Discussing Churchill.

Status
Closed
May 2012
817
In the Land of Russia where the Shadows lie
#1
I've already mentioned that Churchill did the same things in foreign policy that Stalin did,only in a worse way.Or if you like,Stalin did the same things that Churchill did, only in a softer way.

We tried to discuss British Katyn, now let's try to discuss British Warsaw.

In 1944 the Soviets didn't help Polish nationalists during the Warsaw uprising. Nobody knows was the Red Army able to do it,but the Western tried to hold up to shame the USSR.

In the same 1944 in December British troops attacked 120 thousandGreek guerrilla's army ELAS, wich at that moment has completely liberated the country.From the 4th of December till the begining of January 1945 the British fought at streets of Greece capital.As a result they have kileed tens of thousand of antifasists and civilians ,destroyed Athens and established a reactionary dictatorship in the country.

Any comments?
 

pugsville

Ad Honorem
Oct 2010
9,247
#2
British failure to do something in Warsaw is in some way the same as wholesale executions? Stalin Soft? Stalin was much more brutal and ruthless than Churchill, of course the Russian context is much more brutal in general, the civil war there were plenty of brutality to go round.

Yup the British did meddle in Greece and seek to install a a regime and back a regime that led to a pretty hard civil war, (though divisions existed and the conflict might well have happened without British meddling)

Yup the British Empire done a whole heap of stuff that wasnt real nice. Churchill was am unabashed imperialists, and willing to sacrifice non-Britons interests, and do some of the not nice stuff.

But in Brutal Killing, Stalin's got Winston covered rather easily.
 
Nov 2011
8,874
The Dustbin, formerly, Garden of England
#3
When people start comparing Churchill to Stalin or to Hitler, they consistently forget that Churchill, despite his own self-agrandizement in his histories, was responsible to a parliament and his cabinet colleagues and he had to deal with National Movements, like the Free French and the Free Poles as independent foreign governments, unlike the NKVD stooges who entered Poland and other east European countries as the servants of the Red Army.
As far as Warsaw is concerned, there is no mystery why the Red Army called a halt when the Polish Home Army rose up against the German occupiers, he wanted the Germans to wipe them out, rather than have the Red Army do it later. The fact that the Russians not only cynically ignored the Polish Home Army calls for help, but also directed anti-aircraft fire at the British and south African planes dropping supplies to the Poles, is something that they should be eternally ashamed of.
While the Soviets betrayed the Poles to an enemy, the British did not betray the Greek ELAS fighters to the Germans, they had already had experience before 1944 of ELAS being more interested in killing other Greeks or Greek Quislings, rather than Germans. The Greek Government of National Unity under Papandreou was the one recognised by the Allies (including Stalin), when ELAS decided to fight against them, the British naturally sided with Papendreou. (Stalin also threw ELAS to the wolves, their only external support came from Tito, when Churchill travelled to Athens in an attempt to broker a ceasefire or obtain a settlement he was accompanied by a soviet military delegation).
 
Aug 2011
7,045
Texas
#4
I've already mentioned that Churchill did the same things in foreign policy that Stalin did,only in a worse way.Or if you like,Stalin did the same things that Churchill did, only in a softer way.
:zany:The two are not comparable, except in stature by leading their respective countries.

We tried to discuss British Katyn, now let's try to discuss British Warsaw.
I'm not well informed on whatever was discussed in another thread, but i can only assume without further clarification on your part, that if pleading ignorance of the atrocities is the worst that is being said about the UK/US compared to the Soviet massacre of Polish citizens itself, then it certainly doesn't speak well of the World War 2 Alliance and one of the prime reasons it broke down so quickly after 1945. Trust! As for the massacre itself.
Russian Duma condemns Stalin for Katyn massacre

In 1944 the Soviets didn't help Polish nationalists during the Warsaw uprising. Nobody knows was the Red Army able to do it,but the Western tried to hold up to shame the USSR.
Indeed. Most controversial things done through a state cover up leads to a lot of public speculation. Stalin and the Soviets paranoia only have themselves to blame for this. It just seems rationally obvious as to why Stalin didn't want to help Britain's Polish allies, that is... they weren't reliable allies to Stalin and the Soviets, end of point. So it seemed perfectly natural to let the Germans do Stalin's dirty work then instead of Soviet soldiers having to do it later. It was a brutal but effective logic. Running well ahead of their supply lines and having exhausted troops was a convenient excuse to do as little as possible that some historians are only willing to buy with little objective thought applied.

And it is rather pathetic seeing that Soviet forces were right there on Warsaw's doorstep that the Soviet leadership couldn't do much more then drag their feet and hamper aid via the Warsaw Airlift to the Polish resistance until it was too late.

In the same 1944 in December British troops attacked 120 thousandGreek guerrilla's army ELAS, wich at that moment has completely liberated the country.From the 4th of December till the begining of January 1945 the British fought at streets of Greece capital.As a result they have kileed tens of thousand of antifasists and civilians ,destroyed Athens and established a reactionary dictatorship in the country.
The British didn't attack them, they were responding to the ELAS attacks on other resistance groups. Re; ELAS antagonizing and attacking other resistance groups
 
#5
When people start comparing Churchill to Stalin or to Hitler, they consistently forget that Churchill, despite his own self-agrandizement in his histories, was responsible to a parliament and his cabinet colleagues and he had to deal with National Movements, like the Free French and the Free Poles as independent foreign governments, unlike the NKVD stooges who entered Poland and other east European countries as the servants of the Red Army.
As far as Warsaw is concerned, there is no mystery why the Red Army called a halt when the Polish Home Army rose up against the German occupiers, he wanted the Germans to wipe them out, rather than have the Red Army do it later. The fact that the Russians not only cynically ignored the Polish Home Army calls for help, but also directed anti-aircraft fire at the British and south African planes dropping supplies to the Poles, is something that they should be eternally ashamed of.
While the Soviets betrayed the Poles to an enemy, the British did not betray the Greek ELAS fighters to the Germans, they had already had experience before 1944 of ELAS being more interested in killing other Greeks or Greek Quislings, rather than Germans. The Greek Government of National Unity under Papandreou was the one recognised by the Allies (including Stalin), when ELAS decided to fight against them, the British naturally sided with Papendreou. (Stalin also threw ELAS to the wolves, their only external support came from Tito, when Churchill travelled to Athens in an attempt to broker a ceasefire or obtain a settlement he was accompanied by a soviet military delegation).
Thank you for telling...!!!
 
May 2012
817
In the Land of Russia where the Shadows lie
#6
Given:

1.The Soviets didn't attack Poles in Warsaw.

2.The British did attacked Greecks in Athens.

A question : what is worse?

The answer must be very simple,and I want to hear it.
 
Aug 2011
7,045
Texas
#7
Given:

1.The Soviets didn't attack Poles in Warsaw.
Huh? Who said anything about them attacking the Poles during the uprising? Aid is what they needed and aid was in short supply from the Soviets on their very doorstep!

2.The British did attacked Greecks in Athens.
Like i said, the British responded to the (Communist aligned) ELAS campaign to wipe out all resistance groups that would threaten the ELAS bid to rule unchallenged.

A question : what is worse?
The Cold war was the worse. Because we still haven't dealt with all the disinformation out there, apparently.
 
Last edited:
Apr 2011
6,626
Sarmatia
#8
I hope that all Americans who read the posts of our Russian friends will understand that in Russian minds the cold war is not over and that policy of appeasement is not a solution in dealing with Russia.
 
Aug 2011
7,045
Texas
#9
I hope that all Americans who read the posts of our Russian friends will understand that in Russian minds the cold war is not over and that policy of appeasement is not a solution in dealing with Russia.
Interesting that you mention that. I have a book on the Soviet history of the great patriotic war. Basically a collection of Soviet school books prior to the eighties. Kind of interesting in how they saw the war and how they explained it to the Russian generations that were too follow.

While it isn't quite that bad compared to their counterparts in the West, they both in the end were subject to the prevailing views of the cold war. Leaving out the bad and only highlighting the good of their respective nationalities.
 
May 2012
817
In the Land of Russia where the Shadows lie
#10
Status
Closed

Similar History Discussions