The reaction to my September 23 article, “A Fairy Tale Version of World War II is Being Used to Sell the Next World War,” has been significant. Many people expressed praise and appreciation for the article, while many others expressed fury and denunciation. Much of the fury and denunciation seems to derive from the supposition that I’m only discussing this topic in the first place because my ultimate purpose is to undermine support for interventionist US policy in Ukraine. As such, a large portion of critics have started with the premise that I am personally “bad” — and then reasoned backward from there.
Such an interesting follow up to a very interesting original article. Forget Katz, let’s do more comparisons to WWII and Ukraine. Would really like to read more on this in the future. I must confess that in all my years very little of this is actually taught or spoken about, particularly from this angle.
Nice job Michael - this Katz guy is one deranged POS.
Watching you have to cite minute detail after minute detail, simply to defend your integrity, is painful to watch. I feel like many of us are living that life, albeit on a much smaller scale.
Every day, I see our media tell outright and obvious lies ... I see leftists friends hear it ... and I see that embraced as the 'new truth'. Even though it's not true. And if right-thinking people simply attempt to actually correct them, we are called Nazis ... called racists ... called homophobes ... etc, etc, etc.
There is no 'fair or honest' public dialogue in this country anymore. The Authoritarians in the media, high tech, academia, and Hollywood control the narrative, and tell people to believe their leftist view of the world. And anyone who disagrees is called names, and told to take their 'Nazi-like views' elsewhere. You just wrote a 3,000 word article just to set the record straight (an article which will be ignored, btw). Most of us don't have the energy to do it. I applaud your commitment to honest journalism.
There was a famous exchange between Hermann Goering and an American psychiatrist sent to evaluate him. Goering pointed out that the average man has nothing to gain from war and can hope for nothing better than to return to his previous station in life intact. The government need only insist that the country is in danger and anyone opposed to the war is a traitor to overcome this natural reluctance. The shrink replied that in a democracy, people could use their votes to oppose war but Goering replied that the government could use the same strategy in a democracy. How correct old HG was.
To be fair, Germany was a democracy until it voluntarily gave away powers to hitler (and he predicted that he’d gain dictatorial powers legally) by creating an enemy. He then stated that he could save the people from this enemy but only if all power in government was consolidated under him.
Excellent piece!! I applaud your patience and willingness to engage people who disagree with you, even vilify you!! Once again we are being dragged into a war that is not our interest or fight. Funny how the war mongers hate those of us seeking peace.
A politically hobbled president - like Biden - is a threat to world peace. Analyzing Biden’s recent speeches provides evidence that being a desperate man, he is committed to doing desperate things.
Without question, Biden destroyed Nord Stream 1 & 2 simply to bolster his sagging position in the public’s eye, and he is willing to spill the blood of Americans to do it.
Call me a “Putin puppet” as you must, but I commend Vladimir for not responding in-kind.
This is a great follow up to your initial article. A good defense of your observations and a level-headed and highly satisfying rebuttal of Katz's histrionic reaction to your work. Thank you for speaking out against the warmongering insanity that has taken hold of our country.
I think what really annoys this Katz guy is that they'll never get their Ministry of Truth with people like you around. These apparatchiks know what they are doing, they are just relying on the plebes being too stupid or lazy to do the footwork of corroborating everything.
Michael, it's a shame you have to spend this much time dealing with Twitter idiots. Both of these pieces are great - excellent detail and context. You can't please everyone. I'm old enough to recall a time when people could disagree without making things personal. Sigh.
Like today, the American people in 1940 had no political vehicle to oppose war because both parties were all in for war. The Republican candidate that year was a stiff named Wendell Wilkie, whom British intelligence controlled by threatening to reveal his relationship with a woman not his wife (i.e., his mistress). So both candidates were pro-intervention.
You are correct that poor to Pearl Harbor Americans were absolutely against entry in the war. This fact is the foundation of the conspiracy theory that FDR allowed Pearl Harbor to happen in order to cajole the public’s perception toward going to war.
As Michael makes clear in his first piece, what Roosevelt did do with Japan (as he did with Germany) was to manoeuvre them both into a position where they had little choice but to take on the USA. Neither wanted to, for obvious reasons. The fact that Japan attacked Pearl Harbour more or less as she declared war may have surprised FDR, although it's interesting that none of the carriers were there when the attack happened - were they forewarned? Some old battleships and 2,400 soldiers and sailors was perhaps a small price to pay for persuading Americans to support world war.
What intrigues me, is why was FDR so keen, and for so long, for the USA to enter the war? It cannot surely have been just because he and Winston Churchill were such good buddies.
PS And yes, both pieces were excellent - thank you Michael, for such a comprehensive and relevant history lesson.
The attack on PH was a surprise, but an attack by Japan was assumed to likely if not imminent in the theater. The pacific fleet was on alert at the time. We just didn’t guess that Japan would strike at the heart of the fleet. A very bold move that was even doubted as a long term success by key Japanese leaders. These leaders states that we’d likely strike back with incredible vengeance.
But let’s be clear about “the war.” We’re not talking about any resemblance to any post war conflict. The war was an actual existential threat. The population didn’t see it, having at least some hangover from our dabbling in the first war. But it was clear that Germany was bent on dominating the whole of Europe to include the UK. It was also equally clear that Japan was bent on the domination of the east. These were not regional clashes; it was essentially a world war before we entered the fight. It’s hard therefore to straw similarities between the two (Ukraine nonsense and WWII) prewar political strategies. I’d go as far as to say that comparing WWI and Ukraine American political pro-war strategy more similar because the reasons to get involved were more aligned to relieve political pressure.
We established the lend lease program because the German juggernaut was running across the whole of the continent with clear signaling that it would continue beyond that. We cut oil to Japan (the biggest navy in the pacific if not the world at the time) be sue they too were running across the whole of the east, also without any signs they’d stop.
FDR was in an exceptionally difficult position to bolster the Brits and Soviets and slow down the Japanese. Any argument made that compares or contrasts our modern war problems with a call back to Hitler, the conduct of the war (like the morality of “carpet bombing,” and our own political maneuvering at that time...is dumb. There is no post war similarity to that event; it is thankfully singular as a threat.
Curious to see if anyone else noticed that the Polish guy of the "Thank you, USA" tweet in regards to NS2 is MARRIED to Anne Applebaum. These people are beyond whatever caricature my deepest cynicism could imagine.
Your patience is remarkable and commendable. Thank you so much for this very interesting follow up.
The excellence of your work on this extremely important issue has made a paid subscription very worthwhile.
Thank you so much, and please keep up the great work.
Such an interesting follow up to a very interesting original article. Forget Katz, let’s do more comparisons to WWII and Ukraine. Would really like to read more on this in the future. I must confess that in all my years very little of this is actually taught or spoken about, particularly from this angle.
Nice job Michael - this Katz guy is one deranged POS.
Watching you have to cite minute detail after minute detail, simply to defend your integrity, is painful to watch. I feel like many of us are living that life, albeit on a much smaller scale.
Every day, I see our media tell outright and obvious lies ... I see leftists friends hear it ... and I see that embraced as the 'new truth'. Even though it's not true. And if right-thinking people simply attempt to actually correct them, we are called Nazis ... called racists ... called homophobes ... etc, etc, etc.
There is no 'fair or honest' public dialogue in this country anymore. The Authoritarians in the media, high tech, academia, and Hollywood control the narrative, and tell people to believe their leftist view of the world. And anyone who disagrees is called names, and told to take their 'Nazi-like views' elsewhere. You just wrote a 3,000 word article just to set the record straight (an article which will be ignored, btw). Most of us don't have the energy to do it. I applaud your commitment to honest journalism.
There was a famous exchange between Hermann Goering and an American psychiatrist sent to evaluate him. Goering pointed out that the average man has nothing to gain from war and can hope for nothing better than to return to his previous station in life intact. The government need only insist that the country is in danger and anyone opposed to the war is a traitor to overcome this natural reluctance. The shrink replied that in a democracy, people could use their votes to oppose war but Goering replied that the government could use the same strategy in a democracy. How correct old HG was.
To be fair, Germany was a democracy until it voluntarily gave away powers to hitler (and he predicted that he’d gain dictatorial powers legally) by creating an enemy. He then stated that he could save the people from this enemy but only if all power in government was consolidated under him.
Those wacky Germans. That could never happen here in the US!
Excellent piece!! I applaud your patience and willingness to engage people who disagree with you, even vilify you!! Once again we are being dragged into a war that is not our interest or fight. Funny how the war mongers hate those of us seeking peace.
A politically hobbled president - like Biden - is a threat to world peace. Analyzing Biden’s recent speeches provides evidence that being a desperate man, he is committed to doing desperate things.
Without question, Biden destroyed Nord Stream 1 & 2 simply to bolster his sagging position in the public’s eye, and he is willing to spill the blood of Americans to do it.
Call me a “Putin puppet” as you must, but I commend Vladimir for not responding in-kind.
Yet.
This is a great follow up to your initial article. A good defense of your observations and a level-headed and highly satisfying rebuttal of Katz's histrionic reaction to your work. Thank you for speaking out against the warmongering insanity that has taken hold of our country.
I think what really annoys this Katz guy is that they'll never get their Ministry of Truth with people like you around. These apparatchiks know what they are doing, they are just relying on the plebes being too stupid or lazy to do the footwork of corroborating everything.
Michael, it's a shame you have to spend this much time dealing with Twitter idiots. Both of these pieces are great - excellent detail and context. You can't please everyone. I'm old enough to recall a time when people could disagree without making things personal. Sigh.
This is very important work you are doing. Keep it up.
Beautiful. Just a clinic on refuting propaganda.
Thank you for your courage in speaking truth.
Like today, the American people in 1940 had no political vehicle to oppose war because both parties were all in for war. The Republican candidate that year was a stiff named Wendell Wilkie, whom British intelligence controlled by threatening to reveal his relationship with a woman not his wife (i.e., his mistress). So both candidates were pro-intervention.
As Bugs Bunny would say, "He's a maroon."
You are correct that poor to Pearl Harbor Americans were absolutely against entry in the war. This fact is the foundation of the conspiracy theory that FDR allowed Pearl Harbor to happen in order to cajole the public’s perception toward going to war.
As Michael makes clear in his first piece, what Roosevelt did do with Japan (as he did with Germany) was to manoeuvre them both into a position where they had little choice but to take on the USA. Neither wanted to, for obvious reasons. The fact that Japan attacked Pearl Harbour more or less as she declared war may have surprised FDR, although it's interesting that none of the carriers were there when the attack happened - were they forewarned? Some old battleships and 2,400 soldiers and sailors was perhaps a small price to pay for persuading Americans to support world war.
What intrigues me, is why was FDR so keen, and for so long, for the USA to enter the war? It cannot surely have been just because he and Winston Churchill were such good buddies.
PS And yes, both pieces were excellent - thank you Michael, for such a comprehensive and relevant history lesson.
The attack on PH was a surprise, but an attack by Japan was assumed to likely if not imminent in the theater. The pacific fleet was on alert at the time. We just didn’t guess that Japan would strike at the heart of the fleet. A very bold move that was even doubted as a long term success by key Japanese leaders. These leaders states that we’d likely strike back with incredible vengeance.
But let’s be clear about “the war.” We’re not talking about any resemblance to any post war conflict. The war was an actual existential threat. The population didn’t see it, having at least some hangover from our dabbling in the first war. But it was clear that Germany was bent on dominating the whole of Europe to include the UK. It was also equally clear that Japan was bent on the domination of the east. These were not regional clashes; it was essentially a world war before we entered the fight. It’s hard therefore to straw similarities between the two (Ukraine nonsense and WWII) prewar political strategies. I’d go as far as to say that comparing WWI and Ukraine American political pro-war strategy more similar because the reasons to get involved were more aligned to relieve political pressure.
We established the lend lease program because the German juggernaut was running across the whole of the continent with clear signaling that it would continue beyond that. We cut oil to Japan (the biggest navy in the pacific if not the world at the time) be sue they too were running across the whole of the east, also without any signs they’d stop.
FDR was in an exceptionally difficult position to bolster the Brits and Soviets and slow down the Japanese. Any argument made that compares or contrasts our modern war problems with a call back to Hitler, the conduct of the war (like the morality of “carpet bombing,” and our own political maneuvering at that time...is dumb. There is no post war similarity to that event; it is thankfully singular as a threat.
PS And yes, both pieces were excellent - thank you Michael, for such a comprehensive and relevant history lesson.
Curious to see if anyone else noticed that the Polish guy of the "Thank you, USA" tweet in regards to NS2 is MARRIED to Anne Applebaum. These people are beyond whatever caricature my deepest cynicism could imagine.
Michael, you are doing a great job reporting reality. As for the Katz's of the world, it's kind of sad, but there is nothing you can do about them.