Was World War II Worth It?

Pat Buchanan asks perhaps the most important question we face. How is that? Because WWII is about the only instance of a "just war" we can think of, because of the after-the-fact justification of the Holocaust we didn't stop. Getting involved in foreign wars do not "stop the killing," it only increases it.

We must recognize that Germany had no interest in world empire, and had no argument with France or Britain; it wanted to expand eastward and crush communism. Its occupation of western Europe was tactical and strategic after Britain and France declared war. What made America "vulnerable" to either communism or fascism, was the tremendous increase in Presidential power and federal bureaucracy under FDR, making the country ripe for infiltration. I believe it was Garet Garett that wrote that Communism was the only clear victor in both world wars.

Buchanan writes,

If the objective of the West was the destruction of Nazi Germany, it was a
"smashing" success. But why destroy Hitler? If to liberate Germans, it was not
worth it. After all, the Germans voted Hitler in.

If it was to keep
Hitler out of Western Europe, why declare war on him and draw him into Western
Europe? If it was to keep Hitler out of Central and Eastern Europe, then,
inevitably, Stalin would inherit Central and Eastern Europe.

Was that worth fighting a world war – with 50 million dead?

The war Britain and France declared to defend Polish freedom ended up
making Poland and all of Eastern and Central Europe safe for Stalinism. And at
the festivities in Moscow, Americans and Russians were front and center, smiling
– not British and French. Understandably.