Bill Whittle: What Do Putin and Hitler Have in Common?

ttIn the latest FIREWALL, Bill shows why you don’t have to look very far very back at all to see ugly echoes of an ugly time. See video and transcript below:



Hi everybody – I’m Bill Whittle and this is the Firewall!

One of the complaints leveled against Conservatives by Progressives is that we’re always looking backwards. Why always so locked in the past? Why so obsessed with history? Why always looking behind us? Why not look forward?

There’s actually a very simple explanation for that. You see, the past exists. And the future doesn’t. Not yet, anyway. That’s why progress isn’t always good. We could be progressing forward off a cliff. Or into the room where the murderer is hiding. Or out into the water where the shark is. And since we can’t know where we are going, the best we can do is to see if we can learn anything from where we have been.

And you don’t have to look far – not these days. No sir.

Vladimir Putin recently announced that Russia would seek a diplomatic solution to the crisis in Crimea. And the Western intellectuals – “intellectuals” is Latin for “cowards” —  just swooned. A diplomatic solution!

All throughout the mid to late thirties, the Wolf – Adolph Hitler, it was a codename that he kept for his entire career as Fuehrer / Dictator – bullied people and broke things. And the decent, civilized leader of England and France and simply wrung their hands, and wrote harshly worded diplomatic cables, and made vague threats of sanctions, and all the rest.

Hitler didn’t play the West like a violin: he played them like a light switch. Threaten violence, offer peace. Threaten violence, offer peace. Make outrageous demands; invade other countries; backdate the moral argument by claiming your are simply protecting your own ethnic populations against imagined and then invented foreign oppression, et cetera and so on and you know the drill. Well, some of us do, anyway.

Two days ago, skipping through my satellite comedy channels – where I keep the BBC – I came in on the end of an interview with an Estonian defense minister, who proceeded to remind Vladimir Putin – the Bear — that Estonia was part of NATO, while the Ukraine is not. And the BBC interviewer leapt in, in tones of contempt and panic, protesting in a panic that that sort of language was counterproductive because it only antagonizes and offends Moscow. You don’t want to make them angry. It’s better to be nice to them before they overrun your country – you get a higher position in the slave government that way, and maybe they will shoot you last.

Now: both the Wolf and the Bear have a lot in common. Both were from humble beginnings, and both survived and clawed their way to becoming leaders of great nations by cunning and ruthlessness and the predator’s skill at finding weakness in their prey. Both without question have personally ordered the murder of political opponents. Both – and this is important – led nations that were filled with bitterness over lost glory, both fostered intense hatred of outsiders, and both promised to restore their national honor through military conquest. And most importantly, both the Wolf and the Bear represent nations with the exceedingly dangerous combination of resentment, envy, shame and unspoken but pervasive inferiority. That is a dangerous combination.

Opposing the Wolf and the Bear? Two Lambs.

Facing the Wolf: Neville Chamberlain, a proud, self-centered man, consumed with his own sense of self-importance: not terribly perceptive, or terribly interested in much of anything other than his own place in history as a result of his domestic social reforms.

Facing the Bear: ditto.

Hitler saw a vain and timid man who clutched at a piece of paper so that he didn’t have to look at what was behind it.  Putin sees a man-child, who is put in his place by one of the women that have always told him what to do.

Now, unknown to the cowards of Munich – in fact, not discovered until the flames of civilization had been put out and the wreckage of the world cleared – we have information from our look backwards. Because after the Lion replaced the Lamb and the Wolf was finally beaten, records came to light from OKW — Oberkommando der Wehrmacht, the German High Command.

Before Poland, before Czechoslovakia, before the Sudatenland… before the annexation of Austria – before all of the threats of violence followed by offers of peace: Adolf Hitler dipped his toe in the water of western resolve by sending a few lightly armed troops into the demilitarized Rhineland in violation of the Treaty of Versailles. We learned after the war from the records of the mortified, horrified German generals that had the French or the British put so much as a platoon, or a marching band, or perhaps even a single policeman who refused to get out of the way – had there been any resistance at all the Generals would have ordered their troops back to Germany and Hitler would have been overthrown. Could a platoon, or a single policeman have stopped World War II? Yes. Without question. Hitler himself admitted it.

When the Wolf went into the Rhineland, France and Britain were immeasurably superior to Germany, militarily. Even if the Germans had not backed down, the Allies would have brushed them aside in a few days. But in the three years between the Rhineland and the start of World War II in Europe, the Wolf got stronger and stronger, as the Lambs got weaker and weaker. Those of us backward-lookers see the Bear arming daily, as we make drastic cuts in our defense forces, and it looks sickeningly familiar to us as we bleat in impotent protest.

But Wolves – and Bears – know what lambs sound like. And those of us who do, in fact, learn the lessons of history will have to stand by once again and watch as those who don’t are doomed to repeat it.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.  

  • Hktony

    Putin is trying to take over Europe through Crimea and Ukraine? Another part of the world odumbo has got himself involved in and blown up in his face! And we see Putin as the wolf. What next china trying to take over Asia?
    The Arab spring was not Putin. The financial crash not Putin. The spying not Putin. Defending russian speakers in Crimea was Putin. Allowing your ambassador to be killed was not Putin .
    Putin, although he may not be a warm cuddly figure, does what we would hope any leader would do, support his country and people. The west through NATO pushes and pushes at its borders and you wonder why Putin may wish to do something about it.
    I am waiting now, and it am sure it’s just a matter of time, for the USA to start targeting china too. The evil communists trying to take over japan and Philippines and their other lap dog Korea. Cannot America just leave people to get on with their lives instead of sending troops, bombs and money to terrorists. Surely even Americans who are not fooled by odumbo and war monger’s must see this as unpleasant. Just live your lives in America and let others live in their country. If Russia invades Poland for example then help Poland like you did during World War Two?

    • minaka2

      It’s complete BS to claim the West is “pushing” at Russia’s borders. No one including Putin seriously thinks NATO has any intention of crossing the borders of Russia proper. The West is not imperialist. But Russia IS imperialist and Putin is on record as mourning the loss of the border states Russia invaded and forcibly incorporated in the USSR locked behind an iron curtain. He calls the break up of the monstrous Soviet Union founded on rivers of blood “the greatest catastrophe of the 20th century” and wishes to reconstruct as much of it as possible, ergo his moves in Georgia and Crimea. The only reason NATO has moved further east is at the INVITATION of those border states who are mindful of the continuing RUSSIAN threat. To twist that around and pretend NATO’s umbrella over those fearful countries gives Putin any justification for his aggression makes you one of his paid disinformers or if you’re doing it for free, then one of those western “useful idiots” communist rulers of Russia have found so obliging to them.

  • Gian Claude

    Putin painfully learned the lesson of
    Libya invasion by NATO. The US plot, at the time of passing the 1973 UN resolution against Qaddafi, was to form a legal basis for military
    intervention in the Libyan
    civil war
    demanding an immediate ceasefire and authorizing the
    international community to establish a no-fly
    zone and to use “all means” necessary including targeting
    the Libyan leader himself, his family, and all his supporters. The plot ended
    in the killing of the Libyan leader and dismantling a stable state in North
    Africa. The Russians will never let the US and the West fool them again under
    the false theory of a Ukrainian emerging democracy. Consequently, Russia, here,
    is the Lion, and the US and the West play the Wolf.

  • Godzilla Smash14

    Too all you Putin apologists and useful idiots who think the invasion and annexation is legal or fair in anyway shape or form take a look at this.

  • Prof. L. Wessell

    At one point I was sort of a Whittle fan, a bit of bulling, mocking and all around fun spiked here and there with facts. Alas, I have slowly lost patience and am troubled that FrontPage has printed such misconceived and factually erring bullsh*t. Whittle apparently compares Putin and Hitler by spending almost the entire article on Hitler, But, since Putin has been adjectively connected with Hitler, the analysis of Hitler sort of slides over to cover Putin by rhetorical association.

    The facts on Hitler, the French and the British are NOT correct. I doubt if Whittle knows anything about the French mitltary doctrine after WW I, why they went for the Morginol Line (let alone its history and composition and choice of location) and the catastrophic situation re military leardership (the combination of tanks, planes and infantry was not yet known) plus the French (and British) exhaustion in the population after the massive casuality of WW I. In no sense of the word was Chamberlain a “sheep”, rather a European trying desperately to avoid war, played by Hitler (against his will as he wanted war) or, better, by Göring (who wanted no two-front war at the time). Chaimberlain made a mistake in thinking peace was possible, but he was not alone!!! When Hitler attacked Poland, Chaimberlain declared war (not Churchill). The French military had its chance in 1935 to chase Hitler out as Hitler entered the Ruhr. Kissinger has written, had the Frrench just move troops to the boarder, Hitler would have withddrawn. They did not as war was a psyhological impossibility for the French. There is much more, but the ignorance is too great.

    Hitler was basically an atheist with some superstitious belief in destiny. (Himmler was a superstitious “nut”, that is another matter.) Putin has converted to Russian Orthodoxy, Solzhenitzyn refused support of Yeltsin, but gave it to Putin in 2007, Putin has many times spoken out against the moral decadence of the West (I listened to him and I agree 110%), supports the Orthodox Church, has taken measures to increase the birthrate, backs nationalism (which the EU is trying to squash and I want to continue), taken over a Russia after catastrophic effects of the collapse of the USSR (halving the population, massive loss of Russia’s former parts, 22 million Russian now abroad, loss of the Crimea — a part of Russia as long as the USA has existed, faced with repeated breaking of agreements re the West’s Nato approaching to Russia and more. Interesting point: Putin is seen by many traditional Catholics here in Germany (where I abode) as a counterweight to the homosexualization, gendermainstreaming, secularizing, political correct, etc. EU.

    Putin is expansionistic, plays hardball, worries me at times. But the equation of Putin with the “wolves” of Hitler is worse than false and falsifies history, it constitutes a vile calumny! Whittle is creating a false enemy. I suggest turning to PJ Media and look up the articles by David Goldman on Ukraine and Russia. Goldman, known as Spengler, has present much more evenhanded. His opinion of the warmonggers are they are not only “irrelevant, but wrong”. I never expected that FrontPage would print such a cheap diatribe. I will try to remember that even an excellent magazine can err. But if this continues too often, my readership will end. I do not wish to have to waste my time writing another comment on dangerous nonsense.

    • Michael Garfinkel

      Putin is an aggressive nationalist, willing to violate international law to further his interests, but he is not Hitlerian, nor are his designs irrational. His actions do, however, pose a threat to the stability of Europe, and I think Prof. Wessel is a bit too sanquine about this.

      • Prof. L. Wessell

        You can be right. I do spend too much time in Russia, where I gladly pass time. However, I find you to be a “bit too sanquine” about “Europe” and its stability (or one worth keeping). You see, there is no “Europe”, though the EU and its bureaucratic masters do want to force a “Europe” on the nations constituting geographically Europe. I agree with N. Farage of England, i.e., I want Europa to get out of “Europa”. I, with my religious views, live in a aggressively heathen society that is condemning Europa to extinction. Germany has 1.3 to 1.4 children per woman (more or less typical for the EU and, for that matter, the Ukraine has ca. 1.3 children / woman). The “Europa” of the EU is de facto a “culture of death” (to quote Benedict XVI). Under Putin the birthrate has gone up from 1.2 to 1.7 births/woman and last year finally more births than deaths. (If Ukraine goes with the EU it will likewise demographically cease to exist in the not too distant future.)

        As is evident from my words, I am no fan of “Europa” and I fear its augmenting secularization as it becomes a “stablility”. (I like to think that the recent election will de-statilize “Europa” to the core.) Is Putin an “aggressive nationalist”, say, in the sense of the 20th Century? Does Putin intend to take over Poland, Rumania, perhaps East Germany, etc. OR is he re-establishing some of the terrritory of the Russian Empire, but this time as a nation? (Why do you think that Solzhenitzyn supported Putin and condemned the West in his “Warning to the West” presented in his Harvard speech? There is a connection!) One can watch RT TV or Russian tv and view all kinds of exemplifications of US inteventions. I happen to be for some of these “aggressive” interventions, but note that they were or are interventions and not always to the well-being of Russia. I have a hard time not viewing Bush 2 and Obama 1 as having intervened in ways more massively aggressive than Russia in, say, Georgia or the Crimea.Heck, America is still in Afganistan after 11 years!!! And the result, a thriving democracy (sic)?

        I make no predictions about the future. Although I have some troublesome worries about Putin, I do appreciate greatly his moral critique of the West. I support his support of the Orthodox Church in Russia, i am no advocate of democracy (rather of an American constitutional republic –which is dead as Thomas Woods has shown in his “Who Killed the Constitution?”) and, in some morally, theologically and philosophically ways, I do not feel satisfyingly “free” in the “Europa” of today and want it, to quote Obama, to be “fundamentally transformed”. And that will not happen. So, I do not mind too much if Putin throws some stones through the windows of “Europa”.

        I thank you for your comment and was please to read that you apparently have not swallowed the Whittle diatribe equating Putin with Hitler. However one is to evaluate Putin and his Russia, such reductionism of him to Hitler is misleading at best.

        • Michael Garfinkel

          Yes, of course the comparisons of Putin to Hitler are Jejune, and I can’t argue with your assessment of a Europe in political and cultural decline; I share these views.

          I would only caution, (and I’m certain Putin himself shares this concern), that destabilizing events such as the forcible renewal of Russian sovereignty in Crimea have a way of getting out of hand.

          • Michael Garfinkel

            Professor Wessell, I’m sure I speak for all thoughtful commentators when I say that I find “Elliot’s” comment distasteful and embarrassing.

          • Prof. L. Wessell

            Thank you for your comment. I an an elderly man with poor eyesight and find that spelling errors, in whatever language I write in, are popping up. Mais je parle francais assez bien ayant etudié a l’Université de Louvain comme “chercheur libre” (un honneur) pour du temps. An ad hominem argument is one of desperation. I repeat my thesis. Before one worries about Putin, before one judges him, one should not accuse him of things that do not apply to him. Putin as a founder of a neo-Sovietism is one of those things.

          • Michael Garfinkel

            Je suis d’accord.
            Thank you for sharing your very thoughtful perspective.
            I’ve enjoyed this exchange, and I look forward to reading your views again.

    • Johnny Palestine

      Chamberlain and the Earl of Halifax both knew that their actions will lead to war. He made no mistake. This war was destined at the signing of the Versailles Treaty, to the pleasure of the British Elites, who are behind all suffering in the West.

    • Elliott

      In the third line of your second paragraph you lost me.
      The “Morginol Line”. Prof, you are an ignoramus.

      It was the “Maginot Line”.
      Want proof? Type up both names; you’ll see Morginal has a red line underneath it. Maginot DOES NOT.
      No, I DIDN’T read the rest of your efforts.

      • wildjew

        Do you think Putin might commit mass genocide against a racial or ethnic group?

        • Prof. L. Wessell

          No, and if he did, I would want him judged and executed.

          • minaka2

            Guess you know nothing of Chechnya and how Putin used massacres there to subdue the population and vault himself from KGB nobody to Big Man of Russia.

          • Prof. L. Wessell

            You do not want to get into an argument about Chechnya. I have seen videos put out by the rebels there slitting the throats of young Russian soldiers. The rebels there remind me of the fighting quality of the SS in WW II, excellent, but brutal. The Allies bombed 500,000 “German” civilians to death to beat the leadership >>> quite a massacre, no? Those “German” were under a violent leadership. War is brutal, against Nazi Germany or militant Chechnyas who do not leave the civilians out of the struggle. By the way, Chechnyan fighters, having reconciled a bit with Putin, are to be amongst the Russian separatists in East Ukraine. Your argument would be stronger if it were directed at Yeltin. You have your timing mixed up. Because Putin became the “Big Man of Russia”, he was able to reorder the 2nd Chechnyan war, making deals, rather than complete obliteration as the Allies did to Germany in WW II. Finally, I was in Ruissia when Chechyna and other rebels captured the school and killed hundreds of children. So, be careful with you accusations. I do have sympathy with your point of view. But, the 500,000 innocents killed here (Germany) in WW II were part of the process of termination of the vile leadership.

  • theoprinse

    It were the French communists and socialists who sabotaged the French army against Hitler’s attack in may 1940 because of the Hitler Stalin Molotov Ribbentrop Pact that was broken a year later by Hitler in june1941 with operation Barbarossa. The French cmmunists and socialists caused the Vichy regime.

    Hitler was kept under Methamphetamine administered to him by dr Theodor Morell.

    Richard Helms interviewed Hitler in Berlin in 1936 during the Olympic Games. Helms became CIA director over the MKULTRA project where 500 dr. Mengele Nazi’s experimented with a train wagon full of Basel based (Kern)Sandoz (Novartis) LSD.

    It was the former Polish Ukraine family Zbigniew Brzezinski known of a photo of him with Zia ul Haq and Jimmy Carter and another one with Osama bin Laden who advised as his son later on CNN in the Kiev Crimea dispute.

    Recently I wrote the Russian ambassador in the Hague Kolodkin to support his government in the Crimea that was liberated from the horrible Islamic Osman empire in the 19th century.

    In January 2012, Tamerlan Tsarnaev attended a workshop at the NGO “Fund of Caucasus” which is sponsored by the CIA-linked Jamestown Foundation, an NGO based at Freedom House.

    Jamestown’s board of directors includes Zbigniew Brzezinski, former National Security Advisor to Jimmy Carter and is directly funded by the National Endowment for Democracy, the Soros Foundations, the CIA’s Ford Foundation, and the U.S. Agency for International Development.

  • SoCalMike

    Journalists and professional intellectuals endeavor to destroy knowledge; not transmit or cultivate it so Obama and the Left gutting our military in the face of an increasingly dangerous world doesn’t even raise a peep from them.
    And when Obama’s appeasement lays a nuke or WMD on US soil, the same frauds will point fingers at everyone under the sun except Obama.
    They’re already poised to blame the Jews.

  • Erudite Mavin

    A needed commentary on facts of history otherwise known as Reality 101.
    The apologists of Putin don’t know the deep facts of history, the what and why.
    It makes them comfortable so they can mindlessly carry on their sleepwalking.

  • American Patriot

    Bill Whittle needs to understand the fact that England is not a country. England is one of four internal divisions (along with Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland) that make up the country known as the United Kingdom (or Britain). Calling the UK “England” is offensive to the people of Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, the UK’s three other internal divisions. Nobody calls the United States “Maryland”, or Canada “Ontario”. So why does the UK need to be called “England”?

  • Wwww

    It is not Putin that’s following Hitler’s example, but America. American is the most heinous and extensive war criminal since WW2. The US government loves to bully weaker nations like the coward it is. America will learn, like Hitler did, that Russia won’t bend so easily. Victory to Putin!

    • Godzilla Smash14

      Russia will implode on itself just as it always had from Ivan the terrible too czar Nicholas II too the breakup of the soviet union. And if anyone bullies weaker nations it’s Russia through it’s entire murdering history from the holodomor to everyone one of Stalin’s purges and the repression of Polish solidarity. Down with Putin.

  • Nabukuduriuzhur

    Something overlooked has been that Putin’s entire pattern of behavior changed this year. 15 years of steady improvements and reforms went completely out the window.

    It’s not unprecedented. After WW1, Hitler was into the occult, got possessed, then suddenly was a dynamic personality with what was described as “hypnotic violet eyes” by one who met him. He could convince a person of just about anything. Before his “change”, Hitler was a failure in life, painting houses to make ends meet.

    Wilson was a dove in WWI, then had his stroke. After that, his entire personality changed, and he advocated a hard line with Germany. Or his staff and wife did.The details are not known as to how much Wilson was really able to do after his stroke.

    Putin appears to have suffered a concussion. It would be interesting to know how or who did it. Whatever the reason, Bundeskanzler Merkel described him as being out of it when she phoned him when the Ukraine problems with Russia began in earnest this year.

    He’s not the same man that he was last year. That needs to be kept in mind whenever he is dealt with— the former personality patterns of ruthless dismantling of Communism, with the quite expansion of the Russian capitalistic economy, and his adamantine fighting of the russian mafia seem to be a thing of the past.

    So, who are we dealing with now?

    A damaged Putin? His staff? Former communist hardliners?

    We’d better find out before we act. It will help in choosing strategy.

  • XoverTank

    Those who know a little about history see similarities.
    Those who know a lot about history see unique circumstances.