The British and Uncle Joe

[caton]

The British and Uncle Joe


Dear Forum Members,


Our colonialist friends have just make reference to Argentina and Stalin and to support of dictatorships

”Thus supporting a clear dictatorship and allowing it to endure-how noble.” [END OF QUOTE TO HUTCH]

“Whether that was Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, Mao Tsi Tung and more recently tacit support for Saddam, probably because he was diametrically opposed to the US. A bit like Che no doubt! [END OF QUOTE TO JOHN]

“I simply refer, that until quite recently, S. American presidents had a liking for Jack Boots and be-medalled uniforms. They only differed with Hitler, Mussolini, Mao, Stalin and Saddam with style and cut of uniform.” [END OF QUOTE TO JOHN]

When I began my participation in the forum I quoted sources of different nationalities. Pro colonialism members (having no really serious way to deny them) immediately attacked them stating they were ‘anti British bashing’ and so I turned to use only THEIR OWN SOURCES, so they couldn’t do that anymore. The evidence against their ‘cause’ is so overwhelming that I could take the chance of ‘fighting them’ (and win) with only ‘one arm’.

It is with the utmost pleasure that I extend my arm (again!) to my shelves and open another British source, that of their beloved W.S.Churchill, who has a very nice monument in front of the Houses of Parliament, near to another one dedicated to the mass murderer Oliver Cromwell.


The following is a quote to Sir Winston Spencer Churchill’s well known “The Second World War”, volume 6 “Triumph and Tragedy”, book 1 “The Tide of Victory”, chapter 15 “October in Moscow”, first published in 1954 by Cassel & Co.

QUOTE: “On leaving after this profoundly interesting fortnight, in which we get closer to our SOVIET ALLIES (*) (1) than ever before –or since- I had written to Stalin:

20 oct 44.
Eden and I had come away from the Soviet Union REFRESHED AND FORTIFIED BY THE DISCUSSIONS WHICH WE HAD WITH YOU, MARSHALL STALIN(*) and with your colleagues. This memorable meeting in Moscow has shown that THERE ARE NO MATTERS THAT CANNOT BE ADJUSTED BETWEEN US(*) when we meet together in frank and INTIMATE(*) discussion.(...) May we soon meet again.” [END OF QUOTE]



The following is a quote to the same work and volume but to book 2, chapter 23 “Yalta: Finale”:

QUOTE: “(...) Mr Roosevelt, who was host at a luncheon, said that he and I always referred to Stalin in our secret telegrams as ‘Uncle Joe’ (...) This lead to a difficult moment. Stalin took offence. ‘When can I leave this table?’ he asked in anger. Mr. Byrnes saved the situation with an apt remark.’After all’, he said, ‘you do not mind talking about Uncle Sam, so why should Uncle Joe be so bad?’. At this the Marshall subsided, and Molotov later assured me that he understood the joke. He already knew he was called Uncle Joe by many people abroad, and he realised that the name had been given in a friendly way and AS A TERM OF AFFECTION(*).” [END OF QUOTE]


“A TERM OF AFFECTION”! How moving! What a wonderfull personal relationship! But we must consider that a meeting with dear Uncle Joe made Mr Churchill feel ‘refreshing and fortified’ and that he could adjust ‘anything’ with him (among other things, the forced displacement of MILLIONS of people)

But of course, our colonialist Forum Members (who support the present butchering of Irak) say WE admire Stalin... We shouldn’t be surprised. They even insist saying their former ally and friend Saddam had WMD.


Best regards - J


(*) the capitals are mine for everybody to note the ‘detail’<br>

(1) Hey, Hutch: "How noble"!
PS: How many houses, schools and hospitals has HMG destriyed today in Irak?
PSII: How many women, children and old people has HMG killed today in Irak?

[Sakura26]

Dear all

Finding mistakes in each other's actions is easy. But admiting that YOU were wrong, is the difficult part. A nation that admits its errors and therefore tries not to make them again is a wise nation. Argentina admits that trying to recover the islands by force was a mistake, war must be the very last step when everything else has failed. That makes us a wise nation. Does Britain admit the killing in Irak was a mistake? Or their pride is blinding their eyes?

Regards
Noelia

[Johnmcd]

Noelia,
There’s no mistake at all that the Soviet Union was indeed our allies during WWII. Without them and the massive sacrifice they made we would have lost against Hitler and S. America would then have betted on the ‘safe horse’<br>
Surprisingly, Javier fails to mention that Churchill and Eisenhower were seriously thinking about taking on the soviet forces that occupied Poland, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Romania etc. Obviously, after such a destructive war that left 30 million dead ‘strategic power sharing’ in Europe was the best option – though it led to 40 years of Cold War and possible nuclear catastrophe at a moments notice. You must surely look at history of those dark days with in its totality. Every year we have old soviet soldiers, sailors and airmen coming over to the UK to remember that sacrifice with their British comrades.

To many in this country and indeed in Iraq your comments about, ‘British killings in Iraq’ would be highly insulting. I think, at best, it is thoughtless. The reality is that British forces have performed their duties in that country magnificently and are steadily handing over security responsibilities to their Iraqi counterparts. What can we apologise for when lives have been lost and continue to be lost for their freedom?

What do you wish for in Iraq?

A return of the Baathist leader? You might have good company here in the UK with the Socialist Workers’ Party of Britain (Britain’s leading Trotskyist organisation) and the Muslim Association of Britain (MAB). The group which recently invited the homophobic and pro-suicide-bombing Dr Yusuf al-Qaradawi to London.

But not with me.

Best wishes,
John.

[Sakura26]

Hi John

I won't talk about World Wars because it's a subject I have no idea of and I would be an ignorant if I speak about something I dont know.
I was, from the beginning, referring to Irak, which is a war (invasion would fit better...) that I had the unfortunate chance to witness.
What do I wish for Irak? Peace. And No more humiliation. I just imagine how ashamed and helpless I would feel if, for example, someday someone in the white house decides that Kirchner is a terrorist and send the american troops to invade ARgentina, rape our women, humiliate and torture our men, kill our children, and as a joke, they choose a president on their own, and go around the world saying they freed us, while the rest of the planet feels pity of our fate.

What I wish for Irak right now is that american and british troops leave the country and let those poor people TRY to remake their lives again. Who on Earth gave the US or the UK the power to choose who is good or who is evil in this world ? I say Bush is Evil, why is it nobody judges him? WORSE! he was reelected.

I understand that you cannot see things the way I do, John, but at least, show me that you're open minded and admit the invasion to Irak was nothing but pure evil, based on the terrible racism against middle eastern people the US has, and because of their oil.

Noelia

[Johnmcd]

Noelia
No, on the contrary, I believe that your type of opinion on Iraq is blindly racist and utterly cruel. I agree that ordinary Iraqis do not want coalition forces in their country, but they do not want them to go also. 65% of the Iraqi population is ready for the election next Jan, only the Sunni minority in places such as Fallujah are trying to hold the democratic process up. These are the hardliners — including insurgent groups and fundamentalist clerics — threatening violence against anyone taking part in the poll.

What’s going to happen next January?

The first democratic multiparty elections for more than half a century to elect a 275-member National Assembly that will select a government to replace the US-appointed interim administration headed by Sheikh Yawer and Iyad Allawi, the Prime Minister. That’s what will happen!
What’s happening yesterday in Afghanistan?

HAMID KARZAI was sworn in as Afghanistan’s first freely elected President, vowing to bring peace to his nation and to free it from the threats of terrorism and drugs.
Mr Karzai took his oath in a ceremony inside the fortress-like presidential palace in Kabul as Afghan and multinational forces threw a ring of steel around the capital after threats of attack by Taleban militants. He said, “We have now left a hard and dark past behind us and today we are opening a new chapter in our history in a spirit of friendship with the international community,” he said. He gave warning that the fight against terrorism was “not yet over” and called for international assistance to halt growing links between extremists and drug-traffickers.
I believe people with your opinions wish to see this democratic process fail and for both Afghanistan and Iraq to fall into chaos – just to suit your anti-us stance. If so, then this is to be deplored.
You should match your saintly morals with the past of both countries and see where they want their future to go. Your same saintly morals wish to deprive the Falkland islanders of their own future – so no way will I give you any benefit of doubt.
Best wishes,
John.

[Maquilishuat]

Hello John;

I am taking notes on what you wrote "will happen" in Iraq. Apart that I for sure do not believe in chrystal balls, I remember you that Iraq is an occupied country, and is suffering a loss of approximately 100.000 unhabitants due to this invasion.

Now think. Would you forgive any foreign army that had killed someone you loved? Now multiply the above number by an average family of 5 persons; then take into account that Arab people have stronger family ties than western ones. What would you get? The answer is simple, just hate. Nobody would applaude a democracy that came walking on dead loved ones. It never happened before.

Saludos, Maquilishuat

[Johnmcd]

Otto,
I hear what you say, but I don’t believe your ‘body count’ for one moment and please don’t imply that coalition forces are responsible for many thousands of deaths. That would not simply be true. However, there are US and UK soldiers currently up on murder charges. There is certainly no ‘carte blanc’ for coalition forces to blast away negligently.

I try to take time to read through the Iraqi press (over 150 newspapers now since the dismissal of Saddam.) The story that emerges is not one of rampant US/UK forces slaughtering the inhabitants, its something much different. For instance pooled Iraqi news mentioned today:

“A Western diplomat also confirmed that 1,000 officers from the fledgling Iraqi police force of some 135,000 had been killed since April”<br>
Baghdad.
“Our morgue was designed to cope with between five and ten bodies a day,” explained Kais Hassan, the harassed statistician whose job it is to record the capital’s suspicious deaths. He gestured into the open door of a refrigeration unit at the stomach-turning sight of tangled corpses inside, male and female, shaded with the brown and green hues of death. “Now we’re getting 20 to 30 in here a day. It’s a disaster.”
Figures compiled at the central mortuary, on file and indisputable shine a light through the murk of estimate and rumour surrounding casualty rates in Iraq. Of the 6,635 suspicious deaths in Baghdad recorded this year at the city’s Medical-Legal Institute, the complex incorporating the central mortuary, more than 75 per cent were killed by a bullet. Stabbing is the next most common cause of death.

October’s figures include 726 suspicious deaths, of which 494 were caused by gunfire. The vast majority did not die for reasons directly related to the insurgency but as the result of the crimewave scourging the capital’s streets.

I am aware that top level investigations are going on to establish the numbers that have perished as a result of insurgency activity and crime. It will take time for the Iraqi authorities to have their police and military numbers up to strength. They really don’t need or ask for blind condemnation – they need our support.

Best wishes,
John.

[Gabriel]

Hi John,

So, let me make sure I understand. You walk into a home and shoot the parents of a new born baby. The defensless baby dies from malnutrition a few days later, and that somehow is not your fault? Who's fault was it? You chose the time and the manner in which to conduct your war, why didn't you have a plan to look after the baby?

Regards,

Gabriel

[Sakura26]

Hello Gabriel


Let's see: according to american and british point of view, if this baby had his parents alive, and no british and american troops had killed them, he would had grown up under the tirany of Saddam. So in order to free him, they had to interfere. Yes, unfortunately lives were taken, so his parents had to died and therefore he was not fed propperly and now, 18 years later he has no role models, he's begging money on the streets to survive, and he's a retard, because of the lack of vitamins during his childhood....[glow=red,2,300]BUT HEY!![/glow] he lives in a democratic society....mcdonald's everywhere, he can vote next elections, and look at this clothes! although a little overworn, he's using the Union Jack as a Tshirt.......aww too bad he has no idea where the UK is located, because he had no parents to send him to school, but what the hell, who cares as long as he cheers to the US and the UK right?? LONG LIVE THE INVADERS!

why is it so difficult for the rest of the world to see the amazing work america and the uk are doing in irak?

Noelia

[Sea Eagle]

Noelia,

Nobody owns all the truth or all the facts, but it seems that the present killings in Iraq (by the dozen and 20's at a time) are the result mainly of a rearguard action by the Sunni and foreign backers, former followers of Saddam Hussein, who are desperately trying to maintain their supremacy as a minority over the majority Shiite population by indicriminately killing their own people who by joining the Police Force and new Armed Forces are supporting the path to democracy and the elections in January 2005.

Nobody wants Armed Forces on their doorsteps, even friendly ones, (Not even in the Falklands!) and bad mistakes have been made but it is important that the elections take place and then the phased withdrawal can begin. Of course the opponents of the invasion of Iraq would love to see the Coalition forces stay just to prove their point.

On another note I would say that I disapprove of the current anti-British sentiments expressed on this Forum as exemplified by Javier's postings (We were not a party to Vietnam, by the way, so it is not all accurate). I admire Javiers scholarship in many respects and do my best to retain friendship with him in other respects, but his ploy of trying to say that because the British were historically agressive, then their possession of the Falklands and support for Islanders self determination cannot be right is simply the confusion of two unrelated arguments. The British have, even if sometimes reluctantly, supported self-determination in one way or another commencing in the 19th Century until now, with the process accelerating after Independence for India in 1947. This is evidenced by the Commonwealth. It is not a unique ploy against Argentina but a solid British policy for all Territories backed by historical evidence and supported by the UN which has designated the Falklands as a Colonial Territory entitled to self-determination.

I digress, please read the news report on Iraq below

22-party United Iraqi Alliance
Shiites launch coalition

BAGHDAD — Iraq’s most powerful-looking electoral bloc unveiled a slate of candidates for its election campaign yesterday, throwing down a gauntlet to minority Sunni Arabs who complain next month’s vote will be marred by violence.
The coalition of 22 parties and groups, calling itself the United Iraqi Alliance, includes leaders of the long-oppressed 60-percent Shiite Muslim majority. Formed under the auspices of the country’s most influential cleric Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, it also involves figures from other sectarian and ethnic groups.
Major Sunni and Kurdish parties have yet to begin campaigns.
US and Iraqi security officials admitted, on a day that saw only limited attacks on their forces, that despite a major US offensive on the rebel city of Fallujah last month there was no way to prevent mainly Sunni insurgents shedding blood during an election that should consolidate new power for the Shiites.
But interim Prime Minister Iyad Allawi disowned a suggestion that the Jan. 30 vote, intended to be Iraq’s first truly democratic election, might in fact be spread over several days or weeks to allow people to cast their ballots in more safety.
Citing a UN deadline of the end of January for electing a national assembly, aides said Allawi had been misquoted by a Swiss newspaper and said: “The Iraqi government ... is very well aware of the importance of holding elections on time.”<br>The US-backed interim president complained neighbouring Syria was helping former allies of Saddam Hussein to foment rebellion but expressed confidence the insurgency would fail.
Presenting the Alliance at a news conference in Baghdad’s heavily fortified Green Zone government and diplomatic compound was Hussain al-Shahristani, a widely respected scientist jailed by Saddam for refusing to work on a nuclear weapons programme.
“This is a united list, representing all Iraqis, not just Shiites,” he said.
The intense security around the news conference is a mark of the conditions in which any campaign will be fought in much of the country, especially Baghdad, and the Sunni north and west.
Two big Shiite religious parties, the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI) and Dawa, lead the bloc. Ahmad Chalabi, a secular Shiite and former US favourite who heads the Iraqi National Congress, also has a prominent role.
Representatives of Moqtada al-Sadr, a young cleric who has led two Shiite uprisings against US forces, are also in the coalition. Sadr and his chief aides are, however, not on the list of 228 candidates, a third of whom are women.
(Reuters)

[Sakura26]

Hello Ernie

I do understand your point of view, but it seems nobody understands mine. I dont see any anti-british sentiments here, except for the sad fact that we're in opposite sides of this discussion.

However, maybe I'm still so sick for what Nora did to me that I cannot realize when it's happening to you, if that's the case, I'm very sorry.

I am not anti british and, although John seems to think it's something we should be ashamed of, I do admire the UK. I admire some things of the US too. It's kind of difficult (and somehow hipocryte) not to admire other's things.

I admire Argentina too. We have things here you dont have, and you have things there we dont have.
But, even the best ones make mistakes. Irak was HUGE mistake.

For the US and for the UK. Two countries that are supposed to set the example to the rest of the world, cannot make such a big mistake and not apologize for it. Worse, you still support what happened there, maybe for pride, who knows, or maybe because you really feel like that.

Best Wishes
Noelia

[Maquilishuat]

John:

This is one of the several articles I found, regarding the civil casualties (euphemism for murder). Please note that I am referring to RED CROSS.

Saludos, Maquilishuat

Red Cross horrified by number of dead civilians
Canadian Press

OTTAWA — Red Cross doctors who visited southern Iraq this week saw "incredible" levels of civilian casualties including a truckload of dismembered women and children, a spokesman said Thursday from Baghdad.

Roland Huguenin, one of six International Red Cross workers in the Iraqi capital, said doctors were horrified by the casualties they found in the hospital in Hilla, about 160 kilometres south of Baghdad.

"There has been an incredible number of casualties with very, very serious wounds in the region of Hilla," Huguenin said in a interview by satellite telephone.

"We saw that a truck was delivering dozens of totally dismembered dead bodies of women and children. It was an awful sight. It was really very difficult to believe this was happening."

Huguenin said the dead and injured in Hilla came from the village of Nasiriyah, where there has been heavy fighting between American troops and Iraqi soldiers, and appeared to be the result of "bombs, projectiles."

"At this stage we cannot comment on the nature of what happened exactly at that place . . . but it was definitely a different pattern from what we had seen in Basra or Baghdad.

"There will be investigations I am sure."

Baghdad and Basra are coping relatively well with the flow of wounded, said Huguenin, estimating that Baghdad hospitals have been getting about 100 wounded a day.

Most of the wounded in the two large cities have suffered superficial shrapnel wounds, with only about 15 per cent requiring internal surgery, he said.

But the pattern in Hilla was completely different.

"In the case of Hilla, everybody had very serious wounds and many, many of them small kids and women. We had small toddlers of two or three years of age who had lost their legs, their arms. We have called this a horror."

At least 400 people were taken to the Hilla hospital over a period of two days, he said -- far beyond its capacity.

"Doctors worked around the clock to do as much as they could. They just had to manage, that was all."

The city is no longer accessible, he added.

Red Cross staff are also concerned about what may be happening in other smaller centres south of Baghdad.

"We do not know what is going on in Najaf and Kabala. It has become physically impossible for us to reach out to those cities because the major road has become a zone of combat."

The Red Cross was able to claim one significant success this week: it played a key role in re-establishing water supplies at Basra.

Power for a water-pumping station had been accidentally knocked out in the attack on the city, leaving about a million people without water. Iraqi technicians couldn't reach the station to repair it because it was under coalition control.

The Red Cross was able to negotiate safe passage for a group of Iraqi engineers who crossed the fire line and made repairs. Basra now has 90 per cent of its normal water supply, said Huguenin.

Huguenin, a Swiss, is one of six international Red Cross workers still in Baghdad. The team includes two Canadians, Vatche Arslanian of Oromocto, N.B., and Kassandra Vartell of Calgary.

The Red Cross expects the humanitarian crisis in Iraq to grow and is calling for donations to help cope. The Red Cross Web site is: www.redcross.ca

[Johnmcd]

Otto,
Thanks for the quotes - it doesn’t make for comfortable reading.

A couple of things. My partner is an area co-ordinator with the British Red Cross and is well aware of the whole sale slaughter in certain regions if Iraq, mostly the ‘no go areas’ within the Sunni triangle. The data she receives indicates that the killings are co-ordinated by insurgent groups and extreme religious Sunni groups - against local populations and the Iraqi police and military. Their agenda is clear. This to cause an outright civil war against the Shia majority and Kurds. The hard line Sunni’s know, even with a representational government, their hold and domination of Iraqi politics and religious ascendancy will be lost. They are getting more desperate as the election draws near.

Also, I have a very good friend that has just returned from Southern Iraq. He notes the ‘ground level’ desire for peace and prosperity above all else in the region. But, there is the fear among the southern Shia’s, that Iranian religious fundamentalists will do what ever they can to disrupt the elections. When Iraq becomes democratic, with its 250 elected representatives then the Iranian people themselves will desire the same. (They have been trying to for decades) The Mula’s of Iran will be isolated and they know it. This is hardly making the press at the moment. Also, not making the press is the significant number of ordinary Iranians that are crossing over to Iraq, not to fight, but to look for work in the new industries that are springing up.

Best wishes,
John.

[caton]

Dear John,


It is true Iranians had a long fight for free elections.

Do you remember Mossadegh? He dared touched Iran's own oil (guess under which company's control?) and a coup was made by CIA. Iran was ruled after that by the same man the UK had established into power after the joint invassion to that country by Soviet Russia (your good ally Uncle Joe) and yourself.


I perceive you are writing tha arguments of George W and HMG for preparing to invade and destroy Iran.

Who will be next?



Best - Javier

[Sakura26]

Hello All

Latinamerica will be next....does anyone have any doubts about it? When the oil issue is finished, the next step for the masters of the universe is to get water, and down here we have the biggest reserve of natual water.....

Regards
Noelia