A serious question (not another candidate bashing thread)

[jeter]

This is a short essay (and hopefully discussion) for those of you tired of all the anti-candidate threads that have taken over DU's GD forum.

I read this months Vanity Fair (which is really good by the way - go out and buy it) and there were a couple of articles in there about Bush and the war and the like. It got me thinking about something I have been thinking about for a while (even before Bush became President).

If Hitler and the Nazis had not given us the holocaust, but did everything else the same. How would they be remembered?

I wonder. You see, a couple of years ago I watched a movie called, "Nuremburg" about the trial of the Nazis there in 1946. In that movie, most Nazi officers were down right unrepentant. Especially Hermann Goering, who of course was the highest ranking official among them. There was a scene, towards the end after the trial, when Goering is talking to an American officer. He tells him (and I am paraphrasing) that "it was the Jews. Had we not gone after the Jews none of this would have happened.I warned them (Hitler and other Nazis) that this would happen. We should never have gone after the Jews."

What he was refering to was that the Holocaust was what set the Nazi's apart from other vanquished nations. Infering that had it not happened, there would be no "Trial of the Century."

A brief History:

After World War I, the Germans were forced to accept full responsibility for the war and assume the debts of other European nations in reparations. They were also forced to keep their army small (100,000 total troops). As a result, the economy of Germany, like all of Europe at the time, was in shambles and only got worse. Hyperinflation set in. The country fell in total disarray, politically, socially, and economically.

The rise of the Nazi's derived from this steep decline. Hitler and the Nazi's promised to restore Germany's proper place in the world and create a "Third Reich (or third Empire)." Now of course, from the beginning the Nazi's blamed the problems of the Germans on the Jews. But imagine had that not been the case. Imagine if he stuck only to Germany's "rightful place" as the leader of Europe and his fanatic anti-Communism.

He wanted a "living space" for Germany. So he still annexes Austria, and has its leaders that don't support him murdered or imprisoned. He still attacks Czechoslovakia and Poland. Certainly, the British still would have declared war on them. World War II would have happened regardless, since no one at the time (1939) knew Hitler's policies against the Jews (and the Final Solution itself was not formalized until 1942). The Nazi War machine would still have rolled over Norway, Denmark, Holland, and of course France.

Hitler would still have invaded Russia. But had we finally gotten involved and stopped this madness in 1941 to 1945, would we still consider them Criminals if we had not also found the Nazi's Death Chambers.

There are so many similarites between the current GOP administration and the Nazi's (minus the Holocaust) that it is not even funny. I know it's impossible to draw complete similarities and still remain credible. And anytime you compare anyone to the Nazi's it is automatically dismissed. But here are some similarities:

Both came to power suspiciously.

The Nazi's threatened and pretty much thugged their way to power. For this, I still have that image of those Delay staffers in that Florida recount office threatening and pretty much behaving like thugs.

Neither the Nazi's, nor the Republicans won a clear majority, but governed as if they had. Bush failed to win the popular vote and the Democrats in Congress actually won more votes nationally than did the GOP. The Nazi's won more seats than any other party, but did not win an absolute majority.

They both used acts of "terrorism" in order to quiet the opposition and install their own ideological fanatic views against the majority of the people. The Nazi's had the Reichstag Fire (blamed on the communists); Bush had Sept. 11 (middle east terrorists).

They both used their position of power to initiate their ultimate war aims. Hitler got his "living space," defeated his European enemies, and then attacked the Soviet Union - because he had the broad support of his country. Bush, attacked Afghanistan and then Iraq - and you know he wants to go after Syria, Iran, and North Korea.

They both disregarded treaties and international conventions that would have thwarted any such aggression. They both bullied and eventually dismissed the international organizations built to determine the legality of aggressive acts. The Nazi's, the League of Nations; the US, the United Nations.

In short, the approach to governing and war between the Bush Administration and the Nazi's in the 1930s are almost identical. Then there was this quote in Vanity Fair this month by Goering, "People dont want war...but can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger." This quote could come right from the Republican National Committee and express the GOP position to war today. But it didn't. It came from Hermann Goering in 1946.

So my question is, if Hitler and the Nazi's had not been responsible for the holocaust, but did everything else the same. Would they still be seen as war criminals? If yes, doesn't that make George W. Bush and the Republican Party War Criminals, too?

[gristy]

1. I'll add one more question

If Hitler and the Nazi's had not vilified and subsequently murdered the Jews, could they have come to power in the first place, let alone achieved the fanatical devotion of their subjects that they did.

And to answer your question, yes, the Bush cabal clearly should be tried for war crimes.

Thanks for your thoughtful post.