It would have been really only feasible at the very end of the push to Berlin, when the US and Britain did bomb sites in Poland and Eastern Germany in support of Soviet troops. Even this was controversial as it likely allowed the Soviets to gobble up territory faster and may have actually resulted in the US push to Berlin to slow. By then the trains were not bringing new prisoners in. And bombing the camps? No one knew what was going on in terms of mass executions…the Germans had started forced marching many of the prisoners towards Berlin at that time. Would a week of bombing saved or killed more prisoners with the Russians coming on the camps so quickly?

Hard to measure the cost-benefits, and in the fog-of-war it was even harder..for Bush and Condi to try to make points on what “they” would have done in terms of events that happened when they were children (Rice wasn’t even born!) is absurd.

Maybe Bush should revisit all the other things that “If I had been President when…”

“I would have attacked Japan before the “Rape of Shanghai”, “I would have pushed for the development of the atomic bomb in 1932…that would have stopped Hitler in his tracks!”, and “I would have made sure Congress freed the slaves when the Constitution was originally drafted! It would have stopped the Civil War!”

It’s a good way to shine the sh*t of his own record, I guess.

From the void of world leadership structures arose stronger nationalist brand identities of fascism.

Republicans in America actually backed the Nazis as an answer to emerging socialism or communism. Germany and its neighboring buffer states were seen as a hedge to communist Russia.

Chamberlain really doesn’t fit any of the comparison models today. Everyone is interventionist. Churchill himself was an interventionist, until he lost a war in Iraq between the world wars and came back hurting. Winston’s gratuities from BP oil and their manipulation in Egypt and Saudi Arabia soothed his hurting venture capitalist ambitions at the time…

Gillard used to look at Iraq through the spectrum of his own familiar love for history, the ghost of Churchill and Halliburton stirred in its wake.

While Chamberlin was trying to prevent or postpone war, Prescott Bush was selling WMDs to Hitler. TEL was vital for high octane gasoline — no TEL, no Luftwaffe, no Blitzkrieg.

Of course, the Bushies always loved them some Hitler — that’s why George Herbert Walker funded Hitler in the 1920s when he was a beer hall bully, and Prescott helped smuggle Nazis out of Europe after the war.

The reason Churchill, who had an ugly authoritarian streak of his own, made a good national unity leader for Britain was because he had been anti-fascist in the 1930s, willing to side with the socialists and social liberals instead of hewing o the politically correct position of the rest of the British Conservatives.

Why would the Allies even consider bombing Auschwitz? Wouldn’t that be defeating the purpose and kill not Germans, but Jews?

no shit. i thought the issue was about bombing the train tracks to auschwitz?

BSRH – hope the shoulder is better soon, good luck with the writing.