Pat Buchanan steps in it

Newsday reports on the furor over Mr. Buchanan's latest column, Was WWII Worth It?


Was World War II worth it?

In the inflammatory world view of Pat Buchanan, the short answer is no. The war that stopped the Nazis' global campaign and the mechanistic extermination of European Jewry was actually not worth the effort.

The commentator yesterday offered equally provocative answers to other questions: Why destroy Hitler? And why venerate FDR and Churchill?

On the radio and Internet, Buchanan framed his positions as amplification of remarks made over the weekend by President George W. Bush that the pact ending the war brought on a Stalinist domination that was "one of the greatest wrongs of history."


Personally, I believe it was worth it. But I must admit the most important reason for this belief is the fact my father fought and was wounded twice in WWII. (The same goes for WWI. My father's father fought in it and one of my great-uncles survived a mustard gas attack.) Yes, they were draftees and had no choice. But fight they did. Why? To keep Europe free from the domination of a single Power. This was also the main rationale for the Cold War. I suppose it boils down to this for me: Europe is the home of western civilization and should be defended and I owe a debt to those who spilled their blood to defend it. (Of course, nearly every day the EU makes me reconsider.

There is nothing wrong with Mr. Buchanan asking the question or stating his opinion to answer it. He is exploring the same mine-strewn waters as Joe Sobran has been lately. (here and here) BTW, both men are Catholic. This is not a coincidence.

He did not mention Jews or the Holocaust - the most outrageous omission for Yaffa Eliach, a Holocaust expert and survivor. "For me it is very important to present the truth, to show the murder," Eliach said. "The idea was to kill Jews."

With all due respect to our Jewish brothers, it is obvious from their behavior and their words that FDR and the rest of our ruling elite would never have gone to war to stop the mass murder of the Jews. WWII was fought to protect Europe from German domination and Asia from Japanese domination.

Also, the Final Solution was as much a means to an end as it was an end in itself. Jew-hatred was used to unite the German people behind the Nazi party and whatever wars Hitler chose to wage. Apparently, the concept of "purity" appeals to many. My guess is most people who bothered to read Mein Kampf did not really believe he would try to murder all the Jews of Europe, much less nearly succeed.

Believing WWII was about saving Europe's Jews is like saying our Civil War was fought to free our slaves. These are cases of post hoc, ergo propter hoc. Both are noble reasons to go to war, but there is not a lot of nobility in the exercise of worldly power.