Re: Churchill's role in war
Bent Attorney Esq.
{
Buchanan: Churchill Spurred the Decline of the West
From Antiwar.com
On September 3, 2009, a debate sponsored by Intelligence Squared, at
the Methodist Central Hall Westminster, in London, considered the
question: “Resolved: Churchill was more a liability than an asset to
the free world.”
Speakers for the motion: Pat Buchanan, Nigel Knight, political
scientist and economist at Churchill College, Cambridge, and Norman
Stone, historian and professor of International Relations at Bilkent
University, Ankara.
Speakers against the motion: Antony Beevor, historian and author of
the best-selling book Stalingrad; professor Richard Overy, historian,
author of many books and articles on the Second World War and the Nazi
regime; and Andrew Roberts, historian, who has spent 20 years writing,
researching, and broadcasting about Churchill and the Second World
War.
We publish below Pat Buchanan’s opening statement:
To borrow from Mark Antony’s funeral oration, we of the affirmative
are not here to praise Mr. Churchill — but to bury him.
But, first, let us concede the greatness of the man.
In that finest hour of the British nation, 1940, Winston Churchill was
indomitable, an inspiration to men everywhere. He was the Lion who
gave Britain’s roar of defiance in the face of Hitler’s Germany. For
that, he will be honored by peoples everywhere — and forever.
And if we judged him on that year alone, there would be no debate.
There would be unanimity.
But Churchill’s career did not last a single year. It lasted half a
century. And, over that half century, no other career of a Western
statesman was more calamitous for his country and his civilization
than that of Winston Spencer Churchill.
More than any other British leader, in 1914 and 1939, Churchill lusted
for war and pushed his country to turn two European wars into world
wars, so Germany might be destroyed.
Both times, he succeeded.
And history records that those wars, that together took the lives of
perhaps a hundred million Europeans, were the mortal blows that
advanced the death of the West.
And it was Winston Churchill who led the West in its advance to
barbarism.
As First Lord he instituted a starvation blockade that violated all
the rules of civilized warfare and brought death to 100 times as many
German civilians as there were Belgian victims of the Kaiser’s army.
Churchill’s purpose: it is, he said “to starve the whole population,
men, women and children, old and young, wounded and sound, into
submission.”
Four months after Germany laid down her arms, the starvation blockade
remained in force. And Churchill rose in Parliament to exult: “We are
enforcing the blockade with rigour and Germany is near starvation.”
In 1920, as Secretary for War and Air, Churchill, enraged by Iraqi
resistance to British colonial rule, declaimed, “I am strongly in
favor of using poison gas against uncivilized tribes to spread a
lively terror.”
Eighty years later, Saddam Hussein and Chemical Ali would be hanged in
Baghdad for doing what Churchill urged Britain to do and what Britain
did.
The day he became Prime Minister in 1940, as the German army was
breaking through in the Ardennes, Churchill directed his bombers not
against Rommel’s Panzers, but Rhineland cities, in what your historian
Paul Johnson calls “a critical stage in the moral declension of
humanity in our times.”
Coventry and the Blitz were war crimes.
But they were also reprisal raids for the terror bombing begun by
Churchill. The climax came in 1945 with Thunderclap, the fire-bombing
of Dresden, the Florence on the Elbe, a defenseless city of a defeated
nation packed with refugees fleeing the serial rapists of the Red
Army. Estimates of the dead range from 35,000 to 250,000.
But he was a great war strategist, we are told.
But the greatest British debacle of World War I was Gallipoli, an ill-
conceived drive to force the Dardanelles that cost a quarter of a
million British, French and Anzac dead and wounded. Architect of the
disaster: First Lord of the Admiralty Winston Churchill.
The greatest British debacle of World War II was Norway, when the
invading Royal Marines arrived 24 hours after German troops had landed
and occupied all the major Norwegian ports from Oslo to Narvik.
Architect of the disaster: First Lord of the Admiralty Winston
Churchill.
One British historian suggests the Norway operation was blown by
Churchill himself, blabbing his plans to neutral press attaches, where
German intelligence picked them up. That historian? Andrew Roberts.
What of Churchill the statesman?
In 1921, the Americans demanded that Britain come to a Washington
Naval Conference, agree to scrap hundreds of warships, and sever a 20-
year alliance with a Japan that had been faithful throughout World War
I. Churchill urged capitulation to the Americans, and Britain
capitulated, terminated the Japanese treaty, and began dismantling the
greatest navy in the world.
British historian Correlli Barnett calls that capitulation to American
demands, at Churchill’s insistence, “one of the major catastrophes of
English history.”
Five years later, Chancellor of the Exchequer Churchill said, do not
worry: “War with Japan is not a possibility which any reasonable
government need take into account.” In 1942, Singapore fell, and the
empire was finished in Asia.
When Hitler marched into the Rhineland in 1936, Churchill hailed the
French for taking the matter to the League of Nations.. But the ideal
solution, he wrote, would be for Hitler to do the “noble” thing, and
march back out of the Rhineland.
Apparently, Hitler did not read the column.
In 1939, he Churchill pushed his country to go to war for Poland.
Britain did. Was Poland saved? Instead of losing Danzig, the Poles
lost half their country, six million dead, and fifty years of freedom.
Churchill excoriated Chamberlain for appeasing Hitler. But
Churchill’s four years of appeasement of Stalin make Neville
Chamberlain at Munich look like Davy Crockett at the Alamo.
At Moscow, Teheran, Yalta, Churchill told Stalin he could keep all the
fruits of his devil’s pact with Hitler including the three Baltic
republics. He acceded to Moscow’s domination of Eastern and Central
Europe in violation of his solemn pledge in the Atlantic Charter.
When he came back from Yalta in 1945, Churchill told Parliament, “I
know of no Government which stands to its obligations more solidly
than the Russian Soviet Government.”
Churchill then gave his benediction to the most barbaric act of ethnic
cleansing in history: the forced expulsion of 13 million German old
men, women and children from their ancestral homes. Two million died
in the exodus.
At war’s end, Germany was a smoldering ruin but all the great capitals
of Central and Eastern Europe — Warsaw, Berlin, Budapest, Prague,
Vienna – were occupied by Stalin’s Red Army. Britain was bankrupt and
broken. The empire was collapsing. And the Americans were going
home.
But there was this consolation: Haile Selassie was back on his throne
in Addis Ababa.
When Churchill entered the inner Cabinet as First Lord in 1911,
Britain was first nation on earth and ruler of the greatest empire
since Rome. When he left in 1945, Britain was an island dependency of
the United States. He was a Great Man — at the cost of his country’s
greatness.
SOURCE: Antiwar.com
}
George
advantageous to any-one who -really- wishes to understand the
pacifistic nature of many politicians and people at that time.
It was only Churchill who stood against the many League of Nations
disarmament plans and the multitude of 'peace' groups of the time.
And for the uninformed. The Second World War was against the Axis
Powers.
Germany, Japan and Italy.
In destroying the Axis Powers Britain and the Empire fought alone
and bankrupted later generations so they could continue the fight
against the now admitted evil nazi empire.
Then turned around at wars end and rebuilt those previous enemy
countries...
George
wrote:
> "rebuilt" anybody or any thing. Germany was rebuilt despite the
> allies, not because of them. The allied expertise was in looting and
> robbery, not in reconstruction.
>
> The so-called Marshall aid was a pittance that didn't even put a tiny
> nick in the damages.
Your response is that of a nazi who cant admit that germany was so
thoroughly defeated in a war they started that if it hadn't been for
the Allies at wars end feeding and clothing the german nation hundreds
of thousands would have died in the next winter.
The nazis left nothing for their civilians.
I'll Always Be 10/09/09
<b3f9dac6-d971-4b64-ade0-10329fe80b9f@x6
g2000prc.googlegroups.com>,
George <gbl...@hnpl.net> wrote:
Better point is: How many defeated
nations ever received aid from the
countries that defeated them?
Bent Attorney Esq.
Define 'nazi' here. You are accusing someone of being a 'nazi.' You
don't seem to know what the term means. I think a 'nazi' was a member
of the natSoc party of Germany during the time of Hitler.
What is your definition? George? C'mon now.
George
wrote:
Your posting history defines you as a nazi.
End of story.
Build a bridge and get over yourself
Bent Attorney Esq.
I'm not a member of the natSoc party of any nation. I don't believe
in genocide, facism, socialism or murder for profit. What is your
definition of the term 'nazi'? I'm waiting. Cat got your tounge?
Bent Attorney Esq.
wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Sep 2009 16:42:55 -0700 (PDT), George <gbl...@hnpl.net>
>
> You have verified yourself as a clueless moron, george. Your drivel
> postings would normally give a failing grade to a grade 3 pupil, let
> alone somebody who claims to be an adult.
>
He is unable to define the term/word 'nazi'. Yet the boy loves to
throw out that word. He's an idiot of magnitude 7 out of 7.2.
George
wrote:
> I'm not a member of the natSoc party of any nation. I don't believe
> in genocide, facism, socialism or murder for profit. What is your
> definition of the term 'nazi'? I'm waiting. Cat got your tounge?- Hide quoted text -
>
So your posts about the 'evil jews' didn't happen?
And all that claptrap about just how nice things were in Germany under
the nazis was a figment of the Nets imagination?.
You follow the same racist antiHolocaust line of the nazis.
You are a nazi!
Truthseeker
"George" <gbl...@hnpl.net> wrote in message
news:b132fc3d-3841-40e3...@f18g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
Now this is a new one for me. Are all the people who are questioning you
holocaust Nazis or do you mean all nationalities and religions included.
Lets face the facts sucker most of the world does not trust you. and you
will never earn respect from most societies on this planet of ours.
Kurt Knoll.
I'll Always Be 11/09/09
<GCyqm.43585$Db2.23838@edtnps83>,
"Truthseeker" <kur...@citywest.ca>
wrote:
> "George" <gbl...@hnpl.net> wrote in message
> news:b132fc3d-3841-40e3...@f18g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> On Sep 12, 5:43 am, "Bent Attorney Esq." <parkstreetboo...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I'm not a member of the natSoc party of any nation. I don't believe
> > in genocide, facism, socialism or murder for profit. What is your
> > definition of the term 'nazi'? I'm waiting. Cat got your tounge?- Hide
> > quoted text -
> >
>
> So your posts about the 'evil jews' didn't happen?
> And all that claptrap about just how nice things were in Germany under
> the nazis was a figment of the Nets imagination?.
> You follow the same racist antiHolocaust line of the nazis.
> You are a nazi!
>
>
> Now this is a new one for me.
What isn't?
> Are all the people who are questioning you
> holocaust Nazis or do you mean all nationalities and religions included.
Third street, near the liquor store
> Lets face the facts sucker most of the world does not trust you.
Let's face the facts fuckface, NONE of
the world has ever trusted a knoll
> and you will never earn respect from most societies on this planet of ours.
"This planet of ours"? Your kind tried
to conquer the planet and look at where
you are now.
> Kurt Knoll.
Truthseeker
holocaust Nazis or do you mean all nationalities and religions included.
will never earn respect from most societies on this planet of ours.
"I'll Always Be 11/09/09" <aussie...@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:aussies_suck-68BB...@aries.ka.weretis.net...
I'll Always Be 11/09/09
I'll Always Be 11/09/09
Bent Attorney Esq.
Where did I post concerning 'evil jews'?
Where did I post concerning how nice things were in Germany under the
'nazis'?
You suk. Show me where I posted this stuff.
Bent Attorney Esq.
Where have I posted about 'evil jews'?
Things in Germany under the natSoc were better than they were
following the implementation of the Versaiiles treaty.
I've stated on this NG that what the natSocs did to the Jews and
others was immoral. Whether or not there was a plan to exterminate
them all, I don't know; ask Penn Jillette.