Posted on 10/12/2012 3:26:13 PM PDT by TexasBarak
The reason it is so depressing to read Alone, the middle volume of William Manchester's biography of Winston Churchill, is not because the British government was so obtuse in failing to listen to Churchill's constant warnings about the rising menace of Adolf Hitler.
Why should that be depressing? After all, when Hitler finally got the war he had wanted for so long, Churchill was elevated at last to be prime minister of Britain, and in that position he saved Britain and, by the way, the world.
So this is the prelude to a tale of triumph. It is sad to see all the wasted opportunities, and to think of all the millions of deaths that could have been prevented if Churchill's warnings had only been heeded.
(Excerpt) Read more at hatrack.com ...
|
|
|
| GGG managers are SunkenCiv, StayAt HomeMother & Ernest_at_the_Beach | |
|
|
Thanks TexasBarak, but......when Hitler finally got the war he had wanted for so long, Churchill was elevated at last to be prime minister of Britain, and in that position he saved Britain and, by the way, the world....wow, what a crock of horse manure. |
|
|
|
|
Thanks for bringing this brilliant essay to the attention of the Freeper community. I’ve posted a link to it on my Facebook page. Everyone should read it and reflect on the scary parallels.
The only difference between then and now is that there is no Churchill to rally us and save western civilization. The shelves in the great “Arsenal of Democracy” are bare and we lack the will to fill them even if we had the industrial capacity.
If it wasn’t Winston Churchill, who was it? No reputable historian disagrees that it was Winston alone who gave the British people enough heart to withstand the early months of the war. If England fell, we would have been alone. It would have made the redemption of the old world by the new even more difficult if we had bothered to do it at all.
Ender ping
Thanks for the ping. Orson Scott Card is correct: Islam is the greatest threat today — and nothing they do turns leftists against them.
Balderdash. The US saved the world, obviously, with weapon, aircraft, and ammo production for itself and its allies; singlehandedly snuffed the Japanese navy, which is more than the UK was able or willing to do; and built the landing craft for the invasions of Winston’s “soft underbelly of Europe” and D-Day. The UK sat back and waited while Germany expended itself in the Soviet Union. Speaking of the USSR, Stalin did more to save the world from the Nazis than did Winston Churchill.
Unfortunately, this book is NOT the middle volume of the Manchester biography of Churchill. It was supposed to be, but sadly Manchester died prior to completion of the 3d volume.
I was a great fan of Manchester’s biographies and could hardly wait for the 3d volume to appear. Alas, it was not to be.
Another well-thought/written piece by OSC - He could do much good if he would go on a speaking gig about politics.
90% of the German soldiers killed in WWII were killed by the Red Army.
Good essay.
Parallslism falls apart on one basic fact.
Hitler and the Nazis had a real shot at conquering the world militarily. And came remarkably close to accomplishing it. (Though their victory would have been short-lived once America got The Bomb.)
There is absolutely, positively NO WAY Islamists are going to conquer the world militarily.
Weak kneed Europeans and Americans might roll over without a fight, and conversion/immigration could conceivably bring them to power, but they have no hope whatsoever of conquering the world against genuine opposition. Very different from the Germans.
Surely you don’t expect to see a perfect parallel to historic events- the main point here is that Islam is a threat. It doesn’t have to be a *military* threat to be dangerous.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.