Did World War II Have To Happen?
On Sept. 1, 1939, 70 years ago, the German Army crossed the Polish frontier. On Sept. 3, Britain declared war.
Six years later, 50 million Christians and Jews had perished. Britain was broken and bankrupt, Germany a smoldering ruin. Europe had served as the site of the most murderous combat known to man, and civilians had suffered worse horrors than the soldiers.
By May 1945, Red Army hordes occupied all the great capitals of Central Europe: Vienna, Prague, Budapest, Berlin. A hundred million Christians were under the heel of the most barbarous tyranny in history: the Bolshevik regime of the greatest terrorist of them all, Joseph Stalin.
What cause could justify such sacrifices?
The German-Polish war had come out of a quarrel over a town the size of Ocean City, Md., in summer. Danzig, 95 percent German, had been severed from Germany at Versailles in violation of Woodrow Wilson’s principle of self-determination. Even British leaders thought Danzig should be returned.
Why did Warsaw not negotiate with Berlin, which was hinting at an offer of compensatory territory in Slovakia? Because the Poles had a war guarantee from Britain that, should Germany attack, Britain and her empire would come to Poland’s rescue.
But why would Britain hand an unsolicited war guarantee to a junta of Polish colonels, giving them the power to drag Britain into a second war with the most powerful nation in Europe?
Was Danzig worth a war? Unlike the 7 million Hong Kongese whom the British surrendered to Beijing, who didn’t want to go, the Danzigers were clamoring to return to Germany.
Comes the response: The war guarantee was not about Danzig, or even about Poland. It was about the moral and strategic imperative “to stop Hitler” after he showed, by tearing up the Munich pact and Czechoslovakia with it, that he was out to conquer the world. And this Nazi beast could not be allowed to do that.
If true, a fair point. Americans, after all, were prepared to use atom bombs to keep the Red Army from the Channel. But where is the evidence that Adolf Hitler, whose victims as of March 1939 were a fraction of Gen. Pinochet’s, or Fidel Castro’s, was out to conquer the world?
After Munich in 1938, Czechoslovakia did indeed crumble and come apart. Yet consider what became of its parts.
The Sudeten Germans were returned to German rule, as they wished. Poland had annexed the tiny disputed region of Teschen, where thousands of Poles lived. Hungary’s ancestral lands in the south of Slovakia had been returned to her. The Slovaks had their full independence guaranteed by Germany. As for the Czechs, they came to Berlin for the same deal as the Slovaks, but Hitler insisted they accept a protectorate.
Now one may despise what was done, but how did this partition of Czechoslovakia manifest a Hitlerian drive for world conquest?
Comes the reply: If Britain had not given the war guarantee and gone to war, after Czechoslovakia would have come Poland’s turn, then Russia’s, then France’s, then Britain’s, then the United States.
We would all be speaking German now.
But if Hitler was out to conquer the world – Britain, Africa, the Middle East, the United States, Canada, South America, India, Asia, Australia – why did he spend three years building that hugely expensive Siegfried Line to protect Germany from France? Why did he start the war with no surface fleet, no troop transports, and only 29 oceangoing submarines? How do you conquer the world with a navy that can’t get out of the Baltic Sea?
If Hitler wanted the world, why did he not build strategic bombers, instead of two-engine Dorniers and Heinkels that could not even reach Britain from Germany?
Why did he let the British army go at Dunkirk?
Why did he offer the British peace, twice, after Poland fell, and again after France fell?
Why, when Paris fell, did Hitler not demand the French fleet, as the Allies demanded and got the Kaiser’s fleet? Why did he not demand bases in French-controlled Syria to attack Suez? Why did he beg Benito Mussolini not to attack Greece?
Because Hitler wanted to end the war in 1940, almost two years before the trains began to roll to the camps.
Hitler had never wanted war with Poland, but an alliance with Poland such as he had with Francisco Franco’s Spain, Mussolini’s Italy, Miklos Horthy’s Hungary, and Father Jozef Tiso’s Slovakia.
Indeed, why would he want war when, by 1939, he was surrounded by allied, friendly, or neutral neighbors, save France? And he had written off Alsace, because reconquering Alsace meant war with France, and that meant war with Britain, whose empire he admired and whom he had always sought as an ally.
As of March 1939, Hitler did not even have a border with Russia. How then could he invade Russia?
Winston Churchill was right when he called it “The Unnecessary War” – the war that may yet prove the mortal blow to our civilization.
Read more by Patrick J. Buchanan
- A Reluctant Warrior Tiptoes to War – June 17th, 2013
- Outside Agitators – June 6th, 2013
- The Unraveling of Sykes-Picot – May 27th, 2013
- What Should Americans Die For? – May 16th, 2013
- Who Are the War Criminals in Syria? – May 6th, 2013





Twitter Trackbacks for Did Hitler Want War? by Patrick J. Buchanan -- Antiwar.com [antiwar.com] on Topsy.com
August 31st, 2009 at 11:52 pm
[...] Did Hitler Want War? by Patrick J. Buchanan — Antiwar.com original.antiwar.com/buchanan/2009/08/31/did-hitler-want-war – view page – cached #RSS 2.0 RSS .92 Atom 0.3 Antiwar.com Original » Did Hitler Want War? Comments Feed Antiwar.com Original Obama and the Neocon Middle East War Agenda East Jerusalem Shuts Out Thousands of Palestinians on Holy Day Kennedy Was a Lion, but War Remains King — From the page [...]
Geo1671
September 1st, 2009 at 11:08 am
Pat– Now Pals "Germany, France reinforce Iran sanctions threat"-that is today's War Cry.Explain it and you just might get the answer in why then France and England Declared war and Fire Bombed German cities before WWII started. There was a sinister thing going on in Poland , againist a "unwanted" religious group. Could it be that Hitler came for their rescue? Check out , back ground of Nicolas Sarkozy –time to get ready to hide from WWIII
TheWretch
September 1st, 2009 at 3:30 pm
Operation Barbarossa commenced on June 22, 1941. Of course Pat might say it would have been OK for Nazi Germany to take over Communist Russia.
The destruction of the Jews began as soon as the Nazis took power. Nazi Germany's final solution was planned before the trains were scheduled.
Describing Nazi Germany's mindset as wanted to "take over the world" is a cartoon characterization of Hitler's actual territorial goals. (Look at the quotes from Mein Kampf below. )
Would it been prudent for the US and the UK to forge an alliance with and expanded Nazi nation that could have stretched from the Atlantic to the Pacific Oceans? I don't think so.
What will be the moral blow to civilization is the asinine refusal of the United States to refuse, since the end of WWII, to demilitarize. Our current military spending is indefensible and will destroy us more certainly than any military threat on the horizon.
From Mein Kampf:
The future goal of our foreign policy ought not to involve an
orientation to the East or the West, but it ought to be an Eastern
policy which will have in view the acquisition of such territory as is
necessary for our German people. To carry out this policy we need that
force which the mortal enemy of our nation, France, now deprives us of
by holding us in her grip and pitilessly robbing us of our strength.
Therefore we must stop at no sacrifice in our effort to destroy the
French striving towards hegemony over Europe.
Without respect for 'tradition,' and without any preconceived
notions, the movement must find the courage to organize our national
forces and set them on the path which will lead them away from that
territorial restriction which is the bane of our national life to-day,
and win new territory for them. Thus the movement will save the German
people from the danger of perishing or of being slaves in the service of
any other people.
From the past we
can learn only one lesson. And this is that the aim which is to be
pursued in our political conduct must be twofold: namely (1) the
acquisition of territory as the objective of our foreign policy and (2)
the establishment of a new and uniform foundation as the objective of
our political activities at home, in accordance with our doctrine of
nationhood.
But when we speak of new territory in Europe to-day we must principally
think of Russia and the border States subject to her.
Did Hitler Want War? by Patrick J. Buchanan — Antiwar.com « Mauryk2's Blog
September 1st, 2009 at 9:38 am
[...] Did Hitler Want War? by Patrick J. Buchanan — Antiwar.com By mauryk2 Leave a Comment Categories: Uncategorized Did Hitler Want War? by Patrick J. Buchanan — Antiwar.com [...]
September 1, 2009 « Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes?
September 1st, 2009 at 1:39 pm
[...] http://original.antiwar.com/buchanan/2009/08/31/did-hitler-want-war/ [...]
Oregon Commentator » Blog Archive » Lest We Forget… That Pat Buchanan is a Lunatic [UPDATED with new link]
September 1st, 2009 at 1:54 pm
[...] reason, you wish to subject yourself to “Did Hitler Want War?”, you can now find it at Antiwar.com (along with Stormfront, etc. — which should tell you a lot about both Pat Buchanan and the [...]
bogi666
September 1st, 2009 at 10:21 pm
Hitler and the NAZI's were just understood psycho's. They were 1st rate psycho's though and that's what it took to dupe the German people, 1st rate psycho's. Americans on the other hand are duped by the 10th rate psycho's Cheney, Dobbs, Beck, O'reilly, Limbaugh and so forth. Hitler and his psycho's weren't cowards like the 10th rate American psycho's. They fought in WW1 and battled in the streets. The only battle our 10th rate psycho's know is with their hemorrhoids, ask Beck about that. They wage their war from the comfort of a TV studio and the only injury they may incur, along with their hemorrhoids, is laryngitis. I guess it didn't occur to Pat that the reason for the capture of Poland was to secure a border with the USSR, this is what Hitler said. As far as Pat goes, he's never had a job that requires anything productive or contributes to society. If he had to work for a living he would die of thirst in 3 days or starve in 30. Anyone who sits back pontificating, someone who has never engaged in meaningful contributing to society usefully can only be taken so seriously. Hitler should have never declared war on the USA though.
Anonymous
September 1st, 2009 at 5:10 pm
[...] [...]
captben31
September 2nd, 2009 at 1:29 pm
Hitler was using his rhetoric of "master race" and "thousand year reich" long before Poland was a glimmer in his eye. Get your facts straight and get your head out of your you know what by minimizing what this monster and his cronies did to Europe and to a generation of Americans that had to finish the fight against all that is evil.
captben31
September 2nd, 2009 at 1:30 pm
First off, this is revisionist history at it's best…and ugliest. Handpicked facts and misnomers riddle this article. Hitler had about 70 U-Boats not 29 at the start of the war. Hitler also launched his pocket battleships, using the latest technology available, in 1934…5 years before war with Poland started. As far as strategic bombers, the technology DIDN'T EXIST to make one until AFTER WW2. The best two bombers that came out of WW2, the B24 and B29 had limited range and used forward bases to conduct their missions. Mid-Air fueling wasn't even perfected until the 1960's.
Let's face it, as soon as Hitler came into power 1933 he violated the Treaty of Versailles by building mass amounts of tanks, fighter aircraft, bombers, pocket battleships, Uboats, a large professional army, and the SS. This was not to take back a city the size of Ocean City Maryland that would bring him even further into the Baltic. Even so, if his ships couldn't "get out of the Baltic" , then how did they wreak havoc in the shipping lanes BEFORE he was able to establish forward bases?
Geo1671
September 2nd, 2009 at 2:47 pm
And 2 my dear good fellow– all those military toys Hitler acquired were funded by Uncle Sam.Remember,USA was a pal of Germany after WWI. USA SETUP?
You BET! .America got most of Europe. Just like Saddam's Iraq /Iran war. USA loves to come in for the final kill :^/
LeopoldBloom
September 2nd, 2009 at 8:51 am
Mr Buchanan has some interesting points but they are highly selective (and I emphasize 'highly'), as the comments above acknowledge. To take just one example (the Siegfried Line), it is worth pointing out that in the heyday of the Roman Empire Hadrian's allegedly 'defensive' Wall did not prevent Rome from pursuing an aggressive policy against northern Britain. It was after all only 70 years after the wall had been built when the emperor Severus invaded with a massive army and 'laid waste' to Caledonia from end to end (a policy that ultimately backfired, but that's another story).
It's possible to argue anything if you are conveniently selective with the evidence you analyze.
ccarusoc
September 3rd, 2009 at 4:51 pm
Pat sir:
How can you compare Pinochet who killed thousands with U.S. help to Castro who shot a coupla dozen bloody secret police, also aided by U.S.? (I met one), All the while fending off a U.S. invasion and multiple assassination attempts?
Absurd, and usually yr columns are pretty good – so much better than yr TV spouting, which makes me think someone else writes the columns
Didnt the good sisters tell you not to fib? (Between swats with their 12-inch rulers)
AMDG – charley caruso
Why not compare Pinochet with the Israeiis who've killed many thousands to maintain their fading pariah state, also US-supported. Afraid of a call fm Abe Foxman?
Did Hitler Want War? by Patrick J. Buchanan — Antiwar.com | Breaking News 24/7
September 5th, 2009 at 12:04 am
[...] the technology DIDN’T EXIST to make one until AFTER WW2. … View original here: Did Hitler Want War? by Patrick J. Buchanan — Antiwar.com Share and [...]
“Rightwing” Extremism and Islamofascism – Tory CMF….Shh!! « Centurean2’s Weblog
October 10th, 2009 at 1:04 am
[...] stir recently when he commemorated the anniversary of Germany’s invasion of Poland by publishing an article suggesting that Adolf Hitler was basically a rational guy, and that war with Nazi Germany could [...]
Troubling Partnerships: Extremists Left and Right « Right Sided American Kafir
October 10th, 2009 at 11:43 am
[...] stir recently when he commemorated the anniversary of Germany’s invasion of Poland by publishing an article suggesting that Adolf Hitler was basically a rational guy, and that war with Nazi Germany could [...]
“Rightwing” Extremism and Islamofascism « Centurean2’s Weblog
October 20th, 2009 at 1:46 am
[...] stir recently when he commemorated the anniversary of Germany’s invasion of Poland by publishing an article suggesting that Adolf Hitler was basically a rational guy, and that war with Nazi Germany could [...]
Dr Peter Morici & Views on the Current Economic Situation in the US - Page 3 - Practical Machinist - Largest Manufacturing Technology Forum on the Web
February 24th, 2010 at 12:43 pm
[...] Pat Buchanan's views on WWII, if you're not familiar with them. Did World War II Have To Happen? by Patrick J. Buchanan — Antiwar.com [...]
Did you take a moment to remember what happened 66 years ago today? - Electronic Arts UK Community
June 6th, 2010 at 7:37 am
[...] The 'Good War' Myth of World War Two Did World War II Have To Happen? by Patrick J. Buchanan — Antiwar.com __________________ Chelsea Aggro – 1905 Fulham Road Loyal – Every Other Saturday The Mighty [...]