January 06, 2008
Gratuitous Historickal Posting
It's taken me about a year to get all the way through the series, but last evening I finally finished off the last book of Winston Churchill's memoirs on WWII, Triumph and Tragedy.
I have to say that this is one of the saddest books I've ever read.
So here's a question for you history buffs out there: Given "Uncle Joe" Stalin's ruthlessness, FDR's declining health and feebleness at Yalta, Truman's slowness to pick up on the threat and the strong political pressure in the States to yank the American troops from Europe as soon as possible either to send them to fight the Japanese or bring them home, was there a damned thing that Winston could have done to stop the loss of Poland, the swallowing of Eastern Germany and the rest of the villainy that occured behind the Iron Curtain? Or did the Old Boy do the very best he could with what he had?
Discuss.
UPDATE: Mrs. P brings up the Home Front issue in her comments. I've tried to respond twice but got spammed both times, so I'll put my answer in the main post:
No, I did not forget the politicians. However, my compound sentence was already hidiously bloated and I was afraid it would burst if I added any more factors. Also, the truth of the matter is that without enthusiastic American support, Britain simply didn't have the capacity to face down the Soviets by herself, no matter how unified at home.
This raises an interesting question, though. Supposing that FDR and then Truman had decided to act to stop the Red Tide rolling into Central Europe. For example, what if the Americans had refused to withdraw from their farthest line of advance into Germany, or had pushed even farther in a concerted effort to beat the Soviets to Berlin. Supposing it had been the Allied policy to encourage German surrender to the Western powers, instead of throwing them to the tender mercies of the Soviet juggernaut. Supposing Alexander had been given the go-ahead to squash Tito and drive on Vienna. Supposing, even, that we had threatened to nuke Moscow if the Russians didn't get the hell out of Poland. Given that, could Winston have mustered enough support on the home front in order to keep the Coalition Government together?
Posted by Robert at January 6, 2008 10:43 AM | TrackBackYou are forgetting about all the jerks in Parlaiment too. Complete fools and worse.
He did the best he could do. Which was more than anyone else was willing to do or capable of doing. That's why he's still so beloved today.
Except 50% of British kids under the age of 20 have no idea of who he is.
Posted by: Mrs. Peperium at January 6, 2008 12:59 PMBut in a sense, he was in a situation of "you and whose army?"
Posted by: Son of a Pig and a Monkey at January 6, 2008 02:32 PMBugger. It appears my earlier comments got eaten up in the intertubes.
My point was that Britain was physically, emotionally and fiscally exhausted by the war. She couldn't keep her overseas territories (Palestine Mandate, India) outside of the Falklands, I doubt she had any more fight left in her.
Not to mention that the British government was riddled by Soviet Fifth Columnists.
Besides, wasn't Churchill already out of power by then?
Posted by: rbj at January 6, 2008 03:33 PMPatton -- ever tactful -- argued the same point. War-weariness was everywhere and a few short years after having one PM declare 'peace in our time' on the eve of war, we all packed up and went home.
What if those soviet sympathizers hadn't given them the nuke (while hiding behind the 'don't witch hunt poor little us' defense)?
Thank goodness for Reagan, Thatcher, and JPII.
tdp, Dont forget Lech Walensa (spelling, please). Without someone kicking the rotten pillars from the inside, no amount of outside huffing & puffing would do anything.
Posted by: rbj at January 7, 2008 09:53 AMI think Churchill also thought that he had more influence over Stalin than he actually did; that he thought he was the one politician who could bring about some sort of rapprochement between the Russians and the U.S. I think he was somewhat mistaken in this notion.
But short of a nuclear war, I don't see how the Allies could have liberated the East from Stalin. I think it was part of the price for defeating Hitler; that Eastern Europe's fate was sealed probably as early as the reoccupation of the Rhineland -- once Britan and France refused to enforce Versailles, the Eastern European states which were the children of Versailles were doomed to be consumed by either Germany or Russia.
I'm glad we've moved NATO's boundaries further East; I think it clarifies the world a great deal. Putin may get as far as Belarus or the Ukraine in his sphere of influence, but no further.
Posted by: The Abbot at January 7, 2008 09:58 AMFor what it's worth, the issue was looked at by the Office of the Minister of Defence/War Cabinet---they called it "Operation UNTHINKABLE". The answer wasn't quite what we might've hoped for.
Posted by: The Country Pundit at January 7, 2008 01:39 PMAs much as Churchill is my hero, his Fulton speech was a bit rich given the fact that much of the acquisitions he warned the Soviets had made had been suggested by him in the infamous Percentages Deal.
But if there is blame I would put it inevitably on Ike who saw Churchill's demand for control of Berlin (he knew the stakes clearly back in 1944) as political rather than military, and we suffered 44 years as a result, coming close in 1948 to WWIII. As many Americans complained during the airlift, Truman had gall to risk war when it was his decision to allow Berlin to remain an exclave for Allied forces within East Germany.
But then, when one considers Britain had seen control of 1/4 of the world, and the US saw Central and South America as its entire sphere of influence, war-torn Bulgaria, Albania, Hungary etc. were not much consolation for Stalin.
NIKE板鞋 nikedao NIKE运动鞋 百度 百度贴吧 百度知道 百度 百度贴吧 百度知道 NIKE板鞋 nikedao NIKE运动鞋 NIKE板鞋 nikedao NIKE运动鞋 google google blog 谷歌 google google blog 谷歌 google google blog 谷歌 nikedao nikedao nikedao.com www.nikedao.com NIKE ADIDAS PUMA NIKE板鞋 NIKE运动鞋 NIKE跑鞋 ADIDAS板鞋 ADIDAS运动鞋 ADIDAS跑鞋 PUMA板鞋 PUMA运动鞋 PUMA跑鞋 NIKE 板鞋 NIKE 运动鞋 NIKE 跑鞋 ADIDAS 板鞋 ADIDAS 运动鞋 ADIDAS 跑鞋 PUMA 板鞋 PUMA 运动鞋 PUMA 跑鞋 板鞋 运动鞋 跑鞋 首页 商品分类 会员中心 购物车 客户留言 品牌 赠品 捆绑商品 产品目录 联系我们 关于我们 常见问题 安全交易 购买流程 如何付款 adidas Smith 情侣鞋 adidas adicolor 情侣鞋 adidas 35周年鞋 adidas 新款皇冠女鞋 adidas 城市系列 NIKE 复古板鞋 NIKE Dunk SB Nike Air Force One NIKE AF1 25周年 Nike Air MAX 2003系列跑鞋 NIKE板鞋 nikedao NIKE运动鞋 百度 百度贴吧 百度知道 百度 百度贴吧 百度知道 NIKE板鞋 nikedao NIKE运动鞋 NIKE板鞋 nikedao NIKE运动鞋 google google blog 谷歌 google google blog 谷歌 google google blog 谷歌 nikedao nikedao nikedao.com www.nikedao.com NIKE ADIDAS PUMA NIKE板鞋 NIKE运动鞋 NIKE跑鞋 ADIDAS板鞋 ADIDAS运动鞋 ADIDAS跑鞋 PUMA板鞋 PUMA运动鞋 PUMA跑鞋 NIKE 板鞋 NIKE 运动鞋 NIKE 跑鞋 ADIDAS 板鞋 ADIDAS 运动鞋 ADIDAS 跑鞋 PUMA 板鞋 PUMA 运动鞋 PUMA 跑鞋 板鞋 运动鞋 跑鞋 首页 商品分类 会员中心 购物车 客户留言 品牌 赠品 捆绑商品 产品目录 联系我们 关于我们 常见问题 安全交易 购买流程 如何付款 adidas Smith 情侣鞋 adidas adicolor 情侣鞋 adidas 35周年鞋 adidas 新款皇冠女鞋 adidas 城市系列 NIKE 复古板鞋 NIKE Dunk SB Nike Air Force One NIKE AF1 25周年 Nike Air MAX 2003系列跑鞋
Posted by: nikedao at May 30, 2008 12:48 PM
Image courtesy of the lovely and talented 