Gorque wrote: ↑
15 Jan 2022 15:14
ljadw wrote: ↑
15 Jan 2022 09:52
Gorque wrote: ↑
13 Jan 2022 21:31
ljadw wrote: ↑
13 Jan 2022 07:30
Is it to troll to say that the positions from Churchill and De Gaulle before the war,made what they said,totally irrelevant ?
De Gaulle was a discredited colonel of the French Army (you know how many colonels there were in France in 1939 ? )and I see that you have no notion of the opinions of the political parties about Churchill :
for the Tories he was a traitor and an intriguer:they had not forgotten what he had done between 1929 and 1931
for Labour he was only a disguised fascist ( he had supported Mussolini ) and had ordered the police to shoot on strikers
for the Liberals he was an old fashioned racist imperialist
for the intellectuals he was a warmonger
the public opinion had not forgotten his role in the abdication crisis.
Considering Churchill's past posts held and his current posting as a long-term MP, calling his opinion "irrelevant" borders upon ignorance. As far as De Gaulle is concerned, he was a forward thinking staff officer in the 30's who was also promoting, much like Guderian, the use of tanks and mechanization for the French Army. Once again, to render his opinions within the defense establishment "irrelevant," borders on ignorance.
Is it to troll to say that Mary Heaton Vorse was an ultra left American journalist whose writings about the situation in Europe were determined by her political opinions ?
Yes it is. What does her political leanings have to do she quoted Rydzs Smygly?? She was INTERVIEWING Rydzs Smygly and quoted what he SAID. Think about this. Did the New York Times retract her story because she misquoted Rydzs Smygly? The only person whose judgement is clouded by their political beliefs and preconceived notions is you.
Is it to troll to say that Vansittart was fired at the demand of Eden ?
And what was the opinion of Eden about his POSS ?
Eden said : "he is not balanced and in such a continual state of nerves that he will end up making would-be aggressors think the more of us as a potential victim. '' (source is Rhodes James )
There you go again Ludo, moving the goal posts again.
You stated "he did not represent HMG and was fired by Eden in 1938 and what he said were only assumptions,without any proof
For your information, after his dismissal, Vansitarrt was given a newly created position of "Chief Diplomatic Adviser to His Majesty's Government" in which he served until 1941. Did you conveniently forget the bolded first part of your statement???
About Vansittart: on 9 October 1937,Chamberlain wrote in his letter to his sister Hilda that Vansittart was a man whose '' instincts were all against my policy ''
The source is John Charmley :Chamberlain and the Lost Peace P 34 and Note 11 on P 216.
The obvious conclusion is that after he was fired, Vansittart did not represent the views of the British Government and that his newly created position represented nothing .Unless you think that the British PM would use as his representant someone whose instincts were all against the policy of the PM.
There is even no proof that when Eden became again Foreign Secretary, he listened to/asked the opinions of Vansittart .
A nice quote, but how does it disprove the fact that Vansitartt and Drax were entrusted not only with negotiating with the Soviets in the summer of 1939, but also that he held the position of "Chief Diplomatic Adviser to His Majesty's Government"?
1 Vansittart and Drax were not going to Moscow to negotiate with the Soviets,as HMG knew very well that the Soviets could not and would not help .Not to prevent a war.Not to help Poland if there was a war .They could not do it even if they wanted and they would not want to do it even if they could .There were no negotiations between B+ F and the Soviets .
It was all keeping up appearances .
They went to Moscow ,wasting their time, only for political domestic reasons ,which were that Lloyd George ( who hated Chamberlain ) and Churchill demanded in the Commons that the government should send a mission to Moscow to have Russia (= the Red Army ) on its side when war broke out .If there was a possibility that this could happen, Halifax would go to Moscow . But he knew that it was only a wast of time.
2 The title from Vansittart does not mean that he had any political influence :the title was only hollow words .
Chamberlain knew very well what the opinion was of Vansittart .See his letter to his sister and it was out of the question that the Chief Diplomatic Adviser to his Majesty's Government would play a role .No one took any notion of Vansittart .
Other point : if the opposite had occurred = 1 September attack by the Soviets,17 September intervention by Hitler to prevent the Soviets from taking Danzig and West Prussia,would the situation have been different ?
NO ,of course: Drax, Vansittart and Doumenc would go to Berlin . Poland would refuse any German help and Hitler would ask what would be his reward if he intervened .
And the wokes who blamed Stalin and Chamberlain,would now blame Hitler and Chamberlain .
Already in 1938,Churchill was talking ,bombastly as usual,about the Great Alliance (B+ F and the USSR )
and Chamberlain wrote to his sister: ''the Plan of the Grand Alliance,as Winston calls it,is a very attractive idea,till you examine its practicability.From that moment its attraction vanishes .''
Source : Churchill The Greatest Briton unmasked (Nigel Knight ) P 80 Note 15 .
And, was the situation of Poland better in 1939 ? Of course not .
There was nothing Britain and France could do to prevent Hitler from attacking Poland .And there was nothing they could do to prevent Hitler from defeating Poland .