Pajamas Media

96 Comments

1. Roger L. Simon » Israel’s conundrum:

[...] Speaking of Iran, on PJM this morning, Sheryl has an absolutely mind-blowing report on a jaw-dropping prevarication by that “great [...]

Jul 1, 2008 - 8:23 am 2. Tom A:

“Facts are facts. Ideology blinds people. We forget that at our own peril.”

And what “facts”, pray tell, lead you to your outrageous attribution to Iran of “a burning ambition to exterminate *the Jews*” (my emphasis added)?

*Israel* must be able to be disagreed with as a political entity without bringing on the intellectually dishonest equating of this with National Socialism’s desire for genocide.

Cartoonishly demonizing Iran is not going to move conditions in the region in a positive direction for any of the players.

Jul 1, 2008 - 8:32 am 3. Snippet:

Iran doesn’t want a CONVENTIONAL war with an enemy that would make quick work of the Iranian armed forces in any engagement that pitted the uniformed, “legitimate” military forces of both sides against each other in the field of battle.

What they want is to extend the Islamism. If they could do that without war, I’m sure they’d be perfectly happy. If they could do it using gentle persuasion delivered in soothing, carefully modulated tones, I’m sure that would be Allah-rific.

So, Pat Buchanan is right. They don’t want war.

Jul 1, 2008 - 8:56 am 4. Joel:

“The left is currently the home of some of the worst forms of cultural relativism, but let us not forget that the right houses its own equally dangerous revisionist historians who attempt to use their false history to influence current events.”
Pat Buchenwald is not a Conservative or a Republican. He is a Falangist and he makes common cause with the Left. his unreadable magazine (wrongly named “The American Conservative”) reads like the neo-Stalinist “The Nation”

Jul 1, 2008 - 8:57 am 5. Joel:

Tom A
How many quotes of Iraniann intentions to exterminate the Jews of Israel do you need? Are you stupid or just an ideologue?

Jul 1, 2008 - 8:59 am 6. Joanna:

Tom A: The article wasn’t talking about disagreeing with Israel. The article was talking about Ahmadinejad’s constant promises to literally wipe the country off the map.

Ass.

Jul 1, 2008 - 9:18 am 7. JOHN:

Tom A
HUH, WHERE HAVE YOU BEEN?

Jul 1, 2008 - 9:33 am 8. Colette:

Snippet, the point of the post was that Buchanan somehow conveniently FORGOT about the Iran/Iraq war. If you get major facts wrong, you are not right. You are wrong. He is discredited.

Jul 1, 2008 - 10:13 am 9. NukemHill:

*Israel* must be able to be disagreed with as a political entity without bringing on the intellectually dishonest equating of this with National Socialism’s desire for genocide.

The fact of the matter is, people who support Israel’s right to exist don’t collapse these two arguments. We actually do believe in a healthy, sometimes opposing, argument over the politics surrounding Israel. We don’t automatically assume that anyone disappointed with, or in disagreement with, decisions made by or about Israel, is some sort of demonic anti-semite or anti-zionist.

It is people like you, unwilling to have a straight conversation about the topic, who accuse us of accusing you of anti-semitism. It’s a delightfully beautiful sleight-of-hand. Only, it’s a rather ugly and disgusting rhetorical tactic.

You, and your ilk, are the one guilty of intellectual dishonesty. Only, you’ll never confess to it. You’re too much of a coward.

Jul 1, 2008 - 10:15 am 10. Snippet:

Colette,

I understand that the Iran/Iraq war blindspot was the main point of the post.

I was just adding my own unsolicited supplement.

Iran was behind the bombing that killed 200+ marines in Lebanon. Killing American soldiers seems somewhat war-ish to me.

Jul 1, 2008 - 10:20 am 11. rrsafety:

I heard him make the comment and I took it to mean that Iran hadn’t started a war. Didn’t Iraq start the Iran-Iraq war?

Jul 1, 2008 - 10:29 am 12. Roy Mustang:

“And what “facts”, pray tell, lead you to your outrageous attribution to Iran of “a burning ambition to exterminate *the Jews*” (my emphasis added)?”

Wow. Almost as good as Obama’s “Don’t Question Our Patriotism” declarations and Wright’s “God Damn America” sermon.

Jul 1, 2008 - 10:30 am 13. Xanthippe:

Tom A: “And what “facts”, pray tell, lead you to your outrageous attribution to Iran of “a burning ambition to exterminate *the Jews*” (my emphasis added)?”

How about the denial of the Holocaust by Ahmadinejad, or his statement “Israel must be wiped off the map” in 2005.

His statement November 29, 2006:
“What have the Zionists done for the American people that the US administration considers itself obliged to blindly support these infamous aggressors? Is it not because they have imposed themselves on a substantial portion of the banking, financial, cultural and media sectors?”
(Letter from Ahmadinejad “to the American people”)

It’s absurd to read this thinking that he’s speaking of Israeli Zionists, or Israeli citizens, and not American Jews. To Ahmadinejad, Jews = Zionists = Jews.

These statements by the leader of Iran are far more than mere disagreement with Israel as a political entity.

Jul 1, 2008 - 10:36 am 14. Don’t think only Lefties are revisionist morons « Buttle’s World:

[...] only Lefties are revisionist morons Filed under: Posts — buttle @ 9:38 They come from all sides of the political [...]

Jul 1, 2008 - 10:38 am 15. David Thomson:

“…but let us not forget that the right houses its own equally dangerous revisionist historians”

Pat Buchanan was long ago excommunicated from center-right media outlets and institutions. He represents only the extreme right. It is outrageous that Fox News keeps inviting him to appear on its shows. Conservatives should protest loudly. Buchanan has been mostly pushed out the door—but that’s not good enough. He needs to be kicked out entirely the rest of the way.

Jul 1, 2008 - 10:39 am 16. jerry:

Nukem…

Ten years ago I came to the conclusion that indeed those who claim to be only anti-Israel and not anti-Semitic are engaging in linguistic games. These merely anti-Israelites are too cowardly to admit their desire to see the Jews in Israel massacred. It doesn’t fit in with their sense of moral superiority to be seen advocating genocide. They lie as much to themselves as they do to their opponents. I actually have some perverse respect for Buchanan. He is an old fashion Nazi-sympathizer and proud of it.

Buchanan is off on more facts then just whether Iran fought a war in the 1980’s. The title of his latest paean to Nazi Germany, “Churchill, Hitler and the Unnecessary War” is a title of error in itself. The book is about the decision to go to war in September, 1939. Churchill was still an angry back bencher with no influence on policy right up to the eve of the war when Chamberlin brought him back into the government as First Lord of the Admiralty. Buchanan attributes Churchill’s quote (the unnecessary war) as supporting his view that Britain should not have gone to war in 1939 when in fact Churchill called the war unnecessary because he believed that forceful action in the mid-1930s would have brought Hitler down.

Jul 1, 2008 - 10:42 am 17. Fred:

Plus there’s the whole question of Iran’s very well known sponsorship of multiple acts of terrorism. Doesn’t that count for anything in the “want a war” category?

Jul 1, 2008 - 10:43 am 18. Anonymous:

Iran’s buring desire to exterminate the Jews is based on their leader’s constant statements of just that sentiment.
So far as Buchanan is concerned the Jews are all powerful and behind every foreign policy move in the Middle East with which he disagarees.
Here’s a thought, if the Jews were so powerful Israel would not be in such terrible danger and we would not be selling arms to the Arabs.

Jul 1, 2008 - 10:47 am 19. Brian Carnell:

Wow, Buchanan is a moron and you actually make him look brilliant in comparison. Buchanan’s point is the Iranians don’t want war. The Iranians didn’t want war with Iraq. Iraq *invaded* Iranian territory in September 1980.

This is like saying the Americans wants war because, well, they attacked Iraq in 1989 and then Afghanistan in 2001.

Jul 1, 2008 - 10:48 am 20. Noga:

“And what “facts”, pray tell, lead you to your outrageous attribution to Iran of “a burning ambition to exterminate the Jews” Tom A asks.

You can start by reading this paper:

WHAT IRANIAN LEADERS REALLY SAY
ABOUT DOING AWAY WITH ISRAEL

http://www.jcpa.org/text/ahmadinejad2-words.pdf

Then this:

Mearsheimer and Walt: Apologists for Ahmadinejad

http://jeffreygoldberg.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/06/mearsheimer_and_walt_apologist.php

And then perhaps you might want to explain to rational readers how they can doubt the Iranian regime’s ambition to exterminate the Jews?

Israel’s Jews account for 40% of the Jewish people currently alive in the world.

Jul 1, 2008 - 10:57 am 21. Jim,MtnViewCA,USA:

PB: “They haven’t fought one since the revolution.”
I may mis-remember but perhaps Pat B. meant that Iran had not _started_ a war since their revolution. I believe that Saddam’s Iraq attacked them.
Iran, using that viewpoint, has “only” sponsored terrorism, not initiated wars.

Jul 1, 2008 - 10:57 am 22. Dave Surls:

‘On the eve of his trip to New York City, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad stood before a banner blaring “Death to America,” showed off his military might and declared his extremist regime will not bow to Western pressure….”

And…

‘Aired on Iran’s Channel 1 and Al-’Alam TV on Jan. 9th, thanks to FrontPageMag, here is some of what Iranian leaders said in front of a backdrop showing the WorldTradeCenter and an American flag in flames, and the crowds response:’

‘”We Express Our Hatred & Disgust to the Center of Evil, the Criminal America… “Death to America”‘

‘Crowd: “Israel is the enemy of Allah.”‘

‘Man: “May the hands of the infidels be chopped off…”‘

Do they intend to kill us all, or do the followers of Khomeni intend to limit themselves to the acts of terrorism they’ve already used against America and Israel? Beats me, but I certainly intend to destroy them before any more American embassies are attacked by Iranian “students”, before any more Americans or Israelis are murdered by Hezbollah terrorists.

The sooner we attack and destroy the Iranian government, the sooner we capture, try and execute the Iranians who have engineered terror attacks against the United States and our allies, and the sooner we wipe out their military capability…the better.

As far as I’m concerned, the United States and Iran have been at war since the Iranians attacked our embassy in Tehran in 1979, and the war will only end when the regime created by Khomeni and his followers is utterly destroyed.

Jul 1, 2008 - 11:07 am 23. Xanthippe:

Brian Carnell: “Buchanan’s point is the Iranians don’t want war.”

How do you reconcile this supposition with the statements of Ahmadinejad, the leader of Iran?

Jul 1, 2008 - 11:08 am 24. wolfwalker:

I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt and believe it was an unconscious omission because to willfully erase the memory of so many hundreds of thousands of dead and wounded is a crime against humanity and history.

Why would Buchanan care about the dead in the Iran-Iraq War? They weren’t white.

Even if you stretch way over backwards to assume that Buchanan meant “Iran hasn’t started a war since the islamic revolution” and thus eliminate the Iran-Iraq War, he’s still wrong. It’s general knowledge that Iran is arming, advising, training, and funding insurgents in Iraq (which is an act of war against Iraq and the United States) and Hezbollah in Lebanon (who are at war with Israel even if Israel tries its hardest to pretend it isn’t at war with them).

Jul 1, 2008 - 11:18 am 25. matt:

There is a wholesale revisionism of WW II history taking place, all of it to serve current political objectives. Niall Ferguson, Buchanan, Nicholson Baker and others are all rewriting history without the distraction of mere facts. Churchill, MacArthur, Roosevelt, Marshall, and others are portrayed as fools or criminals to justify the political objectives of various factions.The evils of both Naziism and Communism are swept under the rug while empire, profit, and petty national interest are peddled by the same Fabian fabulist fellow travelers who provided cover for Stalin, Alger Hiss, and the Rosenbergs…..

Jul 1, 2008 - 11:20 am 26. Jay Manifold:

A few seconds of searching finds that Iran could have easily ended the war in less than a year by accepting a Saudi offer (approved by Iraq) of substantial reparations and complete withdrawal of Iraqi forces. Instead, Iran prolonged the war by six more years and suffered several hundred thousand additional casualties. I note that timely Iranian reconciliation with the US could also have ended the war in a way that removed Saddam Hussein from the scene as well, saving us a great deal of effort later on. The incompetence and cruelty of the Iranian regime was matched only by that of Iraq; portraying the ayatollahs as helpless victims is absurd.

I will add that every American with an IQ above room temperature knows that a de facto state of war between the United States and the Islamic Republic of Iran has existed since November 4, 1979. The only question is how we will choose to finish that war.

Jul 1, 2008 - 11:20 am 27. Kim Zigfeld:

OMG I hate this bastard Buchanan much more than any liberal democrat. How I would love to kick him in the shins!

Jul 1, 2008 - 11:20 am 28. Jay:

what was Iran’s support in the hezbollah/Israel conflict a few years ago, then, Pat? “Asymetrical” and “proxy”, but war all the same.

And whats up with all the Iranian Guard fighting us in Iraq? They want a fight. They just want it on thier terms. We should not let them have it at a time of their choosing.

Jul 1, 2008 - 11:21 am 29. Sheryl:

Jim and others, you are certainly correct that Iraq initiated the war, hoping to take advantage of turmoil in the wake of the revolution. However, after two years during which Iran pounded Iraq, gaining back all the territory they had lost, the Iraqis withdrew and offered a very generous Saudi-backed armistice which included 70 billion dollars of reparations to Iran and all their territory. Not only did the Iranians refuse, they then invaded Iraq and proceeded to wage a bloody war for six more years.
Buchanan’s words were very clear, but even if one does linguistic somersaults to try to interpret them as meaning Iran hadn’t started a war, they would still be deeply misleading.
Anyone is free to listen to the interview and decide for themselves. It’s archived on billoreilly.com.

Jul 1, 2008 - 11:24 am 30. Lawrence S:

“Facts are facts. Ideology blinds people.”

Exhibit A: Tom A.

The theocratic rulers of Iran are obvious about their ambition to exterminate the Jews.

Just listen to what they say and the anti-Jewish propaganda they broadcast.

http://www.memritv.org/

“Facts are facts. Ideology blinds people.”

Jul 1, 2008 - 11:29 am 31. Brian Carnell:

“How do you reconcile this supposition with the statements of Ahmadinejad, the leader of Iran?”

Ahmadinejad is not “the leader” of Iran. Ahmadinejad is the president of Iran; Ali Khamenei is the Supreme Leader of Iran and as such everything Ahmadinejad wants to do has to be approved by Khamenei. Khamenei is the real source of political power in Iran, and commander in chief of the Iranian military. Khamenei publicly repudiated Ahmadinejad’s “Israel should be wiped off the face of the Earth” comment saying “the Islamic Republic has never threatened and will never threaten any country.”

Iran is more like the United States — it would much rather fight through a surrogate such as Hamas then risk confrontation directly. Iran’s continued support for terrorist groups is troubling and something that needs to be dealt with, but that is a separate question from whether Iran is looking to go to war with its neighbors.

Jul 1, 2008 - 11:36 am 32. Big Ben:

Buchanon’s history speaks for itself; He grew up in an America-First family,a follower of Charles Coughlin, the home grown American Fascist and an admirer of Lindburgh. He has made nuanced anti-Semitic statements his entire life. He went bonkers when Jews protested the desecration by the Polish Church of the sacred burail grounds in Auschwitz.He was the erstwhile defender of every famous Nazi the US was seeking to deport.
His vocabulary is replete with catch-phrases about the Jewish vote in Boca and Palm Beach and Miami and the Zionist lobby’s push to entangle the US in the Mid-east.
So, its only natural that Pat would seek to defend a fellow traveler- Ahmandinejad and his junta.

Jul 1, 2008 - 11:48 am 33. GM Roper:

Just out of curiosity, who really thinks Pat Buchannan even matters any more? The man is and has been so out of touch with reality that it is pathetic. Who Cares?

Jul 1, 2008 - 11:48 am 34. Quilly Mammoth:

Frankly I stopped watching, or listening to or reading anything Buchanan has to say. When a person makes the claim that the Holocaust was caused by Churchill that person is either a moron or a bigot. Morons ought to be pitied, but Pukecannon is no moron. Bigots ought to be shunned by a society which desires to promote equality.

Jul 1, 2008 - 11:55 am 35. ajacksonian:

Paying others to wage Private War on your behalf is still waging war, and worse war than any other kind. Iran is unwilling to act by civilized norms of warfare – it does not stand up a proper foreign legion with symbols, rank, accountability and flying under its flag. Instead it arms others surreptitiously to slaughter innocents for the aims of the rulers of Iran. That sort of war, this Private War belongs to the Law of Nature, not the Laws of Man, as those who wage it are hostile to all laws save themselves. They are true outlaws, existing outside all law and the safety of it.

They then fought in a debased way against an evil man who invaded them, and would not accept peace. Instead they recruited children who had no weapons to run across minefields to try and kill a soldier to get a weapon from the other side. If Saddam was evil and debased for the use of chemical weapons, what of those sending children helpless into battle to die? Many Iraqi soldiers had deep problems firing on and killing children, and yet the rulers of Iran sent them in swarms in hopes a few might survive to cause some damage beyond just that on the morale of the enemy.

Pat Buchanan glosses over far too much in his rhetoric including the arming of both sides via grants from the US to Iraq and the arms for hostages deals with Iran. That whole history does not fit in neat and tidy cubbyholes, save that which the expedient use to say less than wholly what had happened, and by that lie by omission. If we cannot learn from that whole history, we will be poorer the second time around as we repeat it again. Perhaps it is time we learn to stop supplying those who oppose us with the means to kill us. That would be a very good start, really, not that any politician will stand up for it anymore.

Jul 1, 2008 - 12:04 pm 36. Joseph McNulty:

The breakdown of the postwar consensus is now nearly complete. The Allies can now be described as being as vicious as the Axis. Winston Churchill, amazingly, can now be described as a villian by, of all people, Pat Buchanan, who (during the Nixon years) wrote columns condemning containment and calling for a Churchillian policy approach against the Soviet Union. I fear that Israel, in an effort to maintain its “special relationship” with America, will be forced into concesions that, when the Arabs get nuclear weapons, will prove fatal. Do we in the West realize that the demise of Israel will only be the first step on the Islamization of the world? Islamic Jew-hatred is not an artifact of the Third Reich; it is woven into the very fabric of Islam and has been from the beginning. Anyone ever tell you what Mohammed did to the Kaybar Jews, who were attacked for no better reason than to get booty? We ignore the essential nature of Islam, an implacable enemy (Islam, not individual Muslims), at our peril. They are prepared to kill us and die (go to Paradise) in the process because they BELIEVE. Unfortunately, belief is something that is in very short supply in the West and Israel.

Jul 1, 2008 - 12:13 pm 37. tim maguire:

I have my doubts that Buchanan lied. The Iran-Iraq war is far too well known for him to think he could slip this past us. I think he was talking off the cuff, defending his argument without checking his facts and simply forgot about that war.

Something popped into his head, he thought is was nifty, so it came out his mouth. Oops.

Jul 1, 2008 - 12:36 pm 38. Tom A:

“Paying others to wage Private War on your behalf is still waging war, and worse war than any other kind.” Hmmm, your referring to the iran-contra imbriglio? Our policy toward Saddam for 15 years until we gave up and invaded? Our current attempts to support opposition in Iran?

This conversation really is polarized beyond recognition. Islam tolerated other faiths before Christians were finished with their Holy Wars and Inquisitions. Israel as an extension of Western imperialism is often demonized in the Middle East. Most Middle Eastern countries have indigenous Jewish communities who are far from threatened with anything like extermination. In fact **Iran** has the largest communities of Jews outside Israel in the region:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5367892.stm

Many of you have simply swallowed a certain partisan rhetoric and are perpetually in the sort of psychological state that supports war – utterly convinced of the righteousness of your cause and the evil of your enemy. History teaches us, time and again, that that is a state of distorted perception and high affect and that it leads more often to tragedy than to glory. There is another psychological state possible — it’s the one that we’ve struggled most of our history to create the mechanisms in our institutions to achieve. It’s the difference between a lynch mob and a court of law. And it is truly the only way *forward*.

Jul 1, 2008 - 1:17 pm 39. Captain Kendrick:

Buchanan, Ahmadinejad, the Jews and most of you imbeciles here just demonstrate how stupid and dangerous religion is to the human race. We’re all screwed. Thanks a lot.

Jul 1, 2008 - 1:27 pm 40. jblog:

“And what “facts”, pray tell, lead you to your outrageous attribution to Iran of “a burning ambition to exterminate *the Jews*” (my emphasis added)?”

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said as much when he called for Israel to be “wiped off the map.”

I think we can take him at his word, at least in this case.

Jul 1, 2008 - 1:27 pm 41. Jim:

Iraq attacked Iran. If Buchanan meant Iran has not fought a war of aggression, he is right.

Jul 1, 2008 - 1:38 pm 42. Kevin:

Joel, your ignorance is showing. Just because Pat Buchanan is a Catholic Nazi-symp doesn’t make him a Falangist, or a Phalangist, either. Both movements have a lot to do with Spanish and Lebanese traditionalism, which as an Irish-American Buchanan would have zero involvement in, and neither one is particularly noted for antisemitism. In fact, Spain under Franco was noted for giving shelter and assistance to refugee Jews (particularly in Hungary) and the Lebanese Phalange were allies of Israel.

You want to call him a Nazi, fine, but don’t mix him in with our lot. We have some standards.

Jul 1, 2008 - 1:40 pm 43. mjk:

Yeppers, Tom, the tolerance of Islamic countries was just awesome. Jews and Christians beaten in the streets. Jews having to wear identifying hats/marks. Jews driven out of all Arab nations with little to nothing when Israel became a nation. Haj Amin Al-Husseini was planning on building a concentration camp in the British Mandate once the Nazis won to exterminate every last Jew in the Middle East.

History teaches us that people really really hate the Jews. And they really hate them when the Jews fight back.

You ever been to Israel or the Middle east, Tom? Or are you just regurgitating “facts” that you haven’t bothered to research.

Jul 1, 2008 - 1:43 pm 44. mjk:

P.S. Tom, bonus points if you know who Haj Amin El-Husseini is.

Jul 1, 2008 - 1:44 pm 45. mjk:

Captain Kendrick,
Grow up. I’m “religious” and I’ve never once honor killed anyone, or blew anyone up, or female circumcised someone. I realize it’s hard to understand that people have religious beliefs for you. But most religious people aren’t going around regurgitating this crap or trolling on websites.

Jul 1, 2008 - 1:46 pm 46. kieth:

Is it not true that Saddam started the Iraq-Iran war
and that Iran was defending its borders? what was
Iran supposed to do?

Jul 1, 2008 - 1:57 pm 47. Tom W.:

“Most Middle Eastern countries have indigenous Jewish communities who are far from threatened with anything like extermination.”

Down is up. Black is white. Freedom is slavery.

We truly live in Orwellian times, don’t we?

As for Iran not wanting war: That’s true. The Iranian military is a shambles. The Iranians want nuclear weapons so that they can throw their weight around without risking a war.

The Iraqi military killed Iranians in Basra who were directing the Madhi Army defense. The Iranians then immediately agreed to a ceasefire.

The Iranians have Hezbollah and Qods Force agents all over southern Iraq. These are supposed to be the best terrorists in the world, but the fledgling Iraqi security forces routed them.

If we do go to war against Iran, it’ll be a turkey shoot that’ll shatter the myth of Persian prowess forever. That’s one reason we should do it. The mullahs need to be humiliated so that the middle east will stop appeasing them.

Don’t let these Iran-groupies fool you with their nonsense about Sunburn anti-ship missiles, barrages of rockets, and the closing of the Straits of Hormuz. We can defeat everything in the Iranian arsenal without breaking a sweat.

This is why the Iranians want nukes.

We should give them war instead.

Jul 1, 2008 - 2:06 pm 48. Michael:

Buchanan has been going further and further off the reservation ever since the end of the Cold War. In all fairness to him though, it should be pointed out that Iran did not start the war with Iraq. Saddam Hussein, in one of his famous miscalculations, thought that the chaotic state of affairs in revolutionary Iran would make it easy to achieve some territorial gains. It is interesting to consider whether, if he had just left them alone rather than giving a patriotic focus for national effort, the Iranian revolution might have collapsed.
In any event, Iraq attacked and invaded Iran in a completely unprovoked act of naked aggression. Even Khomenie’s Iran had the right, and even the responsibility, to defend itself. To give Buchanan every benefit of the doubt, is it possible he was trying to get across the idea that Iran has not *started* a war in recent times rather than merely fought one? There is a big difference between attacking a neighbor and defending oneself.
It goes without saying though that the Islamic Republican government of Iran would gladly destroy Israel and kill every Jew in it, and anywhere else for that matter, if they could.

Jul 1, 2008 - 3:11 pm 49. tim maguire:

mjk: we should offer Tom bonus points if he knows what “dhimmi” means.

You see, Tom, Islam is quite tolerant so long as you recognize the supremacy of Islam; if not, then it’s off with your head. Islam can be generous from a position of power, but only from a position of power.

Jul 1, 2008 - 3:15 pm 50. Bozoer Rebbe:

Most Middle Eastern countries have indigenous Jewish communities who are far from threatened with anything like extermination. In fact **Iran** has the largest communities of Jews outside Israel in the region:

Are you really that ignorant of history, or just that disingenuous? It’s true that prior to 1948 there was a substantial population of Sephardi Jews in the Arab and Muslim world. They lived as dhimmis, official second class citizens. Bernard Lewis said that Islam may never have treated Jews as badly as Christian Europe at its worst, but it also never treated them as well as Christian Europe at its best. The major distinction is that there were fewer incidents of murder. As events surrounding the establishment of the State of Israel came to a head, acts of terror and threats of violence against the Jewish communities in the Muslim world reached a fever pitch, at least 750,000 Sephardim fled the Muslim countries, with billions of dollars in assets seized when they left. Sephardi Jews are the unmentioned refugees of the Middle East. Unlike the Arabs, who kept Palestinians in camps and refused them citizenship, Israel more or less successfully absorbed the Sephardi refugees. Until a large number of Russian Jews immigrated to Israel, a majority of Israel’s Jews were either born in Muslim countries or their parents & grandparents were. The only reason why Iran has the 2nd largest community of Jews in the Middle East is because Jews were expelled or fled from all the other Muslim states, and the current Jewish population of Iran is a fraction of what it was prior to 1948. While thousands of Jews may remain in Iran, most Persian Jews have long since left Iran and more Iranian Jews live in California than in Iran.

BTW, I think it was Supreme Leader Khamenei who said that a nuclear exchange with Israel would be okay because while only some Muslims would die, nearly all Israeli Jews would die.

Jul 1, 2008 - 4:31 pm 51. Larry:

Iraq attacked Iran. If Buchanan meant Iran has not fought a war of aggression, he is right.

Iran has through it’s Lebanese subsidiary, attacked the US and Israel. Unfortunately, the US didn’t fight back. Fortunately, Israel did. Just not enough. But both were acts of war directed by the IRI.

Jul 1, 2008 - 5:38 pm 52. Dave Surls:

“In fact **Iran** has the largest communities of Jews outside Israel in the region:”–Muslim apologist

“At the time of the establishment of the state of Israel in 1948, there were approximately 140,000–150,000 Jews living in Iran, the historical center of Persian Jewry. Over 85% have since migrated to either Israel or the United States. At the time of the 1979 Islamic Revolution, 80,000 still remained in Iran. From then on, Jewish emigration from Iran dramatically increased, as about 20,000 Jews left within several months after the Islamic Revolution. In mid- and late 1980s, the Jewish population of Iran was estimated at 20,000–30,000.”–wiki

In fact, Muslim societies are hell of intolerant, and that’s why there are hardly any Jews in Iran.

Jul 1, 2008 - 6:00 pm 53. Mike:

seems to me pretty clear that what Buchanan meant was that Iran hadn’t started a war. So to accusing him of ‘lying’ by conveniently forgetting about the Iran-Iraq war is an overreach. I’m no Buchanan fan, but the guy misspoke. Whether or not Iran is an aggressor in general, well, obviously that’s a thorny subject as these comments illustrate. But to call Buchanan a liar because of this misstatement is just so nuts and is a good example of why so few people take this site seriously. (Unless, Sheryl, you are implying that Iran was the aggressor in the Iran-Iraq war, in which case, I would like you to back that up– otherwise you are just playing semantic games.)

Jul 1, 2008 - 6:02 pm 54. Ellen K.:

A fair number of comments here defend Buchanan because he allegedly meant Iran never STARTED a war (even though, as anyone conversant with the history knows, Khomeini kept going on and on, even sending ten year old children to their deaths as minesweepers for the Mahdi, one of the most insane acts of modern history). Having listened to the OReilly tape, I got no such feeling from Buchanan. He was just bs-ing and bloviating as he always does. He is one of the most reprehensible men in America.

Jul 1, 2008 - 6:03 pm 55. gazzer:

Wow, some of you really hate him. It’s convenient to call him a right wing nut who appears on Fox, but in fact he appears far more on the liberal MSNBC shows. Just saw him there tonight in fact. Oh, and this morning.
I don’t think he hates Jews. i remember how he was one of the few people to stand up for John Demanjuk when he was extradited to Israel for war crimes. Turns out the Israeli supreme court agreed with Pat Buchanan. Most of you Buchanan haters would have been glad to see an innocent man executed there, I suppose.
Your irrational rants tell us more about you than it about him.

Jul 1, 2008 - 6:50 pm 56. Dane:

“i remember how he was one of the few people to stand up for John Demanjuk when he was extradited to Israel for war crimes. Turns out the Israeli supreme court agreed with Pat Buchanan. Most of you Buchanan haters would have been glad to see an innocent man executed there, I suppose.”

Uhh, if you look into that a little bit, you’d see there is considerable evidence that John Demjanjuk was a concentration camp guard and had served in the SS – the verdict was overturned by the Israeli supreme court because he had been accused specifically of being the man who had operated the gas chambers at Treblinka, and new information put that into doubt. It was not because he was innocent.

Jul 1, 2008 - 7:48 pm 57. kabud:

there is definitely much more behind Iran war mongering then just Iran’s local political and regional interest

it is much more then just exterminating th Jews

it is a part of general offense towards West and it is not just Islamic

Jul 1, 2008 - 9:08 pm 58. Bigben:

“I don’t think he hates Jews. i remember how he was one of the few people to stand up for John Demanjuk when he was extradited to Israel for war crimes”

Gazzer,do you remember the other Nazis he stood up for? How about declaring “war” on the Jews for protesting the Auschwitz desecration by extrem elements in the Polish Church. The man who was breat fed to Coughlin’s rants had never shown any remorse. The Late great Bill Buckley openly denounced Buchanan’s bigotry against Jews.
If your going to hat Jews, or defend the anti-Semites, at leat be a man and fess up to it.

Jul 1, 2008 - 9:48 pm 59. Jim Stutts:

jerry:

Your opinion is just that.

If you’re going to claim that ANY disagreement with Israel the nation-state is a crime of some kind, then you are a fool.

Israel sells military technology we paid for to CHINA.

http://www.cnn.com/US/9911/11/us.israel.china/

Israel is no more a “friend” of ours than we are of their’s (the Clinton and Bush Admins fund the PLO). Nations don’t have friends, they have interests. Our interests may not always coincide.

Pick your country and if you damn people for choosing their own….

Jul 1, 2008 - 10:13 pm 60. David:

The one thing I want to comment on is the silly assertion that Germany didn’t want war in 1939. It’s a matter of record, has been for decades now, that the war was started via a deliberate provocation on the German’s part, so that they could invade Poland. It’s also a matter of record that Hitler was hoping to provoke a war with Britain and France over Czechoslovakia in 1938. He reportedly was outraged when Chamberlain made him an offer he couldn’t refuse, and he had to postpone things for a year. Buchanan is an idiot, and everyone has known this for years, but this latest book makes him into such an ass that it’s hard to imagine how anyone could take him seriously.

Jul 1, 2008 - 11:33 pm 61. Cris:

Ms. Longin’s failure to provide contextual facts to support her vindictive assault on Buchanan is curious. Her logic is not based on the cogent facts which embroil the issue at hand. From a geopolitical perspective, it is true that Iran isn’t interested in starting a War at this particular moment. Its bizarre antics and recent flexing are more likely aimed at an internal consolidation of power through misdirection and to keep its Arab neighbors at bay. In turn, it may be advantageous for Israel to strike now before the year’s end.

I am a steadfast in my support of Israel; yet do not believe it is prudent to cloud my judgment with personal feelings concerning- historic occurrences not relative to the dire situation at hand (regardless of how abhorrent). Ms. Longin’s obvious dislike of Mr. Buchanan greatly weakens the merit of her argument. Her use of ultra- Far left activist Christopher Hitchens and Newsweek Magazine (post 2005, an equally Liberal Fascist publication) as the sole source for her anti-Semitic implications position ,

Ms Longin needs to look at her own conclusion, “Facts are facts. Ideology blinds people”, and become educated on relevant historic intricacies through a variety of competing prisms before blathering an opinion so absent of intellectual heft.

Ms. Longin’s failure to provide contextual facts to support her vindictive assault on Buchanan is curious. Her logic is not based on the cogent facts which embroil the issue at hand. From a geopolitical perspective, it is true that Iran isn’t interested in starting a War at this particular moment. Its bizarre antics and recent flexing are more likely aimed at an internal consolidation of power through misdirection and keeping its Arab neighbors at bay. In turn, it may be advantageous for Israel to strike now before the year’s end.

I am steadfast in my support of Israel; yet do not believe it is prudent to cloud my judgment with personal feelings concerning- historic occurrences not relative to the dire situation at hand (regardless of how abhorrent). Ms. Longin’s obvious dislike of Mr. Buchanan greatly weakens the merit of her argument. Her use of ultra- far left activist Christopher Hitchens and Newsweek Magazine (post 2005, an equally Liberal Fascist publication) as the sole source for her anti-Semitic implications position gives reason to question both the veracity and credibility of her forceful position. Likewise, it is obvious on its face, that her research lacks objectivity.

Ms Longin needs to look at her own conclusion, “Facts are facts. Ideology blinds people”, and become educated on relevant historic intricacies through a variety of competing prisms before blathering an opinion so absent of intellectual heft.

Jul 2, 2008 - 12:03 am 62. davod:

“seems to me pretty clear that what Buchanan meant was that Iran hadn’t started a war.”

Not another “what he meant to say was”

How does anyone know what Buchanan means to say?

Jul 2, 2008 - 3:27 am 63. gazzer:

Dane,
You can say that Demanjuk was released on a technicality, but I recall the difference to be execution vs. non-execution. Again, it took some courage for Buchanan to make the argument at the time and expose himself to widespread vituperation.
You can all throw around accusations like “standing up for nazis”, but you need to be more specific than that.
Again, if he is on MSNBC day after day (as he is right this minute as i write), you can hardly dismiss him as some kind of monster that any sane thinking person would disown. It’s the kind of breathless rhetoric that leads people to link him with the Fox channel.

Jul 2, 2008 - 4:26 am 64. gazzer:

And going back to the central theme of the piece, it’s hard to believe that Iran wants outright war with anybody. Sure, their leaders are a nasty bunch and its true that they have sponsored mischief against Israel and others.
As has been pointed out, Iran definitely did not start the war with Iraq. Just because they fought back does not mean they like war.
Finally, why not address Buchanan’s point about Germany directly, instead of calling it sickening and throwing in your own comparisons so you can tie them back to him? There is no evidence that Hitler wanted war with the West. In fact, it was the undoing of him once we finally stood up. His strategy was to take Austria, then allow the Sudeten Germans to undermine Czechoslovakia, then join with Russia to split up Poland and then finally to attack Russia. France and England declared war on HIM.
Doesn’t make Hitler a nice guy, but let’s at least try to recognize facts.

Jul 2, 2008 - 4:47 am 65. Dark Helmet:

Why not just ask him ( Pat ) directly what he meant by that and then write your story. At least then you’d have both sides, rather than a cyper pile on. The very thought that he would attempt to igonore the Iran-Iraq war is beyond stupid on your part and you are the one being dishonest about him and his point of view.

hitler wanted to reclaim the Prussian empire, humilate France and then destroy Russia. He had hopes of a stable partner with England. Gazzer is correct in that war was declard on him after he invaded or ‘retook’ Poland.

Iran was our BEST partner in the middle east before carter stabbed them in the back. Ask any any of the hundreds of thousands of Persians who live here and went through it. They will also tell you this ‘leader’ a psycho monkey in a crappy leasure suit from 1978.

Anytime a group of people show up enmass and do not join the people already there, they have two options. Kill or be killed.

The rest is just people adding thier own agendas to what ever the flavor of the week happens to be.

This thread proves that point.

Jul 2, 2008 - 5:13 am 66. Tom A:

So, if Iran has not shown *any* interest in acquiring territory through war in the last – how many centuries? – and is essentially playing defense (a plausible scenario) through all of its actions including perhaps seeking nuclear weapons (what, after all, is Israel’s justification for having acquired the same weapons?), then what’s driving this?

Jul 2, 2008 - 5:34 am 67. Radtop:

Buchanan was right in this respect, neither Germany wanted, or Iran wants war. Why should they if they can get what they want without it? Iraq’s Saddam was the same way. He thought he could get what he wanted without having to fire a shot. What all these Countries have in common is that they precipitated the wars they didn’t want through miscalculations. And the major culprits that misled them were the appeasers who would have allowed them to have their way without firing a shot. Chamberlain,then and The American surrender monkeys, now give hope to the terrorists that they can have what they want without cost. Iran believes that America will not stop it from continuing to attack Israel and America, and they will stay on that course until it is too late, just as Hitler and Saddam did.

Jul 2, 2008 - 5:36 am 68. jerry:

Mr. Slutts:

Yes, I see your point Israel sells to China and we keep buying China’s toys, textiles and electronics that fund China’s purchase of Israeli military equipment. I guess the rumors of Zionist control of the US Goverments are true after all.

Jul 2, 2008 - 5:51 am 69. rookie1824:

I don’t believe that Tom A’s real name is anything like “Tom A.” It has to be Ahmed or Muhammed, or something along those lines. He can’t really be that stupid or ignorant. He’s got to be a Farsi-cal (as in farcical – excuse the pun), Muslim, literary jihadist, posing as an all-American boy. If not, he believes in some sort of idiot-ology beyond any rational person’s comprehension. I think we should just ignore him. Only a fool argues with a fool. Oh, and that goes for Pat Buchanan, too.

Jul 2, 2008 - 5:59 am 70. Jim Stutts:

“jerry:
Yes, I see your point Israel sells to China and we keep buying China’s toys, textiles and electronics that fund China’s purchase of Israeli military equipment. I guess the rumors of Zionist control of the US Goverments are true after all.”

Oh, please.

Jul 2, 2008 - 7:13 am 71. Dane:

Tom A: “So, if Iran has not shown *any* interest in acquiring territory through war in the last – how many centuries?”

As others have already pointed out, there’s the second phase of the Iran-Iraq War – how else would you define six years of offensive operations into Iraq with the aim of taking territory? This happened within the past few decades. No need to look back centuries.

gazzer: “You can all throw around accusations like “standing up for nazis”, but you need to be more specific than that.”

Okay. If you’re actually interested in specifics, I encourage you to look into the following people and Pat Buchanan’s defense of them: Kurt Waldheim, Arthur Rudolph, Karl Linnas. Demjanjuk was just another ex-Nazi he decided to champion, and it’s coincidence that his conviction was later overturned.

Jul 2, 2008 - 7:37 am 72. Nasser:

I am puzzeled how a person can say Iran doesn’t want war when everyday Iranian president say Israel and US will destroy very soon.
I am a persian and my family live in Iran but I pray Israel and US attack to Iran because war is just one time but threat to war is one thousands times.
In Iran you can see every commender have a speech against US and Israel everyday. they sell oil and put the money in HAMAS and HIZBOLLAH to kill Israelian. they work 24/7 for reaching to atomic bomb for destroy Israel and you have lied.
I am sorry for my sharp words but it is true.
Nasser

Jul 2, 2008 - 7:43 am 73. Xanthippe:

Tom A: “So, if Iran has not shown *any* interest in acquiring territory through war in the last – how many centuries? – and is essentially playing defense (a plausible scenario) through all of its actions including perhaps seeking nuclear weapons (what, after all, is Israel’s justification for having acquired the same weapons?), then what’s driving this?”

What do you make of Ahmadinejad’s constant comments about destroying Israel?

So what if Iran doesn’t mean to acquire the land that Israel sits on. Iran means to destroy Israel – at least that’s what Ahmadinejad constantly threatens.

How do you reconcile any of your statements about Iran’s non-agression with the very agressive statements Ahmadinejad makes toward Israel?

Jul 2, 2008 - 8:38 am 74. megapotamus:

Buchanan is an untterly hideous figure. He second-guesses Churchill?!?!? As I recall, this meme of the unnecessary war began as a critique of FDR for allying with Stalin. And, good on yer. That actually IS a stain on American honor and FDRs, or it would be if one could posit some alternative that is plausible AND inviting. He fails here and collapses into the sort of black hole of stupidity that brught Carter to denounce the American Revolution itself. Astonishing. But he is right of course, no one wants war, including the mullahs. They want capitulation. They want the spoils of war, not the war. They want everyone to do as they say. If we deny them THAT, then, we will have war so we mustn’t do that. Shall we all convert, Pat? What a puke.

Jul 2, 2008 - 8:58 am 75. jerry:

Mr. Slutts:

Your are quite and earnest fellow and couldn’t quite get the sarcasm.

But seriously your feeble attempt to justify the anti-Semitism of the anti-Israeli crowd by throwing out they sell to our enemy China line is pathetic. Let’s see, the Australians have an Embassy in North Korea so I guess they aren’t very good allies either.

Jul 2, 2008 - 10:51 am 76. Jim Stutts:

“jerry:”

“Mr. Slutts:”

At least have the decency to spell my name in a non-insulting fashion.

“But seriously your feeble attempt to justify the anti-Semitism of the anti-Israeli crowd by throwing out they sell to our enemy China line is pathetic. Let’s see, the Australians have an Embassy in North Korea so I guess they aren’t very good allies either.”

I’m not attempting to “justify anti-Semitism”. YOU are attempting to demonize anyone who doesn’t support Israel in everything they do. That’s a despicable, but typical, argument.

Jul 2, 2008 - 11:17 am 77. joeblow:

“How about the denial of the Holocaust by Ahmadinejad, or his statement “Israel must be wiped off the map” in 2005.”

Frankly, so what? These are just the rantings of a figurehead who has no real power to act upon them. When Khatami was the Iranian President and said things that indicated he wanted a rapprochement with the United States, most neocons dismissed his comments out of hand because they knew that the real power lay in the hands of the Supreme Islamic Council of Guardians (I may be getting the name a bit wrong). However, now that Ahmadinejad is President, these same people act like he has the same latitude of power that most Western Presidents do. This deliberate obfuscation seems to indicate that it’s not the Iranians who are itching for a war, but certain Americans and Israelis.

Jul 2, 2008 - 1:19 pm 78. Troll Feeder:

Come on now, people…

Chants of “Death to Isreal!” and “Death to America!” are not in any way evidence that Iran wants to fight a war with us.

They are evidence only that Iran wants us to die.

The 12th imam, bring-on-the-apocolypse garbage, however…

Jul 2, 2008 - 1:52 pm 79. Dave Surls:

“Frankly, so what?”

True, what they say isn’t nearly as important as what they do, and what the followers of Khomeni have done is attack American embassies, blow up American embassies, kidnap and murder hundreds of American citizens…and that means war…as soon as we get a leader who has the stones to wage war against the mad mullahs in Tehran, and the Hezbollah trash in Lebanon, that is.

Jul 2, 2008 - 1:57 pm 80. Tom A:

Yo, rookie1824, I didn’t realize that this corner of the Web was reserved for foaming-at-the-mouth ideologues who wanted to do nothing but talk to each other like a bunch of teenage jocks in the locker room before the big game. Go team! Let’s get out there and kill those guys!

Jul 2, 2008 - 2:56 pm 81. Tom A:

Why should Iran be feeling in need of extreme measures to defend itself from possible attack?

The history of the region – and Iran’s history in particular – shows rather starkly that some very powerful and exceedingly ruthless people are after control of the oil. Many contributors to this board and the long, sad tapestry of human history leads one to the the further conclusion, however, that some people just like a good fight (of the sticks, stones and cluster-bomb variety, that is). Here’s hoping we survive long enough as a species to see the former brought to justice and the latter bred out like the useless war-loving, Nietzsche-misinterpreting, social miscreants that they are.

Jul 2, 2008 - 3:46 pm 82. rookie1824:

“Tom A:

Yo, rookie1824, I didn’t realize that this corner of the Web was reserved for foaming-at-the-mouth ideologues who wanted to do nothing but talk to each other like a bunch of teenage jocks in the locker room before the big game. Go team! Let’s get out there and kill those guys!”

Dear Tom A,

Your replies make even less sense than your arguments.

Sincerely,

rookie1824

Jul 2, 2008 - 4:43 pm 83. Tom A:

“Dear Tom A,

Your replies make even less sense than your arguments.

Sincerely,

rookie1824″

Dear rookie1824,

Since you make no arguments, can we assume that you have none?

Sincerely,

Tom A

Jul 2, 2008 - 11:48 pm 84. rookie1824:

Dear Tom A (or should I address you as Dear Ahmed or Dear Muhammed),

As I said once before, only a fool argues with a fool. I am not a fool.

But, you are at most a propagandist, and at least an incoherent babbler.

Best wishes,

rookie1824

Jul 3, 2008 - 5:52 am 85. rookie1824:

p.s. Besides, you’re beyond boring, so I won’t be taking the time to respond to you any more. In your twisted mind, I’m sure that you’ll count this as a win for your side. Good. I’m happy to bring a little joy into your world, as it’s probably the only pleasure you’ll get out of life for the rest of the day. (Mock-mood, just in case that went over your head, I was being sarcastic.)

So, go ahead and write back, telling me how you won, or that I backed down, or whatever. And make sure that you show your mommy and your imam-my what a good and smart boy you are.

Jul 3, 2008 - 6:22 am 86. Tom A:

Jul 3, 2008 - 6:56 am 87. Dave Surls:

“The history of the region – and Iran’s history in particular – shows rather starkly that some very powerful and exceedingly ruthless people are after control of the oil.”

That’s true enough. The mad mullahs control the oil and since they came into power in 1979 they’ve executed tens of thousands of people for crimes like adultery and homosexuality, so I guess you would have to say they were pretty ruthless.

Jul 3, 2008 - 11:04 am 88. ChrisGreen:

rookie1824, please make statements and then try and support them with facts. You are making Tom A look good.

The Iranian regime is very unpopular among the majority of it’s population. The one thing that would unify the Iranians behind their government would be military strikes by Israel and/or US. Since military action by the US or Israel is likely to affect regime change in Iran, the overall effect would be to extend the life of the current regime. It is a brutal kind of logic, but to imagine the Iranian regime to be above such thoughts is to be naive in the extreme. It’s not too hard to imagine that the Iranians prefer some kind of conflict between Israel and/or the US. Another article at pajamas media actually addresses this very argument.

http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/iran-and-the-coming-war/

It makes a pretty good argument for why they Iranian regime would want a state of conflict between themselves and a superpower.

Jul 3, 2008 - 5:24 pm 89. Javelin:

When a leader of a controlled country makes threats against another nation or shows news footage of missiles in a parade with “Death to ” painted on the side, when the language is not English, you can be pretty sure that country are trying to send a message. It’s not like some actor or local politician throwing his two cents in on the evening news.

Jul 4, 2008 - 12:10 am 90. cedarford:

“Iran’s buring desire to exterminate the Jews is based on their leader’s constant statements of just that sentiment.
So far as Buchanan is concerned the Jews are all powerful and behind every foreign policy move in the Middle East with which he disagarees.”

AIPAC is pretty powerful, and indeed the US should be very careful of being seen as a bribed tool of the Zionists. Especially about being the dumb, easily manipulated Golem going into Iran and fighting and dying not for our vital interests, but to maintain our own albatross necklace’s nuclear WMD monopoly.

AIPAC has adversely affected our vital interests in other countries. Not just the ME.

As for “I’m a Dinner Jacket”, hysterical little Zionists posting about his fire and brimstone tend to be ignorant of Iranian government – In Iran, the President has no war power. A figurehead. That power resides in the Supreme Revolutionary Islamic Council and the Supreme Clerical leader, an Azeri named Khameini. (Who has said WMD should be banned and any attacker using them, terrorist or nation, is outside Islamic Law)

GM Roper:
Just out of curiosity, who really thinks Pat Buchannan even matters any more? The man is and has been so out of touch with reality that it is pathetic. Who Cares?

Intelligensia, think tanks, and companies across the Globe. Buchanan in favor again as much of waht he has written about in the last 20 years has been happening as he said it would. He is also a valuable “go to guy” on politics, a “old hand” in DC. And getting new respect from the Left. Where the new saying is “Pat is so far right he comes around and reaches us from the Left and we sometimes agree with him”.

Besides being in the NY TImes top 10 bestsellers with each of his recent books, they are also international best-sellers in Europe, Russia, Asia. Buchanan is on major networks here and in European “chats”, appears on talk radio. Yes the neocons and Zionists still hate him, but frankly, that is now a selling point with most of the rest of humanity.

***************

Dark Helmet – hitler wanted to reclaim the Prussian empire, humilate France and then destroy Russia. He had hopes of a stable partner with England. Gazzer is correct in that war was declard on him after he invaded or ‘retook’ Poland.

Mostly right. Hitler never wanted to fight the West outside of humiliating France for Versailles “payback”. He wanted self-determination of peoples as Wilsons 14 points promised – which had huge support in most of Europe – though he wanted chunks of non-Germanic land. It all changed when England declared war on him. And no, he did not want to destroy Russia. He wished to destroy instead what he called “Jewish Bolshevikism”, get fair access to Caspian Oil, protect the rights of 3 million Germans inside the USSR, stabilize the Balkans from Communist meddling.

Buchanan writes the key blunder causing WWII was England, dragging a reluctant France along, in a matter of senseless honor vs Realpolitik, joined in a treaty with Poland to go to war if Hitler tried to bring the lost German city of Danzig back into the Reich. It had been “given away” by force after WWI by starving the German people into signing away, and the Poles had inflicted substantial abuses on the ethnic Germans over the years.

In was NOT begun by “Munich” and “appeasement”.

Jul 4, 2008 - 1:46 am 91. rookie1824:

ChrisGreen, regarding my observations about Tom A, readers can draw their own conclusions about the merits of my approach. But, except for the America and Jew haters who posted here, I was preaching to the choir.

Jul 4, 2008 - 8:16 am 92. ChrisGreen:

Cederford, in your opinion, do you think England should not made a treaty with Poland? If that were the case, do you think a war would have been avoided? Do you think Germany could have ‘humiliated’ France and taken large chunks of non-German land (like most of Poland) and invaded Russia (even if his aim wasn’t to destroy it) and that more nations wouldn’t have been sucked into war? Finally, do you think that the war would have been longer and more costly if the non-appeasers had won out and Germany had been confronted sooner?

Jul 4, 2008 - 1:05 pm 93. Tom A:

“rookie1824: But, except for the America and Jew haters who posted here, I was preaching to the choir.”

Now I get it, you’re a lightweight ranter. The ugliness of of your jingoistic hate rather gives you away. My fault for addressing you in the first place. Won’t happen again.

Jul 5, 2008 - 1:03 pm 94. Ignorance galore « The Political Inquirer:

[...] 7, 2008 by Lance Sheryl Longin made me stare at the screen in disbelief for about ten seconds. In her rant on Pat Buchanan where she makes the case that Iran is a warmongering state, she writes: But how [...]

Jul 7, 2008 - 10:25 am 95. George:

Erm, isn’t she factually wrong in this article? Iraq and Saddam started the Iran-Iraq war–not Iran.

Jul 7, 2008 - 10:26 am 96. Matt:

Pat Buchanan’s new book makes some great points but falls apart when he spins he tries to spin his antisemitism in to something he thinks people can digest. He poises him self in a position where you have to agree with him, but then drops a bomb in your lap. Nice tactics, but none the less futile. I suggest reading this book review on his new book.

Jul 13, 2008 - 2:53 am

Write a Comment

Name:	(required, displayed)
Email:	(required, not publicized)
URL:	(optional, displayed)
Comments: