Did Gushing Mika Know Buchanan Criticizes WWII Defense of Poland?

NewsBusters ^ | Mark Finkelstein

[governsleastgovernsbest]

When Mika Brzezinski gushed over Pat Buchanan's knowledge of WWII history today, was she aware that her hero has criticized Britain for coming to the defense of her father's native Poland when Nazi Germany invaded it?

Buchanan has been a member of the Morning Joe panel this week. Much of today's talk has focused, with a Bush-bashing panel of guests, on President Bush's condemnation of appeasement in remarks to the Israeli Knesset. At 8:12 AM ET, the show rolled video from last night's Hardball of Chris Matthews hectoring of radio talk show host Kevin James over the latter's inability to state precisely what it was that Neville Chamberlain did in attempting to appease Adolf Hitler. As I noted here, Chris managed to stumble on some history of his own during that segment, but MJ didn't deign to discuss that embarrassing fact.

Willie Geist turned to Buchanan to answer the question that James couldn't.

View video here.

[governsleastgovernsbest]

[governsleastgovernsbest]

Gushing Mika ping to Today show list.

I encourage people to view Mika’s gushing over Buchanan. It comes 1:50 into the linked video.

[joe fonebone]

pat buchanan is a moron........

[Theodore R.]

I’ve never understood why Britian went to war to free Poland in 1939 but acquiesced to her “communization” in 1945.

[frogjerk]

"Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe to assure the survival and the success of liberty."

John F. Kennedy

[brownsfan]

“pat buchanan is a moron........”

But compared to Mika, he’s a genius.

[Vaquero]

Peace in our Time....straight from cancellor Hitlers mouth.

[brownsfan]

“Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe to assure the survival and the success of liberty.”

John F. Kennedy

Democrats cut of that cloth no longer exist.

[jackv]

What is so hilarious about this is how they are all so defensive about obama being attacked when Bush was more likely talking about Carter.
What doofuses.
They essentially just admitted that obama is an appeaser!!
hahahahaha!

[EDINVA]

if GE still owns NBC/MSNBC, they should pull the plug on MSNBC. It’s absolutely pathetic. I was visiting a patient in hospital last night and the roommate had this show on. It was making me so sick, I thought I’d be admitted next.

[messierhunter]

If a democrat like that were running for the nomination, I dare say they would be viewed by obama and hillary as a DINO traitor.

[messierhunter]

I think Romney said it best. When you throw a rock over a fence, the dog that yelps is the who got hit.

[elhombrelibre]

Does Mika remember WWII? Does her daddy? I think not. I think they’d have been isolationists or appeasers of some sort. They lack guts and the will to defend our way of life even in their academic and studio environments. They are to freedom what parlor socialists were to socialism, all prattle and no practice. Her daddy, as much as Jimmy Carter, gave us Iran’s mad mullahs. That they can still pontificate on our world shows how short memories are and how totally indifferent they are to consequences.

[messierhunter]

“the one who got hit” doh’

[Lee'sGhost]

“was she aware that her hero has criticized Britain for coming to the defense of her father’s native Poland when Nazi Germany invaded it?”

That’s just too damn good.

BTW, been awhile since I said it.... great job.

Thanks.

[governsleastgovernsbest]

Many thanks, LG. Incredible stuff!

[CT]

Just started watching ‘Winds of War,’ the series by Herman Wouk. It starts out in Europe and the way the Nazis invaded Poland. A true classic (Robert Michum is a central characted as Naval Attache in Germany). Far better than any of the crap they try and pass off as TV entertainment these days. Got series from Netflix.

[joe fonebone]

and that is truly sad........

[elhombrelibre]

Mika proves that just as today there are many Liberal Jews who are self-hating and willing to vote for Obama even as he’d give away everything to the mad mullahs in Iran who promise to destroy Israel, ther are also self-hating Polish Catholics who’d rather be hip than learn from history. They’d rather vote for a nutjob like Obama than call him the weak coward he is for seeking the easy cheap praise from America’s slob intelligentsia. Facing America’s enemies today will take Churchillian courage. Obama is Chamberlain.

[Dr. Scarpetta]

I was watching this morning show on MSNBC for a while, but I came to my senses and stopped...

[Dr. Scarpetta]

Just started watching ‘Winds of War,’ the series by Herman Wouk.

I remember watching that series many years ago. Some very sad parts...

[rod1]

What’s the primary difference between the present-day Pat Buchanan and Jimmey Carter? Buchanan is an isolationist and prefers to display his idiocy at home.

[bert]

....What’s the primary difference between the present-day Pat Buchanan and Jimmey Carter...

Carter doesn’t have any rabid followers on Free Republic

[Natchez Hawk]

So what’s Finkelstein’s beef?

The US did not defend Poland from Germany, France and Britain did.

Perhaps he would be happier living in one of those countries. Perhaps ‘President’ Bush would as well or maybe he can just stay in the land of milk and honey—he seems to prefer it.

[Enchante]

I'd like to see someone pull Madeline Half-bright into a discussion of the Appeasement Party since her family's country (Czechoslovakia) was torn to pieces by the Nazis acting with Chamberlain's blessing. Will she find a way to defend the weasels of her Demagogic Party? (yes, of course)

Actually, Buchanan's capsule description barely begins to explain how bad Chamberlain's behavior in the "Munich" appeasement fiasco. "Presided over" does not convey how great the betrayal of the Czechs really was or how badly the strategic situation deteriorated because of that. Taking a firm stand over the security and integrity of Czechoslovakia was the "last best chance" to stop Hitler. Instead, Chamberlain forced Hitler's policies on the Czech leaders, totally betraying them and their people, because he foolishly imagined that could be the last piece of appeasement. Of course, since Hitler knew he was dealing with such milquetoast weasels (ala our current Demagogues), Hitler's appetites and aggression only grew. Britain finally drew the line over Poland, but it would have been more feasible (in military and strategic terms) to stop Hitler before he had carved up Czechoslovakia, absorbed their robust armaments production, etc.

"PAT BUCHANAN: He presided over the departure of the Sudetenland from Czechoslovakia to Germany, because the Germans were threatening war over it, and France was allied with Czechoslovakia. Six months later, Czechoslovakia fell apart."

[mewzilla]

Speaking of Mika, what her dad was up to in February....

Adviser to Clinton Meets With President of Syria

Fruit didn't fall far from the tree, eh?

[HardStarboard]

>>>I’ve never understood why Britian went to war to free Poland in 1939 but acquiesced to her “communization” in 1945.<<<

Britain and the United States were still in he euphoria of the end of WWII. No one, except maybe Winston Churchill, was of a mind to stop Russia from its expansion over Eastern Europe smaller countries.

Britain was broke and, without support from the United States, was unable and unwilling to stop the communist expansion. Right after Victory in europe, American troops were being pulled out of Europe to fight in the Pacific. No one wanted to argue with Russia - who Truman wanted to declare war on Japan.

The seeds for Russia's expansionism were laid in the Yalta meeting of the "Big Three" where Roosevelt, old, sick and tired, caved to virtually all of Stalin's demands on "diveying up" the spoils of war.

Poland was determined as belonging to be in Russia's "sphere of influence", primarily because the Russian Army held all its territory.

That was my take from memory (I was ten at the time).....I just read Wikipedia's write up (Google "Yalta" "Poland"). I'm sort of close - Wiki has more details!

[Enchante]

ALSO, just as bad or worse, Pat's phrase "six month's later Czechoslovakia fell apart" is a PREPOSTEROUS mis-description of what actually happened..... six months later Hitler INVADED the remainder of Czechoslovakia, the crippled country that was supposed to have been secured by the dismemberment that Chamberlain and Daladier had so helpfully arranged at Munich. Buchanan knows some Junior High School history, perhaps, but only enough to be dangerous and misleading.

"The Sudetenland was occupied by Germany between October 1 and October 10, 1938. This unification with the Third Reich was followed by the flight or expulsion of most of the region's Czech population to areas remaining within Czechoslovakia. The remaining parts of Czechoslovakia were subsequently invaded and annexed by Germany in March 1939."

[7thson]

They didn’t back then either. During the Bay of Pigs fiasco, JFK showed his true colors then. No price, no burdan, no hardship, no support, and liberty died in Cuba.

[7thson]

Also, don’t forget that FDR had Alger Hiss as an advisor during that Yalta meeting.

[frogjerk]

Perhaps ‘President’ Bush would as well or maybe he can just stay in the land of milk and honey—he seems to prefer it.

I find your post interesting. Why do you put President in quotes?

[frogjerk]

Obama is Chamberlain

Stolen for my new tagline.

[Ron Jeremy]

Britain and the United States were still in he euphoria of the end of WWII. No one, except maybe Winston Churchill, was of a mind to stop Russia from its expansion over Eastern Europe smaller countries.

Plus: 1. The Russians were already there. 2. The State Department was full of communists.

[Ron Jeremy]

When Mika Brzezinski gushed over Pat Buchanan's knowledge of WWII history today, was she aware that her hero has criticized Britain for coming to the defense of her father's native Poland when Nazi Germany invaded it?

What is Pat's position on this? One could certainly make the case that it is not worthwhile making alliances that you have no intention of following through with.

[jim_trent]

> “The US did not defend Poland from Germany, France and Britain did.”

I am trying to remember what France and Britain did for Poland in 1939. As I remember reading, they declared war, but did nothing else. Britain did send men and material to France, but as far as I know, they did not even attempt to send anything to Poland. Maybe you can enlighten me.

[monday]

“I’ve never understood why Britian went to war to free Poland in 1939 but acquiesced to her “communization” in 1945.”

and in the end it did the Poles no good anyway. Poland was occupied by the Nazi's , then by the Soviets with allied approval no less. Whats the point of intervening in a conflict that you don't have the power to change the outcome of anyway? Not that it wasn't the right thing to do, but the timing could have been better, like before the Nazi's attacked instead of after. Then it might have meant something.

[Anti-Bubba182]

Mika Brzezinski should be permanent Britney Spears reporter wearing a push up bra and calling Joe Scarborough “Daddy”.

[elhombrelibre]

But even more interesting to see than Halfwit's views is what Obama’s views are on these subjects. What does he think about these historic events and what does he think are the lessons we should apply, I'd say.

[Enchante]

"Whats the point of intervening in a conflict that you don't have the power to change the outcome of anyway?"

It's true that France and Britain did not have the means to directly defend Poland in 1939, or even to get appreciable military aid there in an effective way, BUT they could have crushed Hitler's minimal forces on the western front and wrecked Hitler's regime (well France mainly since Britain did not have major land forces, plus British planes) . It would not have stopped the invasion of Poland that was over in a matter of weeks, but France and Britain could have wrecked Hitler's regime before he went any further. Instead, they postured with a declaration of war for the "honor" of standing by Poland while doing nothing appreciable to help. That's why 1939-40 on the western front was known as the "phony war" (until things really got going with Nazi invasions in the west).

The French generals were (not surprisingly) consumed with fears of another WWI situation in the west and massive casualties, but in reality Hitler had only miniscule forces in the west due to deployments in the east. He took a big gamble on the reluctance of the French to engage, because he knew what was in their newspapers and in their politicians' minds.

[Natchez Hawk]

Sure they declared war against Germany as an ally of Poland. Of course, they didn’t actually “defend” Poland, France was invaded and the British were driven off the Continent.

If Finkelstein, Bush or whomever, sees this as a template for world diplomacy, we have got problems.

[Clemenza]

Churchill famously gave Poland to Uncle Joe on a dinner napkin because it was the only way he believed he could prevent the Soviet Union from pushing farther west. As a weakened country whose republic failed to last between the wars, Churchill believed that allowing Stalin to stabilize the “failed states” of eastern europe would serve both to satiate Soviet demands, and provide order in that part of the world.

[Clemenza]

Sorry to say, but Churchill felt pressured to cut a deal with Uncle Joe, and acquiesced to eventual Soviet domination of eastern Europe (see my comments, above). His "iron curtain" speech came later.

There was only so much leverage that Churchill could apply considering the fact that the Soviet Army was in full possession of eastern Europe by 1945. Unless he wanted to risk a third world war, he really had no choice but to make those concessions.

[Theodore R.]

It’s possible Oprah’s Obama has never heard of Chamberlain.

[rmlew]

Britain did not go to war to free Poland. It went to war wehen a country with a mutual defense treaty was attacked.

The British did not acquiece so much as face reality. Poland, which had been invaded by the USSR in 1939, was completely occupied in 1945. Chruchill tried to get guarantees from Stalin, but FDR was a libtard who trusted Uncle Joe.