Skip to comments.We're being dragged into a new Cold War by a puffed-up bullfrog (and I don't mean President Putin)
Posted on 03/23/2014 3:35:36 PM PDT by shepardspie33
Stupidity and ignorance rule the world. The trouble is that the stupid and the ignorant think that they are clever and well-informed.
Take Mrs Hillary Clinton, next President of the United States and former chief of American foreign policy. She has directly compared Russias Vladimir Putin to Hitler. And she has compared events in Crimea to the Czech crisis of 1938.
Dozens of other politicians and grandiose journalists are currently doing the same.
Its the one thing they think they know about history that Britains pathetic Neville Chamberlain didnt stand up to evil Adolf Hitler in 1938 at Munich over Czechoslovakia, so making Hitler believe that he could take over the world. And that the brave Winston Churchill then saved the world.
Almost no part of this legend is true. Even those bits that are true are misleading, with one exception. Hitler was certainly evil. But so was Stalin, the communist mass-murderer who ended up as our main ally in the fight against Hitler.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
Guess it depends on what the meaning of "we" is.
The French army at the time was sizable and well equipped.
And the English navy was second to none.
You're kidding me right?
I’m not too sold on the 1938/Hitler analogy myself.
Plus, were a new Cold War dichotomy to arise, I don’t necessarily see America holding the same moral authority. With American government devolving into a rather lawless, third-world statism, and American culture descending into a mix of socialism, dope, homosex and all-around depravity, it makes for a somewhat different dynamic.
That is correct.
I think the biggest dynamic is the fact that Obama has completely alienated the military. I don't see a dispirited military going all in to follow a dishonest, disrespectful, commander in chief that stands for the opposite of what the military represents.
The 1980’s called, they ask if you want their foreign policy back, and that you are on the wrong side of history!
WWII was a product of WWI. Germany was divided up in pieces, forced to pay heavy reparations that finished sometime in the 2000s. The stock market crash in 1929 forced super hyper inflation on Germany. 1 deutsch mark was virtually worthless. WWI was fought over Lebensrum in part.
Hitler was a fascist through and through. He was a parasite whom lived off the failures and fostered on Germany the greatest fraud. He promised the 1000 year reich. a superior race. killed off political enemies, mentally deformed, developmentally disabled, feeble elderly, gypsies, jews, homosexuals and christian pastors. In the end the third reich did not last long.
Hitler took back German Lands over German Nationalism that was started as early as 1808.
Putin is only taking back the parts of Russia that were annexed as a a part of WWII, and when perostroika came to fruition, these nation states were granted independence. Look at Western Europe,deep in debt, homosexuality is rampant, the christian church is dead, nation states are in economic decline. So Putin desires a buffer between Western Europe and the Russian motherland. Russia will probably isolate itself from Western Europe but will make inroads into the instability of the Middle East. Its partnership with iran and Syria will come to fruitition. it will com to these countries aid, but its motive - dominance in the middle east.
Child care actually means child neglect.
I'm hoping that was sarcasm. and from the overall tone of it, it probably was. Whether Hitler would have won if the world had gone to war in 1938, is certainly debatable and I am not expert enough to even offer and opinion.
Herself, Madame Benghazi, the Cold & Joyless, may be suffering from diminished mental capacity. Not that that would be considered in any way a hindrance in the eyes of her supporters, but it does not bode well for the future of that territory once known as “the United States of America”.
This is still Tiddlie-Winks against Molotov cocktails and rocket-propelled grenades. Vladimir Putin almost cannot contain his exuberance at his good fortune to be confronted with the likes of the Current Occupant now squatting in the White Hut, with the probable successor in office showing signs of early senility, and totally inept diplomatic skills on the part of both of them.
This affirmative action “leadership” has gone on for far too long already. What is it going to take to arouse America from its lethargy?
Hitchens is very good at cataloging the effect of Leftism on British culture, but he does have weird views. Hitler most certainly could have been stopped early on as the German army was much weaker than Hitler’s confidence made it look. The German Generals didn’t want war and warned hitler repeatedly that they were too weak to withstand a concerted effort by the Allies.
Peter Hitchens is the good Hitchens.
The article is excuse making for the Russians, because he lived there and likes them.
Russia has “good reason” to fear being surrounded?
We all don’t like being “surrounded” that does not mean you invade your neighbors. Ukraine was no threat to Russia, Putin is grabbing at least parts of it to feather his own nest.
I hardly think you need to invade a country to prevent it from entering into trade deals with Western Europe.
You forgot the threat of national bankruptcy when the Petro-dollar falls. That would be an interesting reversal of roles. (Define irony)
What does it take before an alchoholic walks into an AA meeting? How low do they have to get? I'm guessing hitting the gutter, for both.
Every man for himselffffff!
Hitler's biggest blunder was declaring war on the United States for no cause. No other nation except America could have bombed their war machine or posed enough of a threat to invade France to dilute his forces.
Peter Hitchens is a very strange person with some very odd views. He believes that Britain and France should not have gone to war with Hitler over Poland; that Hitler had no designs on Britain, and that Britain could have come to terms with Hitler following the invasion of Poland. He takes a cynical view of the U.S. relationship with Britain and believes that the U.S. government took advantage of World War II deliberately to weaken Britain. A reformed Trotskyite, he nevertheless continues to view the world through a fog of emotion and second-guessing of historical events. He styles himself a conservative, but of course that’s only in a European sense; amongst American conservatives he’d be considered fairly wish-washy.
I’d love to see him make McCain explode.
This was a super weird article. Apparently, he thinks we half-educated Americans can’t wait to get into a ruckus with Mother Russia. All because the stupid Mrs. Clinton mewls about the now cliché Neville Chamberlain/Munich. And for him to fall back on the the ole “I have friends who are Russian!” is pathetic. Brother Christopher must be rolling his eyes wherever the hell he is. This is a complicated situation and America is certainly in no mood to go to war with creepy Putin.
Remember, he’s a Tory, which is very different from a conservative in the American tradition. I never knew he flirted with Trotskyism, though. Are you sure you aren’t mixing him up with brother Christopher?
When things get slow flog the past extrapolated into a bogus future
Nope. If there had been war in 1938, Germany would have lost. As you said, the French army was formidable. And the main reason Hitler wanted the Sudetenland is that it was a well-fortified mountainous region. If the Czechs hadn't been betrayed, they could have held back the Germans.
And suppose the Poles got involved. They had a decent army as well. Hitler would have been bloodied, and then overthrown by a military coup.
I’ve been following his blog for a couple of years now; he readily admits it. Very interesting participants on the blog; many of them quite intelligent, with well-informed commentary.
In 1938, either Hitler or Stalin could have beaten us, but fortunately for us, they fought each other over who would do it, and it left both of them too weak to finish the job.
neither hitler nor stalin could have beaten us because they were both in Europe.
Only Japan had the Navy to be a threat. They were. Stalin and Hitler were not
Stalin and Hitler were definitely a threat in 1938.
This is a fairly long movie, but it’s a well done historical document, and well worth viewing.
From a purely selfish point of view Britain would have been much better off staying out of WWII, they bankrupted themselves and lost their empire and gained what? Nothing.
There were three Axis powers and in descending order the threat they posed to the British Empire was Japan, a massive threat, Italy, a substantial threat, Germany no real threat at all, yet the Brits put their war effort into precisely the reverse order.
What did the Brits achieve for fighting the war? The Jews of Europe were still murdered and Poland and Czechoslovakia remained occupied by a genocidal totalitarian regime.
If there was no shame in fighting a “Cold War” against the murderous tyrant Stalin post-1945, where would the shame in Britain fighting a similar cold war against the Nazis?
Build up a massive army and air force, use them and the navy to protect the island and let the International Socialists slog it out with the National Socialists. Would the end result have been any different? The Germans and the Russians carve up central and eastern Europe, Germany imposes a German dominated economic union on France and the rest of western Europe, peace eventually prevails.
Meanwhile the Brits can concentrate their forces in Malaya and Hong Kong to fight the Japanese. Tanks, modern fighters and heavy bombers roaring up and down the Malayan peninsula backed up with hundreds of thousands of Australian and Indian troops would have put up bit of a better show defending Singapore than the lightly armed skeleton forces that Churchill was forced to allocate there.
The Brits lost everything in WWII and gained nothing.
Wouldn't have really mattered...Britain declared war on Japan with us...So there went any restrictions we had on arming Britain...eventually the Nazis would have attacked our ships, and we would have had our Casus Belli for going to war with Germany.
In the end, I became a real fan of Christopher Hitchens and have had him autograph many of his books. He was always a gentleman during these book signings - while puffing on cigarettes and chugging vodka to the horror of the Barnes & Noble employees!
If Hitler stayed put in the East, Stalin would have been ready to go on the offensive by 1943-44.
That was what he gained by signing the Non-Aggression Pact, he got that much closer to Germany.. Originally the Generals were upset with the Pact for that very reason. Of course, Hitler beat Stalin to the punch, mainly because France fell so soon, which in retrospect, may have been a blessing in disguise. A long protracted war in France, may have bled all three armies dry, making all of Europe easy pickings for Stalin.
Sorry, but Putin is a hardcore Communist through and through. Now what is true is that weak socialism loses 100% of fights against strong Communists.
And he always had some mighty fine choom
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.