More ignorance from the clueless Libertarian blogger Willis Hart, this time in regards to WWII and the plans of Adolf Hitler...
|Willis Hart: I don't think that there's a lot of evidence that Hitler wanted a war with England and the West... Of course, by saying that, I know that I'm probably going to upset some folks. (5/23/2014 AT 7:52pm).content|
Actually, Willis, there is SOME evidence...
|Gerhard Weinberg: ...Hitler built up the German navy and began work on a long-range bombeer - the notorious Amerika Bomber - which would be capable of flying to New York and back without refueling. ...Hitler embarked on a crash building program of superbattleships promptly after the defeat of France. In addition, he began accumulating air and sea bases on the Atlantic coast to facilitate attacks on the United States. (excerpt from the 11/22/2006 History News Network article Hitler's Plan to Attack America).|
An Amerika Bomber, huh? And, as noted by Wikipedia "the concept was raised as early as 1938". That was in the very year that Neville Chamberlain (Prime Minister of the United Kingdom from May 1937 to May 1940) signed the Munich Agreement "conceding the German-populated Sudetenland region of Czechoslovakia to Germany" (on 9/30/1938).
He did that to prevent war. War had not broken out yet (WWII lasted from 1939 to 1945). So, what we have here - in regards to the Amerika bomber and his buildup of "air and sea bases on the Atlantic coast to facilitate attacks on the United States" after the defeat of France (6/22/1940) - is Hitler at least thinking war with the United States could be a possibility. And throwing a LOT of resources into building up for that possibility.
Britian declared war on Gernmany on 9/3/1939 and American declared on 12/11/1941 when "Germany and Italy declare war on the United States" and the US reciprocates. Note that both these events took place quite awhile after Hitler thought war with these countries might happen - and made plans and took action (by expending resources) in case that happened. I suppose that doesn't mean he WANTED a war with England and the West, but it surely qualifies as some evidence that it occurred to him that it might happen.
And that his plans of European conquest might very well lead to war with England and the West. I mean, I think you could make a strong case that if he did not want war with England and the West he would have avoided actions (he could be fairly certain) would provoke England and the West... no?
Anyway, as far ignorance by Mr. Hart is concerned... he actually seems to me to be a very well read individual. This ignorance, I think, is him being ignorant in regards to things he WANTS to be ignorant on. That is, he dismisses evidence that doesn't fit into his paradigm, regardless of how strong it might be.
In regard to that - I admit it is something everyone of us is guilty of to some degree. The ironic thing being that the Hartster does not admit he's guilty of it AT ALL. As an "Independant" (small "l" Libertarian) he portrays himself (falsely) as being ABOVE such things, which, if you read his blog, you will find is really quite the LOL-able claim.
With this claim that there isn't evidence that Hitler wanted a war with England and the West, the Hartster is attempting to justify his claim that he's "anti war" (as his blog header claims), which is a claim he's SUPER serious about (with his MANY posts vilifying Abraham Lincoln and saying the Civil War shouldn't have been fought).
With the post in question, "In Defense of Neville Chamberlain", he's saying... what, I'm not exactly sure. Perhaps that if the appeasement strategy had been continued Germany would have conquered all of Europe but left Britain? Maybe he would have (conquered all of Europe but left Britain alone), but would allowing that have been a good idea?
Image: Messerschmitt Me 264 Amerika bomber, its objective: being able to strike continental USA from Germany, 1942. Photo from the website Rare Historical Photos.