Your Email:

Subject:

Message:
Entry: The Good War Link: http://www.takimag.com/blogs/article/the_good_war#20457 Post contents: Sorry to say but I disagree with much of what you write. Particularly on this point: "3) The conquest of Europe by either a victorious Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia, with England either neutralized or defeated, was a prospect unacceptable to a nation that was mostly descended from Europe, which owed its civilization and liberties to the heritage of Europe, and the historic legacy of a Christian Faith that each of these powers was pledged to destroy." So then ideological wars are OK, even when they don't directly threaten us? Germany of course were desperate to keep us out of the war, and while Japan may have attacked anyway (due to our position in the soon-to-be-independent Philippines ) Germany, Italy, Hungary, Finland , Romania, and Bulgaria were hardly ever in a position to be threat to us - none had a blue water navy. I know my position will be unpopular with many here, however. "For all these reasons, I cannot help being grateful for Franklin Roosevelt’s Machiavellian policies, and glad that good men like Robert Taft and Charles Lindbergh didn’t get the chance to prove how wrong they were." About what? That Germany posed no direct threat to the United States? And that while you attach some sort of Crusader 'mother land' ideology to it, people like you would have been perfectly OK to sign up for the Commonwealth forces if you felt that strongly about it. No sir, I am afraid they (Taft and Lucky Lindy) were right. See once you sign on to one ideological war, you are going to continue to fall for more. Or is it only OK to you if 'Christian' countries are the ones being rescued, while you are able to maintain a neutral policy toward 'non Christians'? Not to mention, your brethren in Croatia were hardly helped by the whole thing. Don't get me wrong sir, I like your articles but this only reminds me more of why I will never see eye to eye with paleoconservatives. Sent at: 2008 11 23