Don't Mention the War. Or Churchill.

[cardigankid]

Fat Fairy said:

As ever, full quotes are rarely used...

From https://winstonchurchill.org/publications/finest-h...

'In the event of the Germans using gas on the Russians, my declaration of last year of course stands. We shall retaliate by drenching the German cities with gas on the largest possible scale. We must expect their counter-measures. Is everything in readiness for this contingency both ways? It is quite possible that another warning like I gave last year might check them off at the last minute, but we must be ready to strike and make good any threat we utter with the utmost promptitude and severity.'

and

'Continued use of the Royal Air Force in Iraq, Churchill explained to Air Marshal Trenchard, might require “the provision of some kind of asphyxiating bombs calculated to cause disablement of some kind but not death…'

So, Tear Gas and such?

FF

Churchill had been in WW1 and knew perfectly well what gas meant, and also that tear gas would have been as much use against Kurdish tribes as confetti. If he had used poison gas against German cities in WW2 the Germans would have used Sarin on London. Fortunately more sensible and less drink addled brains prevailed.

[cardigankid]

Fat Fairy said:

Can you provide a reference to that? It is not what I understood.

FF

I’ll give you the dates and locations.

[V8 Fettler]

cardigankid said:

V8 Fettler said:

Feel free to start issuing your facts whenever you're ready.

You don’t accept that Wilson kept Britain out of Vietnam? Or that would have been another one of those just wars us plucky Brits had to fight to defeat communism, unfortunately one which we would have, er, lost. Another tranche of war graves to celebrate.

Facts re: Churchill, not Wilson

[Jonesy23]

So is the main argument on this thread being driven by an Irish-Scots nationalist or a German?

I'd go with the former, even the elderly true believers in Nazism are less revisionist.

[Halb]

cardigankid said:

Harold Wilson. Why? Because he refused to bow to American pressure to send British forces into Vietnam. He kept Britain out of a war

that certainly took courage, and should be saluted.

[anonymous-user]

Fast and Spurious said:

Good to hear a differing opinion. Ignore the cretins that just throw insults.

Edited by Fast and Spurious on Saturday 20th October 22:59

Opinion as to the opinion of "Most Aussies". You're easily impressed!

[Fat Fairy]

cardigankid said:

Fat Fairy said:

Can you provide a reference to that? It is not what I understood.

FF

I’ll give you the dates and locations.

Please do.

FF

[Fat Fairy]

cardigankid said:

Churchill had been in WW1 and knew perfectly well what gas meant, and also that tear gas would have been as much use against Kurdish tribes as confetti. If he had used poison gas against German cities in WW2 the Germans would have used Sarin on London. Fortunately more sensible and less drink addled brains prevailed.

So which bit of "In the event of the Germans using gas on the Russians, my declaration of last year of course stands. We shall retaliate by drenching the German cities with gas on the largest possible scale...." are you having issues with?

Churchill was stating "If the Germans use gas on our allies, we will retaliate"

That's what allies do, isn't it? Look out for each other!

"...tear gas would have been as much use against Kurdish tribes as confetti.."

Cor. I wish I was as hard as a Kurd. When I got tear gassed (on a regular basis) I couldn't see, my eyes were painful, breathing was unpleasant because of burning sensations in my throat and nose. 'Increased nasal secretions' are considered normal for CS Gas, which means for most people, you have an entire week long, stinking colds worth of snot trying to exit your nose in a 5 to 10 minute interval. You get chest tightness, sneezing, coughing and retching. All the things that your 'Super Kurds' will be immune to eh?

FF

[Fast and Spurious]

irocfan said:

I don't think that anyone ever claimed that Churchill was a saint, even by the standards of the day. He may have been a total bd, however he was the bd we (the Western democracies) needed

I think you're right. Probably after 5 long years of war (he said thus in 1944) he was getting a bit narky.

[Fast and Spurious]

Fat Fairy said:

As ever, full quotes are rarely used...

From https://winstonchurchill.org/publications/finest-h...

'In the event of the Germans using gas on the Russians, my declaration of last year of course stands. We shall retaliate by drenching the German cities with gas on the largest possible scale. We must expect their counter-measures. Is everything in readiness for this contingency both ways? It is quite possible that another warning like I gave last year might check them off at the last minute, but we must be ready to strike and make good any threat we utter with the utmost promptitude and severity.'

and

'Continued use of the Royal Air Force in Iraq, Churchill explained to Air Marshal Trenchard, might require “the provision of some kind of asphyxiating bombs calculated to cause disablement of some kind but not death…'

So, Tear Gas and such?

FF

That was 1943, I'm talking about July 1944 when he was stting his keks about the forthcoming rockets (V2). Britain, on his orders, was making and stockpiling gas and Anthrax, it was all ready to go!

[DeejRC]

So we ignore conversations about gas in 1943 and jump straight to 1944?

It is quite well known that Britain had stockpiles of Anthrax and was considering its use.

There is little point in pointing any fingers at Churchill when it comes to debating the morals and ethics of Area Bombing. He is on record as stating it needed to be done simply to show the population that GB was still in the war. He is also on record later on as wishing to constrain Arthur Harris.

Debating the morals and ethics of Harris is a different discussion entirely!!!

[CrutyRammers]

cardigankid said:

Britain prepared planned and launched the First World War for the furtherance of the Empire. Fact. Men were hanged for doing that at Nuremberg.

When people asked for facts, they didn't just mean the word, "Fact".

[Fast and Spurious]

DeejRC said:

So we ignore conversations about gas in 1943 and jump straight to 1944?

It is quite well known that Britain had stockpiles of Anthrax and was considering its use.

I was always talking 1944, you need to keep up old bean.
I don't think it is well known that we had such stockpiles and considered using it!

[Fat Fairy]

Fast and Spurious said:

Fat Fairy said:

As ever, full quotes are rarely used...

From https://winstonchurchill.org/publications/finest-h...

'In the event of the Germans using gas on the Russians, my declaration of last year of course stands. We shall retaliate by drenching the German cities with gas on the largest possible scale. We must expect their counter-measures. Is everything in readiness for this contingency both ways? It is quite possible that another warning like I gave last year might check them off at the last minute, but we must be ready to strike and make good any threat we utter with the utmost promptitude and severity.'

and

'Continued use of the Royal Air Force in Iraq, Churchill explained to Air Marshal Trenchard, might require “the provision of some kind of asphyxiating bombs calculated to cause disablement of some kind but not death…'

So, Tear Gas and such?

FF

That was 1943, I'm talking about July 1944 when he was stting his keks about the forthcoming rockets (V2). Britain, on his orders, was making and stockpiling gas and Anthrax, it was all ready to go!

Yup. It was there. Ready to be used in retaliation. Why oh why should the allies fight as if they were Ivanhoe, charging to the rescue on a white steed, feathers in their helmets?

The Nazis instigated TOTAL WAR! Churchill had reminded them that gassing the Russians would result in the rest of the allies retaliating! Why in gods name, must the allies fight with one hand tied behind their back!

A further quote from https://winstonchurchill.org/publications/finest-h...

"In view of the celerity and gusto with which Right Thinkers in the media attack Churchill, it is appropriate to mention Sir Martin’s next paragraph—a poignant reminder of stark reality, and the difference between “us” and “them”:

“News had just reached London of the mass murder in specially-designed gas chambers of more than two and a half million Jews at Auschwitz,which had hitherto been identified only as a slave-labour camp.”19

FF

[Fast and Spurious]

Fat Fairy said:

Yup. It was there. Ready to be used in retaliation. Why oh why should the allies fight as if they were Ivanhoe, charging to the rescue on a white steed, feathers in their helmets?

The Nazis instigated TOTAL WAR! Churchill had reminded them that gassing the Russians would result in the rest of the allies retaliating! Why in gods name, must the allies fight with one hand tied behind their back!

A further quote from https://winstonchurchill.org/publications/finest-h...

"In view of the celerity and gusto with which Right Thinkers in the media attack Churchill, it is appropriate to mention Sir Martin’s next paragraph—a poignant reminder of stark reality, and the difference between “us” and “them”:

“News had just reached London of the mass murder in specially-designed gas chambers of more than two and a half million Jews at Auschwitz,which had hitherto been identified only as a slave-labour camp.”19

FF

The Allies fought with one hand tied behind their backs???!!!! I really don't think so. They dished it out pretty well.
I also think that getting all your quotes from Winnies library isn't going to give you a balanced view.

[Russian Troll Bot]

Fast and Spurious said:

Fat Fairy said:

Yup. It was there. Ready to be used in retaliation. Why oh why should the allies fight as if they were Ivanhoe, charging to the rescue on a white steed, feathers in their helmets?

The Nazis instigated TOTAL WAR! Churchill had reminded them that gassing the Russians would result in the rest of the allies retaliating! Why in gods name, must the allies fight with one hand tied behind their back!

A further quote from https://winstonchurchill.org/publications/finest-h...

"In view of the celerity and gusto with which Right Thinkers in the media attack Churchill, it is appropriate to mention Sir Martin’s next paragraph—a poignant reminder of stark reality, and the difference between “us” and “them”:

“News had just reached London of the mass murder in specially-designed gas chambers of more than two and a half million Jews at Auschwitz,which had hitherto been identified only as a slave-labour camp.”19

FF

The Allies fought with one hand tied behind their backs???!!!! I really don't think so. They dished it out pretty well.
I also think that getting all your quotes from Winnies library isn't going to give you a balanced view.

Anything that the Western Allies "dished out" pales in comparison to the crimes of Nazi Germany and Japan

[Fat Fairy]

Fast and Spurious said:

Fat Fairy said:

Yup. It was there. Ready to be used in retaliation. Why oh why should the allies fight as if they were Ivanhoe, charging to the rescue on a white steed, feathers in their helmets?

The Nazis instigated TOTAL WAR! Churchill had reminded them that gassing the Russians would result in the rest of the allies retaliating! Why in gods name, must the allies fight with one hand tied behind their back!

A further quote from https://winstonchurchill.org/publications/finest-h...

"In view of the celerity and gusto with which Right Thinkers in the media attack Churchill, it is appropriate to mention Sir Martin’s next paragraph—a poignant reminder of stark reality, and the difference between “us” and “them”:

“News had just reached London of the mass murder in specially-designed gas chambers of more than two and a half million Jews at Auschwitz,which had hitherto been identified only as a slave-labour camp.”19

FF

The Allies fought with one hand tied behind their backs???!!!! I really don't think so. They dished it out pretty well.
I also think that getting all your quotes from Winnies library isn't going to give you a balanced view.

'Winnies Library' it may be, but all the references and quotes from there are verifiable and documented. Not from a chair bound historian trying to sell a book with snipped quotes.

As to the Allies 'dishing it out', where does it say in the rules that you must 'match the aggressor+1%' ???

[DeejRC]

Fast and Spurious said:

DeejRC said:

So we ignore conversations about gas in 1943 and jump straight to 1944?

It is quite well known that Britain had stockpiles of Anthrax and was considering its use.

I was always talking 1944, you need to keep up old bean.
I don't think it is well known that we had such stockpiles and considered using it!

Of course it is. Every half decent WW2 historian and scholar covers it.

Just because you were talking about 1944 is irrelevent, the subject was already being addressed in 1943 - as the other poster points out. Actually 1943 is largely neither here nor there, Britain had stockpiles prior to that.

The use or not was nothing to do with morals or ethics, but practicality and tactical. It’s a very poor weapon as part of an area bombing campaign delivered from high level. It will disperse and provide very little impact.

Churchill issued far worse - in terms of the ethical - orders than considering gas.

[AW111]

fblm said:

Opinion as to the opinion of "Most Aussies". You're easily impressed!

IME, "most Aussies" only think of England when there's a sporting contest involved.
You're an irrelevance the rest of the time.

[jakesmith]

V8 Fettler said:

Topbuzz said:

Churchill, Hitler, and "The Unnecessary War": How Britain Lost Its Empire and the West Lost the World

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Churchill-Hitler-Unnecess...

Very interesting book. Lots of info and sources for further investigation.

Amazon summary said:

among the British and Churchillian errors were:
• The secret decision of a tiny cabal in the inner Cabinet in 1906 to take Britain straight to war against Germany, should she invade France
• The vengeful Treaty of Versailles that mutilated Germany, leaving her bitter, betrayed, and receptive to the appeal of Adolf Hitler
• Britain’s capitulation, at Churchill’s urging, to American pressure to sever the Anglo-Japanese alliance, insulting and isolating Japan, pushing her onto the path of militarism and conquest
• The greatest mistake in British history: the unsolicited war guarantee to Poland of March 1939, ensuring the Second World War

Why would the British wait for the Germans to occupy France before taking military action in WW1? It was not in British interests to allow Germany to dominate continental Europe 1914 onwards.

The "revenge" element of the Treaty of Versailles was largely driven by the French. There is a case for dismantling Germany following WW1.

The Anglo-Japanese alliance wasn't severed, it lapsed. An important difference.

It was not in British interests to allow Germany to dominate continental Europe 1939 onwards. The greatest mistake in British military and political history during the 20th century? Not expecting Blitzkrieg in 1940, a concept that was developed by the British.

But apart from that, good effort!