IAN AUSTIN'S ARTICLE ON CHURCHILL

Dear Ian - copied to Express and Star reporters who published your piece and to your assistant Cllr Keiran and to former Defence Secretary, Michael Portillo for comments/correction, please.

You are as enthusiastic for dear Winston as Andrew Roberts.  We all have our prejudices! But do take a look at Andrew Marr's book, 'A History of Modern Britain'.  My own thoughts on Britain's Greatest Briton are these that gives a different perspective and are influenced by Marr and the 99 year old interviewed on the 'Today' programme earlier this month.  I think we are all a mixture of good and evil and of hero and villain. We are all frail and flimsy. Please hear both sides of the argument.

1. Churchill loved action, militarism, imperialism, nationalism and the thrill of warfare.  He loved nothing better than a good scrap.
2. He would have loved the British empire to have lasted "for a thousand years" to rival Hitler's Third Reich.  But both were no more after the one World War in two halves. Winston's greater love for war did it for Empire - both Germany and ours.
3. He was a leading protagonist for war in the Cabinet discussions up to 4 August 1914 declaration of war, from what I have read.
4. Yet, this was a war that was nearly lost, by our side, in the first few weeks.
5. This was war, more than once, that could have gone either way.  Only the USA intervention in 1917 turned it in our favour.
6. There was a 'peace' treaty that seems to have failed to recognise the above facts. It was hardly a treaty that was magnanimous in victory - a wonderful phrase attributed to dear Winston.  Akin to "justice tempered with mercy."
7. Even IDS, the former Conservative leader, has spoken of how that disastrous war led to its sequel in 1939.
8. According to Marr, on the 28 May 1940 at the time of the Dunkirk evacuation, if it had been only Conservative politicians present who wanted to cut a deal with Hitler, Churchill would have been outvoted.  The Conservative Foreign Secretary, Lord Halifax had found "Hitler most sincere and Goering frankly attractive." However, Clement Attlee and Arthur Greenwood, the two Labour men in the Government of National Unity, "were solid for fighting on and so, by a squeak, Churchill had his majority." (Marr)
9. Marr has most of the Establishment and many Conservatives, looking on Churchill as "a rather ridiculous, drunken, dodgy man with a penchant for wild speeches and silly hats.  Behind their gloved hands, they called him the rogue elephant, even the gangster." In Labour circles, he was seen as an enemy of the working class, a pink faced toff who called in the army against strikers.  Tonypandy, first time?
10. When he won his majority for war on the 28 May 1940, Churchill told the full War Cabinet, that they were all to fight on to the death.  There would be no parley or surrender. "Let it end only when each one of us lies choking in his own blood upon the ground."
11. Therefore, twice, Churchill wanted all out total war to the death.  The first half imperial war led to the second half in 1939. Surprisingly, two Labour MPs gave him his majority for our nation to fight on after Dunkirk.  One was the Labour leader, Attlee and the other was Arthur Greenwood.  The Conservatives, Halifax and Chamberlain wanted to parley and surrender.  It was the Labour Party that won the war (and lost the peace) and not the Conservatives!!
12. Much later, Attlee led us into the Korean War that had disastrous consequences for that peninsular to this day.
13. It was Attlee who gave us our own deadly WMD with their amassment and renewal by every government, including Labour, ever since.  So much for Labour politicians being wimps for glorious, heroic war! Only in 2015, did the latest new Labour Party leader pronounce that, for him, "war must be the last resort".  And the man still hangs on to this day. Extraordinary!
14. For Churchill and the War Cabinet, when victory was certain for our side in February 1945, it ended for 24,000 Dresden residents not in blood but in fire, flame and burning flesh.  Listen on BBC Sounds. My e-mail to Ian on 14 Feb, here: "Did you hear that 99 year old hero soldier, Victor Gregg, from the 2nd World War who was interviewed on Monday 11 Feb on the 'Today' programme?  He survived the war solely because Churchill and Harris ordered the fire bombing of Dresden in February 1945. His book is called 'Dresden: A Survivor's Story'. His interview starts at 0742:50 hrs."
15. Churchill might easily have lost the war in 1940/1 but the USA came to our rescue in 1941.
16. Radar was an important factor in us winning the Battle of Britain, together with the young pilots and not Winston's magnificent, morale boosting oratory.
17. As Margaret Thatcher was so lucky with her enemies (Galtieri and Scargill), Winston was lucky with his friends in North America and the Empire that won it for him.  Give credit where credit is due.
18. Was it Churchill who thought up the idea of convoys to protect our merchant shipping?  That was a real brainwave.
19. There was Hitler's massive mistakes, of course that helped the Brits and Americans and, the Empire to win.
20. The Soviet Union and Stalin diverted the Nazi war effort onto the Eastern Front.  Did Churchill ever formally thank the USSR for their invaluable help and sacrifice?
21. 20 to 30 million Russians died defending our shores from Hitler.
22. Have you ever bowed your head in silent remembrance of the death and sacrifice of those millions of evil Commies, Ian?
23. Correlli Barnett wrote something like, "In 1945, we were psychologically victorious but, materially defeated and economically bankrupt."

​Anyone is welcome to correct my history or to expand on these notes, here - please.

The White Poppy and the Red

The white poppy was introduced in 1933 by the Co-op Women's Guild to remember those affected by war on all sides, all casualties and the refugees.  It also works for conflict resolution, diplomacy, and positive, practical peacemaking to be used so that war might become the last resort when all else has failed.  The white poppy works for talking with the adversary well before any killing starts.

The red poppy, introduced in 1921, remembers UK armed forces casualties and, through the British Legion, helps their families in many practical ways.  The red poppy does NOT indicate bloodshed.  It does not want, 'Lest we forget', to mean 'Lest we ever forget to wage war'.

2,000 years ago Jesus Christ rejected empire building when he was tempted by the devil to bow down to him and he would be given all the kingdoms of this world.  800 years ago our own country started empire building and collected its nearest country, Ireland first.  It then continued off and on until the First World War that saw the collapse of the German empire, the Austria-Hungary empire, the Russian empire and the beginnings of the end for the British and French empires.

Empire building is called colonialism or imperialism.  It was one reason for the start of the 1914 World War, together with militarism and nationalism according to Professor Niall Ferguson.

Nationalism was seen because it was a Serbian nationalist who assassinated the heir to the Austrian-Hungarian throne.  That led, four weeks later, to the 1914 World War.  Militarism was seen with the naval arms race between Britain and Germany up to 1914.

Britain was fighting the wronged party, Austria-Hungary, that had their heir to the throne killed.  In other words, we were on the wrong side and Germany was on the side of the victim, Austria-Hungary.  Hindsight now shows us that all out, total war between the European empires as punishment over two royal assassinations was way over the top.  It led to many millions killed and injured and, unfinished business that ended with the second half of the World War that caused more horrors and killings for nearly six years to 1945.

The first war had western European world empires fighting each other.  No empires, no imperialism, no colonialism would have meant a shorter, quicker war.  It would never have led to the second world war in 1939.

The stupidity of Britain so quickly and eagerly entering the war on the 4 August 1914, seems to have led to us waging war in many different countries in every single year up to the present day.  Astonishing but true!  It seems we have a penchant for killing foreigners in their own countries for over 100 years.

The only upside was that finally, after many centuries, the European nations were brought to their senses and ended warfare between themselves by working for a federal Europe with the Treaty of Rome and, eventually, the EU.

A righteous foreign policy of constant killing and military intervention on foreign soil, in every year, for 101 years!

JUST KILL THE LOT OF THEM FOREIGN POLICY AND BE DONE WITH IT, YOU WIMP CORBYN.  No need to bother with the judiciary or any law apart from our victor's Law of the Jungle.  Of course, WE are untouchable.  (I am caricaturing right wing politics)

Today it has been announced that the murderer of our Western hostages in Muslim majority countries has been drone killed to keep the streets of Britain safe.  Yet, Islamic State rose to power out of the invasion of white armed forces, with the occupation of, and warfare on, Muslim majority countries.

The white, Western powers have been involved in the Middle East to ensure their supplies of oil, originally for their warships and war planes, for 100 years.  The War of Terrorism from 7 October 2001 in Muslim majority countries to the present day has been particularly provocative for some Muslims.  Now, their beheadings of Westerners and a Japanese man in the desert and their intention to bring about another Caliphate in Iraq/Syria has been equally provocative and unacceptable to the 'Christian' Westerners of NATO.  Hence, the killings must continue until Islamic State is eradicated - like the eradication of Communism, Nazism, Fascism and, before that, of German imperialism of the late 19th and early 20th centuries.  After all, we can't have any rival upstart threatening our power and influence over the world.  And, of course, we only kill the individuals who pose a direct threat to us from 3,000 miles away - like Emwazi, shot to kill today, and threats from Saddam and his WMD in Iraq for all those years that Saddam was about to wipe us out before we finally did something.

Only the West knows Best and don't you forget it.

To be deadly serious, Corbyn is NOT a warrior, NOT a warmonger .  He does NOT believe in upping the violence to turn friends into enemies and, then, with more retaliation from our side, making even more ferocious enemies.

Someone else wrote this but ...

.. I would put it like this:

Our religious beliefs can be part of the problem.  Violence is pretty universal for all.  Our faith beliefs control 

our behaviours.  We all want land for ourselves.  And it can be all too easy to say that God gave us the land to 

justify our occupation - the people of Israel taking over Canaan 3,500 years ago or, us lot taking over the land 

from the native American Indian inhabitants.  We brought them God, germs and guns.  Our ancestors thought 

that God was confirming the rightness of their occupation and takeover of what became the USA, by 

wiping out the earlier inhabitants, quite naturally from disease.  But it was disease from germs, unknowingly 

brought by the good Christians from England.

Terrorism can be state terrorism and by others.

Empire building by the traditional Christian nations, who should have known better, is at the root of the 

problem - the going and getting and controlling other groups and lands and their inhabitants . 

The Cold War was also worked out in the Middle East and made the problem worse.

Control and coercion; grab and brag; occupy and fortify.

Those who lose out from those with the power don't always appreciate it.  The battle between Jews and Arabs 

originated three and a half thousand years ago but 95% of the intervening years has seen inhabitants of the 

Holy Land live in peaceful co-existence with one another - until more and more Jews returned in the 20th 

century as they fled persecution from anti-Semitism by our ancestors in Christian majority Europe.

Sadat and Rabin set a good example of compromise to try and get a settlement.



"FINALLY, a much more fair documentary (by Peter and Dan Snow on the Yom Kippur War of 1973).

I am NOT anti-Jewish, nor am I PRO-Arab or PRO-terrorism of ANY KIND!!!

The truth needs to be understood AWAY from any and ALL religious, prejudiced and other biases that totally 

control the conversation on both sides of the situation!!!  The truth is that there were and are terrorists on both 

sides, initially the terrorists were mostly of the Jewish, population, quickly followed by the Palestinian 

population; now, BOTH.

The Jewish state is still a terrorist one; morally and factually, the declaration (and following codification by 

the UN and the US) does NOT allow the now-state-status to continue or began acts that are terrorist in nature.  

The Arab, Persian and others that comprise the opposite side are egregiously horrible as well!!!!!!!!

The problem is a result of Colonialism and imperialism of the West.  If PEACE is ever to be achieved, the true 

facts must be known and acknowledged on all sides.

The problems were made worse when the US and the Soviet Union literally saw each country in the Middle 

East as "Us" and "Them".. The problems that resulted from this application of East/West conflict, especially in 

the 1980's, made the problems much worse.

Most IMPORTANTLY…This conflict is NOT thousands of years old, it is very recent in terms of history. 

Anwar Sadat and Yitzhak (Isaac) Rabin are true HEROES in this conflict!!!"