it this time. The only reason someone re-writes history is because he is bored with his life and he needs a good argument to keep on living, cause if he can't cause an argument, he'll just kill himself out of boredom. Pat reminds me of blind men trying to describe an elephant. "it's a tree, cries one, no it's a rope cried the other" what a whole crock of bs.

Hate to break to you...
But for those pontificating about what happened in 1946...?

The war ended in 1945.

Woody from Iowa

WAR IN ITALY
Modern Leftists bandy about the term "quagmire" as if this particular attitude is their own provenance to judge and choose as they jet off to Italy to sip vino bonito et pasta superiore'. With their Howard Zinn Ivy League classroom histories, they remain totally oblivious that it is the American GI's that own Italy; paid for foot by foot, yard by yard up the boot from Sicily to Salerno to Anzio and then eight months later into Rome, then and then more foot by foot death march north until the end of the war. The quagmire which was Italy kept Kesselring, possibly Germany's finest general and possible assassin of Hitler, bogged down on the defense. General Mark Clark commanded the US Forces in Italy and got little recognition or glory for the struggle he was forced under allied orders from Marshall and Eisenhower.

Senate Intel Report Today
is not fully released yet, but Here are the key points from the reports, according to a press release from Sen. Jay Rockefeller's office:

--Statements and implications by the President and Secretary of State suggesting that Iraq and al-Qa'ida had a partnership, or that Iraq had provided al-Qa'ida with weapons training, were not substantiated by the intelligence.
--Statements by the President and the Vice President indicating that Saddam Hussein was prepared to give weapons of mass destruction to terrorist groups for attacks against the United States were contradicted by available intelligence information.

--Statements by President Bush and Vice President Cheney regarding the postwar situation in Iraq, in terms of the political, security, and economic, did not reflect the concerns and uncertainties expressed in the intelligence products.

--Statements by the President and Vice President prior to the October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate regarding Iraq's chemical weapons production capability and activities did not reflect the intelligence community's uncertainties as to whether such production was ongoing.

--The Secretary of Defense's statement that the Iraqi government operated underground WMD facilities that were not vulnerable to conventional airstrikes because they were underground and deeply buried was not substantiated by available intelligence information.

--The Intelligence Community did not confirm that Muhammad Atta met an Iraqi intelligence officer in Prague in 2001 as the Vice President repeatedly claimed.


For Charlotte Steve (#1)
Hitler would have faced the following difficulties in a conquest of Russia (Soviet Union):
(1) the country is huge, with severe climate and horrible logistics
(2) Hitler was known to overrule strategies by his field generals (FYI, this was the reason that Stalin was finally able to defeat him AS WAS)

Silliness
Since Germany declared war on America, it was necessary to fight them, but it's obvious that we should never have gotten involved in World War I. To casually cast aside criticism that the Versaille Treaty was too harsh by stating that "the Germans would have done worse" is not an argument. The point is that the terms of peace often times build the foundation for the next war. Next time there is a major war that doesn't involve the US, we should stay out of it.

readyk
To amplify on FDR vis-à-vis WMDs: wasn’t the Manhattan Project initiated after Albert Einstein, newly immigrated from Germany, personally assured President Roosevelt that the Nazi regime was actively pursuing the development of nuclear weapons?

Hmm … “Einstein lied, millions died.” Think that ever had any potential as an empty-headed slogan of the WWII-era left?

Uh, MRC
Germany surrendered in May 1945. Japan in August 1945. And you wonder why few here take you seriously

Okay Hanson
As for Sherman, do you then think it was proper to engage in ethnic cleasening and rape? Which was the the result at Roswell and New Manchester, Georgia where girls and women who were mill workers were captured, raped and then transported to Indiana and Ohio, many to never see their homes again. Today, that would be considered a warcrime. Or how about the intentional destruction of educational facilities such as the University of South Carolina? That is consider a crime of war as well. Or how about the intention destruction of religious institutions--the Union Army loved to burn churches. Yes, another example of a warcrime. Or the looting of graves, which was the case in Savannah when it surrendered to Sherman without a shot--which included the looting of graves of those that signed the Declaration of Independence that being Button Gwinnett.

Was the "bummers" leaving the civilian population along the "march" without food, proper, how about the rapes there as well? Is any thing proper in war? Apparently not since there were US-led warcrimes trials in both Germany and Japan after the war and in some cases, the "criminals" had been engaged in the same activity the US had been engaged in, but the winner gets to decide who is a warcriminal and who is not.


Talk about revisionist history...
just read the posts here of MRC and America hating Akaqi.

A few things
It is clear from Hitler's writing's that he had designs on the west. He put this forward in the so-called "Second Book" (Zweites Buch) that he wrote in 1928. The question remains if the British Empire and France had not declared war on Germany in 1939 would Hilter have moved east or west after Poland.

My opinion is Hitler would have moved west first before taking on the USSR. Stalin believed Hitler would attack the USSR but not before 1943.

The thesis that Germany would grind itself to pieces and the USSR would be exhausted by the war in victory and thus no cold war, no loss of the British Empire, etc makes many assumptions--few based on facts.

As for other things, while the boming of Germany's cities starting in 1943 can't be considered a warcrime, Dresden can be.

And yes, the Germans as well as the Japanese had a nuclear program, but Germany was years away from developing the bomb and Japan decades.

Oh and Buck outside of your continued use of a term viewed as highly offensive, Pat's arguement isn't new--he put out the same theory years ago in his book "A Republic, not an Empire" and at the time, John McCain called for him to be expelled from the GOP.

Really?
So "thinker":

Tell me, were mill workers at New Manchester, Georgia and Roswell not basically abducted and sent north of the Ohio river? Oh and sexually assualted to boot? The date for New Manchester is July 3, 1864 I believe. Not sure of the exact date for Roswell, but very late June, 1864.

How about the burning of the University of South Carolina? That didn't happen? How about the burning of countless churches? That didn't happen? How about leaving civilians without food along "the march" in November-December 1864, that didn't happen? How about the looting of graves included that of Button Gwinnett, that didn't happen?

How about the trial of Karl Donitz at Nuremberg for doing the exact same thing the US did in the Pacific from December 8, 1941 until August 15, 1945? That untrue too?

Please show me how my history is "revisonist." Not that there is anything wrong with revising history, it is not a static subject.


They had NOTHING but subs left!
The battlewagons were not only sunk but rendered obsolete in 45 minutes. Even months later when they were floated and repaired they remained nothing more than floating heavy batteries for shore bombardment.

The War in the Pacific was a CARRIER WAR from the time the first Zeke dropped a bomb on Pear. The destroyers and cruisers saw more action than battleships even the might Iowas.

For a long time the only way to hit back was with a bunch of "pig boats" which till then had been considered only an auxiliary force. In fact the subs sank most of the tonnage in WW2.
The order from CINPAC was simple: Unrestricted submarine warfare is authorized.

SOME commanders were way over the top like Mush Morton and "Killer" O'Kane. Both ordered their men to machine gun enemy sailors in the water. The unwritten rule of naval warfare up to THAT point had been that a man in the water is untouchable. Let him stand up on a piece of floating wreckage and he now had a "deck" under his feet and is a target again.

Until the Essex class fast fleet carriers started sliding down the ways we had little left to fight with. Midway was more of a gamble than most realize. They did sink four enemy carriers but there were still more than that at home. We had a 4 to 1 disadvantage in carrier force going in. If we'd lost two carriers in the battle there would have been only two full sized ships left to support engagements at Guadalcanal and other points in the island hopping campaign.

-Ray

This is the last straw
Pat has become a puzzlement to me recently, but this book is beyond the pale. Years ago a (lefty) stand-up comic quipped that Pat's book reads better in the original German. I want to puke as I reach the conclusion that I must agree with that Hollywood twit.
Pat, you have betrayed you secret, and now we can write your statements off as we would the nonsense we must endure from an annoying uncle.

Oh and thinker
Before you make a claim "well, it was Sherman's men doing the raping and indiscriminate burning, not by his orders, but on their own accord."

Well, Tomoyuki Yamashita was--at least the American claims were--that he allowed his men to run wild in the Philippines as the Americans invaded. He denied any knowledge of the atrocities and correctly stated due to the fact the Americans had degraded his command and control ability to such an extent he had no way to effectively communicate with or control his men or commanders in the operations area--he was hanged in 1946 anyway.

The real reason he was hanged was that Macarthur stupidly thought he was the one who took the Philippines in 1942--that was actually Masaharu Homma. Yamashita in fact took Singapore and Malaya, known as the Tiger of Malaya. He gave a speech in Singapore saying they were now Japanese citizens--Japan had other ideas, and he was sent to the Kwantung Army in Manchukuo soon after and saw little action in the war until he was sent to the Philippines in 1944, just 10 days before the Americans landed.

So if Yamashita was hanged for not controlling his men in the Philippines, shouldn't Sherman, "Black Jack" Logan, O.O. Howard, etc have been as well?

Oh I forgot, "the winner makes the rules" rule again.

think_4_yourself's #24.
All true.

Ray
Even if Japan had destroyed the entire carrier force at Midway and lost not a single carrier, Japan would have still lost the war.

See this excellent article on the subject.

http://www.combinedfleet.com/economic.htm


This is the last straw
Bill:

Why? This is just the same theory he put forward in "A Republic..." and that came out almost 10 years ago. This is nothing new, he has held this belief for a very long time.

Not sure he can be called a conservative either, he shares many views you'd find held by many Democrats--including so it seems Obama and Hillary.

Rewriting history
I am glad that VDH has put the lie to Buchanan's claims that it would have somehow have been beneficial for the Germans to have defeated the Soviets. What good could have come from that? In barely over 12 years the Third Riech managed to murder upwards of 11 million people...what would they have done if they had been able to defeat Soviet Russia? How many more would have been sacrificed on the altar of Hitler's power?

There is nothing wrong with taking a fresh look at history, or wondering "what if?" But there is something disturbing when a person tries to totally rewrite history to conform to his personal beliefs and prejudices; that person is willing to remake history to stroke his own ego. And that type of person is potentially dangerous.

Akagi
Hitler, in "Mein Kampf" stated that the living space he desired for a united Germany was in the east. In fact, this is what he wrote, "If land was desired in Europe, it could be obtained by and large only at the expense of Russia, and this meant that the new Reich must again set itself on the march along the road of the Teutonic Knights of old, to obtain by the German sword sod for the German plow and daily bread for the nation." (pp140)

And in his second volume Hitler stated, "And so we National Socialists...take up where we broke off six hundred years ago. We stop the endless German movement to the south and west, and turn our gaze toward the lan in the East. If we speak of soil in Europe today, we can primarily have in mind only Russia and her vassal border states." (pp654)

Hitler always intended to take Russia for the use of his Reich and expansion to the west was not his highest priority, which is probably why he went after Poland and Czechoslovakia after attempting to unify the German speaking peoples around him under the Nazi banner. (I suppose that Czechoslovakia & Poland qualify as "vassal states".)

Oh and one more thing
Wrat Wrangler:

More than that at home? Yes, Japan had the Zuikaku the Shokaku, which were being repaired and refitted after Coral Sea and the Ryujo and Zuiho. The Ryujo at the time took part in the operations against Dutch Harbor and the Zuiho was part of the Midway operations but didn't take part in the battle.

The Americans had the Saratoga, Enterprise, Wasp and Hornet. All the American carriers were CVs, only the Shokaku class carriers (the Shokaku and Zuikaku) were CVs, the other two were CVLs. The US outnumbered Japan 334 to 246 in aircraft.

IF Japan had sunk then all and Japan had lost none, the US would have two CVs (Wasp and Saratoga) to Japan's 6--four CVs and two CVLs (Akagi, Kaga, Soryu, Hiryu, Shokaku, Zuikaku and the Ryujo and Zuiho). Japan would outnumber the US 561 to 164 in aircraft.

But it wouldn't matter. In 1942 the US built 18 carriers to Japan's 4, in 1943 65 to Japan's 2, in 1944, 45 to Japan's 5 and in 1945 13 to Japan's zero (and the US could have built even more but ramped down carrier production as it knew it had won the war and they wouldn't be needed). By the end of the war it had built 6 times the number of aircraft and eight times the number of carriers and on and on.

Where are you getting this 4:1 advantage for Japan in carrier forces? Not ever. Pre-Midway US had 5 CVs to Japan's 6 and Japan had two CVLs to the US' zero. After Midway, it was 4 CVs to Japan's 2 CVs and 2 CVLs. Or 3 CVs if you don't want to count the USS Wasp which was in the Atlantic.






Flagwaver
I am quite aware of his desire to go east, but that doesn't mean he wouldn't have gone west before going into the USSR either. He made it clear in the second book that German's goal was world domination--the final battle coming in 1980 between the combined forces of greater Germany and the British Empire and the United States in 1980, a war the US would lose.

Correction
Japan would have had 6 CVS and 2 CVLS, if it had lost none at Midway.


Great Article
Victor Davis Hanson is right. This was a great article. The on only problem I see, is when he calls pat buchanan a conservative. I have believed pat buchanan a conservative since the early 90's. Today he is just a nuttier, and his new book proves it. Why he get time in Townhall is beyond me.


The Lesson History Teaches Today
"The mistake instead was not occupying all of imperial Germany after the first war in 1918-19. That way, the Allies would have demonstrated to the German people that their army was never "stabbed in the back" at home, as the Nazis later alleged, but instead defeated by an Allied army that was willing to stay on to foster German constitutional government and its reintegration within Europe. The Allies later did occupy Germany after World War II -- and 60 years without war have followed."

The above passage illustrates the most crucial lesson which history teaches vis-a-vis the Iraq war: premature withdrawal of American and coaltion troops and failure to confront Iran in the next 2 years will be an historical, if no apocolyptic, disaster.


great article because it reminds us...

...of the lib/lefty tendency of revisionism.

Thank you, Dr Hanson.

Hitler was the
second appearance in human form of the Antichrist. Clinton was the third.

Astute historical comments by many,
and the bottom line is unmistakeable. If a nation is going to go to war, then it had best be an all out action that renders the opponent powerless. Politically correct wars are always a problem.

That lesson applies to Iraq today, because we didn't finish the job the first time, and it applies to Iran if we wind up there. That effort should totally destroy every air, naval, and ground forces base from the air, and also eliminate any nuclear facilities.

If Iran believed for one minute that we WOULD NOT DO THAT, then they might actually pass off nuclear weapons to Al Qeada (see Dr. Sowell's article today). They will not do that.

If they are really crazy however, they will bomb Israel, and that will be the end of the Midlle East and its jihadis for quite a while. Oil will be $500+ a barrel when you could get it, but at least we would begin to drill here at home, expand nuclear power plants, and eventually recover.


what about the rest
i made a typo. sorry of course that negates every other part of my thread doesnt it.. i was referring to the nonsense that we have not ever done what i proved we did in my thread. nothing to say about that? i could have typed 2008 and the arguement would ahve been as valid, except to someone who has no real answer to it. stop talking nonsense. if you have something improtant to say about what i wrote say it. dont talk about typos which you know are typos.

wACKEY
Yes they kill mostly civilians most of the time but these cowardly, as yo called them, ragheads have caused the death of more that 3,000 of our brave military persons and many others of these brave persons will bear the scars from their ambuses nd bubbytraps.

My friends from Vietnam understand what it is to have to kill a child who is manning a 50 cal. rifle or is tossing granades. They know what it is to a child or a mother crying for help only to get the G I 's close enough to denoate a bomb that kills herself and her child.

threepines

threepines
do they alo understand what its like to kill a 2 year old who is not hlding a weqapon? of course hemight be hiding one, but then its hard to tell when you are bombing from 35000 feet. you people never really think about the consequences of your actions , every baby is a baby to a parent . kill him and you kill a part of that parent.
what eventually , happens is what M albright was referring to in an interview on 60 minutes. the intervier asked" (paraphrase... madame albright are you aware that our blockade and embago of iraq between the wars resulted in the direct deaths of approximateklt 60,000 children fromstarvation and lack of medical supplies. her answer yes i am aware of that figuere. its a terrible thing but it is worth the cost.' see her autobiography where she confirms this. is this what you mean when you are talking about armed children

WMD
Actually, the allies did find a WMD program the Germans had underway. We just destroyed the program before it could become capable. In fact, the German plans to build an A-Bomb were wrong according to how it was eventually constructed. But they did do a lot of the initial groundwork & much of the detail generation that led to the bomb.
It is ironic that back then intelligence & leaders knew they had to stop the Nazi's from developing their A-Bomb, but we today seem incapable of deciding how to or even if we should deal with a rogue nation with designs to destroy other nations & America (recent Iranian Presidential discussions w/ Japanese called for talks to plan for the world w/o America).
One day some will learn that only through our strength have we preserved our freedom.

Buchanan is the Arm Chair QB
Steve of Charlotte is right .
Buchanan has always had a isolationist agenda and not just on war .
OLD BUCKY BOY would like to build a tall wall around America and not let anything or anybody in or out . He hates World Trade but doesn't like Trade Unions in America ? A simple man knows that many CO.s went over Sea's because of arogrant trade unions here and Our Goverenemnt high taxes(35 %second highest in the world ) , red tape and ton's of REGULATIONS .
In truth if Buchanan is a true Conservative then Ronald Reagan was a devout Liberal ."Hardly " !
As a former ReCon Marine I often get the feeling Old Bucky Boy is a Pacifist . His idea of War is too fight them when they are in LA , DC or NY City .......It's too late then Europe taught the World .
Fore Buchanan too have trusted Hilter meant no doubt we should have trusted Toe Joe and not used the two "Big Bombs " in Japan .
I bet he sees that we could have sat down with Toe Joe and probably worked things out and with the Dear Leader of N. Korea before he invaded S. Korea as well .
Maybe Bucky boy will be Oboma's peace treaty guy with that Nut case in Iran and we all lived happy happy happy fore ever after .B/S .
Once and awhile Bucky boy really writes somthing very smart like on the Borders and well though out but as soon as he does that he fliped the off switch like on his new book ?
VDH took old Bucky boy behind the Tool shed and whipped his Butt with honest history and common sense !
Buchannan sounds much like John Kerry with "" we can get alone with Commumism"" before the Kennedy Fulbright hearing ...... Ronald Reagan didn't get that memo thank God !
Kerry met the Viet Cong in Paris on his own on a possible peace treaty . General Da Tong laughed at John Kerry in his memo's he said later of their meeting in Paris .
Da Tong called John Kerry a Fool as would have Hitler called Bucky Boy .

mrcmrc
You know you don't change from mrbmrb.In fact I'd say you just get worse. I have never heard one thing negative out of you about the enemy unless it's to cut the U.S. down some more. If you are so ashamed of our country then don't let the door hit you in the butt when you leave! this country has done more good around the globe than any other country in the world. Yes they hit some pitfalls along the way and did some things they didn't feel real good about that were unavoidable. But in the end, the world was usually a better place because of it, so go spout your Anti-American bull crap somewhere else.

For mrcmrc
"War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself." -- John Stuart Mill

That pretty much says it all...

The Bad War?
I am old enough to remember what happened in the USA before and during WWII. There was an outspoken Catholic Priest named Father Coughlin who hated Roosevelt, didn't think that Hitler was a bad guy, and opposed any help to Great Britain or any Anti Nazi reportage. His rant was the same as Nazi propaganda aimed at the USA...that it was the Jews who were pushing the USA into an unecessary war with Hitler.
Had Pat Buchanan been active in those years he would have been a follower of Father Coughlin. Indeed, realizing that Buchanan is a Father Coughlinite allows me to predict Buchanan's views on world events
Buchanan now has Saudi Arabia to admire, instead of Hitler.
I am a WWII era veteran, and I detest Buchanan's book. World War II was a necessary, war and a just war for survival of Western Civilization.

SNAFU &historian
Thanks form the back-up, it's good to know there are still some of us that think that this great country and our freedoms are worth fighting for. If you recieve something for nothing, it has no real value to you. work or fight for it and it is priceless.

ReCon-USMC
"...we should have trusted Toe Joe and not used the two "Big Bombs " in Japan .
I bet he sees that we could have sat down with Toe Joe and probably worked things out and with the Dear Leader of N. Korea before he invaded S. Korea as well."

When the atomic bombs were dropped, Hideki Tojo was no longer the prime minister. He was forced to resign in July 1944 after the Americans took Saipan and in August of 1945 was in retirement and seclusion.

As for Kim Il-sung's invasion of the ROK, well, that was greatly a result of the US policy of not selling weapons to Rhee's regime so it could defend itself (tanks, heavy guns, etc) and the statement by the Secretary of State in January of 1950 which stated that neither Taiwan or the ROK was part of the US defensive interests in NE Asia--which gave Kim the green light to invade.

Oh the term "dear leader" refers to Kim Jong-il, not Kim Il-sung who was the one who lead the DPRK on June 25, 1950 when the war began. He was and is known as "the great leader."

Oh and of course, it is Tojo, not To Joe.

Glad I could clear this up for you.







Churchill Timeline
Is it just me, or am I missing something?

Buchanon rails against Churchill being mean to Hitler in 1939. But Churchill wasn't PM until 1940.

This is a little reminiscent of JFKerry in Cambodia in 1968 on Nixon's orders.


WWII Apologists
Hanson mentioning that some people thought the bombing of Germany was a war crime rings a bell. There was a Catholic Bishop from Detroit who thought the same thing. It explains a lot about the conditions in Detroit. Strong church leaders can keep a city from going south. Apparently there has been no such leadership in the Detroit area.
Lifeline

Quoting Sherman?
Sherman is a proven liar in his reports and writings of his campaigns, mentally unstable, a scoundrel, and his "modern war" tactics ushered in an era of mass murder of civillians that heretofore had been minimal in war. He resorted to warfare on civillians only after his mediocre battlefield performances didn't work. He only rarely lacked a 2-1 advantage in numbers over his enemies but took long periods to achieve his goals. His greatest triumph, taking Atlanta before the 1864 elections, happened only because of Confederate tactics that ignored the value of holding on till then. I don't think he's the guy you want to be quoting to make a point. Talk about a man needing historical re-addressing!

Churchill's Germanophobia
In Pat Buchanan's fascinating, thought provoking book, "Churchill, Hitler and the Unnecessary War" there is a comment that Churchill made to a visiting American circa 1937 that gives an indication of where he was coming from. Churchill reportedly blurted out, "The Germans are getting too strong again. We'll have to smash them."
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.