bought mr buchanan's new book "churchhill, hitler, and the unnecessary war"

this tops the slew of conservative revisionist history books that warp and twist the past into a nonsensical vision of what never was.

mr buchanan's primary thesis is that world war ii did not have to be fought. in chapter 13 hitler's ambitions mr buchanan attempts to establish that hitler's goals were not world wide domination and that america had no reason to fear hitler. i decided to dig out a 2004 tome, luftwaffe over america by manfred greihl, that contradicts mr buchanan. the flyleaf starts with "the state of german development was such that plans to raid and bomb new york and the eastern sea bord could well have been realized if the third riech had survived longer". later. "if the soviet union had been conquered however these plans would have become a reality."

the amount of planes being design up thru the full scale development stage is phenomenal. the pictures of the me 264 shows a bomber remarkablely similar to the b-29. the programs for 4 -8 jet engined bombers were underway. there was a ultrasonic rocket bomber in the early stages of development. a program for towing a-4 rockets (v-2s) in submergeable barges by submarine to just off the east coast was beyond the paper design stage.

the intent of the third reich was obvious. how p j buchanan could believe that nazis germany was not our enemy is beyond belief. the man has become a blatant liar in his dithering old age.

And does he mentions the Balfore Treaty? To stay out of Foreign Alliences was constitutional, WWI and II were fabricated for the USA to get involved. Many Americans believed more then than today that the USA is NOT the global police.

Had heard and seen old footage of the the V1 and V2, but History Channel shows footage of German ballistic missles and unmanned aircraft that I'd never seen. Hitler's contempt for the American 'mongrel race' was fierce (unlike England, whom Hitler admired for it's history of conquest and colonialism). Buchannan has to ignore a lot of history to believe the US had 'nothing to fear' from Nazi Germany.

It is shocking to read lies and revisionism like this, and it is dangerous. It reads like a Holocaust denial. At some future point in time, someone will not understand who Buchanan was or that his conclusions are lies and believe them. He does a great disservice to Americans who fought against Hitler and his tyranny to save the world.

there were 3 kooky children in the Buchanan household. Pat, Bay, and a brother who ended up in a mental institution.

remember Pat's keynote speech at the convention for old man Bush? it was scarey! the late, great Molly Ivins said it probably sounded better in the original German. LOL.

In general, I find his traditional conservative perspective to be honest, well researched, and reasonable. I do however, disagree with most of his conclusions. I disagree with them because we differ as to our values, not because his work is dishonest or lax.

For instance, I think his claim that the U.S. may've been left alone had we stayed out of Hitler's way, may be perfectly valid. But then, it wouldn't have suited my sense of values, to leave so much of the rest of the world to their own devices. In other words, rather than dismissing Buchanan's ideas out of hand because we disagree with his conclusions, it might make more sense to consider them in the context of the whole and reserve our "right" to reach our own conclusions.

14 mentions of lord balfore, an englishman, but i could not find the treaty you mention.

you betcha. i don't know what he is thinking. have not as yrt seen a book review as yet.

Trying Googling under "baseball lore", and input the name, "Jim Bouton".

i am a wwii book reader. i bought with out looking in detail. gosh was i surprised at the reasoning and conclusions.

i really don't get the point of the book. his conclusions are untenable. his facts wrong or inadequate. his reasoning is absurd. he makes a fool of himself. georgetown should take back his degree.

his claim is dead wrong.

there are notes from meetings that indicate that the nazis planned on going to war with the usa. there are plans for and full scale test models of weapons that were to be used in the war with america. there are notes from the weapons development meetings that indicated that the weapons would be used against america.

I'm merely suggesting that his alternative perspective is a worthwhile contribution. And in that vein, I would suggest that your evidence suggesting that Hitler was preparing for war with the U.S., is not dispositive. It only makes sense that Hitler would've prepared for war with the U.S., especially given what he would've assumed was the eventual likelihood of our involving ourselves.

I am surprised at Buchanan too. He never made an impression as, what can be characterized, a John Bircher. It's been years since I read about them, but I recall their insistence that FDR purposely allowed the Japanese to attack Pearl Harbor to get the US into WWII. Concluding Hitler had no plan for world domination, reads like a Birch Society pamphlet.

Buchanan...but the "idea" that Hitler's scheme for domination may not have included the U.S., is at least plausible. In fact, a politico-economic world that included a prosperous Japan, U.S., and 3rd Reich could well have appeared to make sense to him.