Second world war unnecessary ?

[serpico]

Before you hammer my karma listen to the interview and and see what you think, Pat Buchanan is a former nixon speech writer, he makes quite a persuasive argument that the second world war was completely unnecessary and came about not because of Hitlers ambitions of world domination but rather a series of blunders by the British.

Part 1

part 2

part 3

part 4

part5

[robin1302]

There's like nearly an hour's there! Bit too much for me to watch through it all!

[Birchesheadpotter]

If you look hard enough into any Historical event, you'll find things that question the actual reason behind it.

To me he just sounds like a smart-arse yank, trying to make a name for himself The amount of books he's written also just stinks of desparation.

[santy]

Bit of a ludicrous statement really, he wanted to invade france, poland, russia etc etc. I've studied the build up from the end of WWI to WWII and Hitler was enamoured by the whole ideals of what Germany wanted to become during WWI and before-hand (which was in turn Germany wanting an empire like that of Britains) but from all accounts and all documentation hitler didn't want the war to end and was disappointed with it which led to the eventual blame of the jews who were accused of ending WWI.

As for the series of 'blunders' perhaps in 1905 over the morrocan issues had we just gone and started a war with germany then, added them to our empire and battered the hell out of them when we could have with ease, WWI and WWII would never have happened so from a perspective neither wars were really necessary.

However, Germany knew they couldnt fight a decent war at that time and backed down over it when Britain stepped in.

You could then go even further back, to when von bismarck was the leader of Germanys expansion and army, basically the guy who forged germany from prussia and the surrounding states - had he not been thrown out in favour of a more war-preparation replacement, WWI probably wouldn't have happened that way and hitler never would have come to be.

Through causality and analysing everything, you could probably say if some guy hadn't killed a sheep 1000 years ago WWII would never have happened. It's a pretty foolish stance for this guy to take up, in hindsight you can always say who should have done what but still can't guarantee what would have been the outcomes.

[stokey-pokey pudding and pie]

as far as im concerned the motivation behind wwII was as in most wars, economical. Hitler was put in power by the ruling class in germany after an economic crash and a couple of mass uprisings by the working class - they chose the 'lesser evil', from their point of view, of fascism. The british ruling class were not so worried about all this, churchill was busy squashing his own mini uprising of miners at the time. It wasn't until germany invaded poland that the french and the british intervened - why?

imo because hitler became uncontrollable and in the invasion of poland told ruling classes of france and britain that their capital wasn't any safer than polands was, they forced the hands of the governments in britain and french(chamberlain and clemencau i think) to go to war to protect their interests.

they used nationalism and even anti-fascist propaganda(ironic given many government ministers support for hitler and Mussolini to convince the pubic of the need for war - cue the working class dying whilst the people who sent them to war in the first place sitting well behind the trenches ensuring their property and capital remained their own.

[serpico]

When you all get the time, listen to the interview in full. I don't think he;s going to change peoples minds, we have all been brainwashed into thinking it was "the good war" by conventional history books, but even Churchill himself said that it was an unnecessary war.

[ParaPsych]

I read a book about the build up a few years ago, forgotten much of it now, but I think it said if we had intervened sooner (around about the time they invaded the Czechoslavkia maybe?) we would have had it won in a jiffy. So I guess technically it was avoidable on our part.

I'm pretty sure something had to be started, it was just a matter of when.

[santy]

You can say any and every conflict in the history of man is unavoidable, right up until the last moment for both sides there is a choice - only an idiot would say there is one cause for something like a war, or even one general thing, any historian will tell you that the foundations of WWII go back to the 1800's as you can see the pattern emerging, the conditions arising that all bring it to fruition, thats a long period in time to just finally make one group or factor accountable for.

Eventually there will be another world war over something, resources, nuclear warheads etc etc it will be avoidable quite easily, but only where it was easily avoidable will be visible after it has occured.

[lordeffinghamhunt]

This country would be much better off if Hitler had of won the war. Only my opinion mind.

[OldStokie]

Of course it was avoidable but it's bollox that it was unnecessary. It was neccesary given the history that led up to it. Politicians got many things wrong which was the reason it happened. Isn't that why all wars happen? Of course, politicians don't pay the inevitable price of war...the millions of dead and wounded ordinary folk who they use as pawns and who are quite happy to toddle along in peace just so long as they've got a roof over their head and some bread on the table.

It could be argued that the second world war has had massive benefits too. Peace in Europe for 63 years being the greatest one.

OS.

[serpico]

Jul 28, 2008 15:42:47 GMT OldStokie said:

It could be argued that the second world war has had massive benefits too.

OS.

Well we lost our empire, perhaps that was beneficial in the long run.

[Deleted]

Fuck me, this another conspiracy theory Serps?

Christ on a bike.

Do you think The X-Files is real?

[Deleted]

Jul 28, 2008 15:54:59 GMT whydelilah said:

Fuck me, this another conspiracy theory Serps?

Christ on a bike.

Do you think The X-Files is real?

The X-Files is real otherwise, Tom Jones would not have been involved in a song that made reference to the lead characters!

FACT!

[serpico]

Jul 28, 2008 15:54:59 GMT whydelilah said:

Fuck me, this another conspiracy theory Serps?

Christ on a bike.

Do you think The X-Files is real?

I suppose calling me a conspiracy theorist (as you do in every one of my posts bar none) is easier than thinking, by the way, I have not even said I'm in agreement with him, but i thought i would share it to see what people thought , but to call something a "conspiracy theory" just because it challenges conventional wisdom is naive, and it doesn't even make sense in this case.

[OldStokie]

Well we lost our empire, perhaps that was beneficial in the long run.

To whom? Has it been beneficial to the Indian sub-continent which is now so divided and has become a hot bed of radicals; spawning the scum that kill innocents at will? Has it been beneficial to the citizens of Zimbabwe? It could be argued that the loss of British colonialism has led, in many places, to anarchy and outright racism. IMHO, only Nelson Mandela had the right credentials for ousting colonialism. The rest are pretty much despots. So, which is best? An orderly colony or a 'free' despotic regime?

OS.

[santy]

Not to mention america, look at how messed up they have become since being free of our empire, how many years from getting their indeendance before they had a civil war? lol

[serpico]

Jul 28, 2008 17:01:53 GMT OldStokie said:

Well we lost our empire, perhaps that was beneficial in the long run.

To whom? Has it been beneficial to the Indian sub-continent which is now so divided and has become a hot bed of radicals; spawning the scum that kill innocents at will? Has it been beneficial to the citizens of Zimbabwe? It could be argued that the loss of British colonialism has led, in many places, to anarchy and outright racism. IMHO, only Nelson Mandela had the right credentials for ousting colonialism. The rest are pretty much despots. So, which is best? An orderly colony or a 'free' despotic regime?

OS.

Can there not be an in-between ? why does the choice have to be either a colony or a despot ? also how can we grandstand about Zimbabwe ? our government helped put Robert Mugabe in power, as we did with Saddam, the Shah and most of the other ridiculously brutal leaders.

America has inherited our empire, and are now making the same mistakes every empire in history has with hubris and overreaching, although that isn't what will bring the American empire down, the impending financial crisis probably will, as it did the soviet union.

[Willie Nelson]

Yep.

Hitler was misunderstood, it was regime change so we could selfishly control the worlds supply of bratwurst and the media whipping up a fear of extremist mullet wearing.

The Jews invented the holocaust so they could steal Palestines oranges and in my opinion deserved it.

If National Socialism had been allowed to prevail we would all live in a wunderbar multi ethnic utopia where wars are fought with flowers and poetry.

Take off your tin foil hat and stop being such a muppet.

edit:

just watching the video if you believe that you are not well read enough to even argue. It is in places factually incorrect and at best twists facts to try and prove point and half truths. Still it sells books to the gullible.

[serpico]

Jul 28, 2008 17:49:58 GMT Willie Nelson said:

Yep.

Hitler was misunderstood, it was regime change so we could selfishly control the worlds supply of bratwurst and the media whipping up a fear of extremist mullet wearing.

The Jews invented the holocaust so they could steal Palestines oranges and in my opinion deserved it.

If National Socialism had been allowed to prevail we would all live in a wunderbar multi ethnic utopia where wars are fought with flowers and poetry.

Take off your tin foil hat and stop being such a muppet.

edit:

just watching the video if you believe that you are not well read enough to even argue. It is in places factually incorrect and at best twists facts to try and prove point and half truths. Still it sells books to the gullible.

It's interesting that you rubbished it before even listening to it, quite an admission, at least you're honest though, your Pavlovian conditioning must have kicked in.

Tin foil hat wearer ?

[Willie Nelson]

No i simply read,

""nixon"" speech writer, he makes quite a persuasive argument that the second world war was completely unnecessary and came about not because of Hitlers ambitions of world domination but rather a series of blunders by the British.

which is not true.

then watched the video and was surprised by how much rubbish he talked to prove his tenuous point.


Nope not a tin hat, premature senile dementia

[Mr_DaftBurger]

Jul 28, 2008 14:25:23 GMT santy said:

Eventually there will be another world war over something, resources, nuclear warheads etc etc it will be avoidable quite easily, but only where it was easily avoidable will be visible after it has occured.

Eventually? It's already started! And after it's really kicked in will there be anyone left to see? (Except Serpico )

[mumf14]

Serpico.....Before I add my two penneth worth...What are your views on your own question.?

Surely this is a wind-up.?

If you want to use a speech writer from the 'Water gate' era as an informed authority on such matters then you really are on very dodgy ground here.

FFS....Don't follow Spiderman...You are much cleverer than he will ever be.!!

[JetBlack]

Santy reply#7 I think the next war will probably be fought over oil/food/Isreal.

[serpico]

Jul 28, 2008 23:36:41 GMT @mumf14 said:

Serpico.....Before I add my two penneth worth...What are your views on your own question.?

Surely this is a wind-up.?

If you want to use a speech writer from the 'Water gate' era as an informed authority on such matters then you really are on very dodgy ground here.

FFS....Don't follow Spiderman...You are much cleverer than he will ever be.!!

It's not a wind up, and some of the very top British historians actually agree with the author, i personally don't pretend to know enough about world war two to speak with authority, but i certainly wouldn't dismiss what he has to say out of hand, and I'm open to listening to people who challenge conventional wisdom, most of us have been taught from a very early age that it was a war against a man hell bend on world domination, Churchill once said that "history will be kind to me, because i intend to write it", and he has done.

Also i don't think you can dismiss someone because he was a speech writer for Nixon, thats guilt by association and certainly shouldn't be used against him as a reason to dismiss his work, as i say, some of the top British Historians actually agree with him, i think you need to look at this objectively.

I don't pretend to know enough about ww2, and I'm sure their are people here who know more than me, but i think it's important to listen to people who challenge conventional wisdom.

I've not actually read the book but it's supposedly very well sourced with over 300+ footnotes.

Listen to the interview before writing him off though, it's interesting even if you don't agree with him.

[Time4aPINT]

Listened to the first 10 mins and got seriously bored of it. Pat Buchanan only seems able to see events from an American viewpoint.

[craig67]

Serpico,some of the points may be valied,but the crux of the arguement must surely be that it has now passed(it is history)and we cannot change it;only learn from it?
It is always easy to be wise after the event,hence why historians can make fortunes on their opinions.Unfortunately most weren't there at the time and hindsight is a great leveller.

[Willie Nelson]

In Serpico's defence

My now not drunk opinion.

I just don't think he is completely honest with what he says and how he says it. I think Hitler was more of an opportunist and not as predictable as this guy seems to think.

He certainly read this but I dont think it can be taken as set in stone.

www.crusader.net/texts/mk/mkv2ch14.html

[PotteringThrough]

Of course it was unneccessary, its not like he wanted to kill all of those Jewish people is it????

[sidibegoalmachine]

christ lets hope theres no world war 3 with nuclear weapons , theyll be no stoke talk if it does happen.

[serpico]

Jul 29, 2008 12:06:35 GMT PotteringThrough said:

Of course it was unneccessary, its not like he wanted to kill all of those Jewish people is it????

Thats part of the argument, no war guarantee to poland = no war, no war = no final solution/holocaust.