APPEASEMENT AND OTHERS

PEACE IN OUR TIME AND OTHERS
History must be viewed from more than just one perspective.
I believe this whole business springs from the Treaty of Versailles, where Germany and a few others got a raw deal from the victors. Germany was held responsible for this war, however, this in my view is not entirely clear and responsibility must be shared by the other powers. There was a fear of Germany trying to carve out its own empire at the expense of the European states, greed as per usual on both sides.
We must not forget that there is a vested interest in portraying Mr. Chamberlain as a villain in league with Germany, this is still very much in the forefront of today’s politics in Europe and America.
Germany would sooner or later demand her place at the head of the table and, France particularly would not have that. The British as usual never really showed their cards and would neither encourage nor discourage Germany, all the time seeing France as her main rival, even when they were supposed to be allies.
I don’t think this was appeasement but rather playing for time as Britain was neither ready nor willing for an all out armed conflict with Germany. Please note that at the time, Britain had more in common (including the royal family) with Germany and with France.
Germany’s ambition was continental whereas France had designs on British overseas territories.
As to THE question whether one should avoid war by all means, I would answer yes! What we call appeasement would only be a fair shake for the other party in those given circumstances.
Regarding India, Mountbatten, mercifully overstepped his brief as viceroy but could not bring Ali Jinnah, another illuminati with his own very particular agenda, to reason, and hence partition. The Indian question is still very pertinent today, as we all know.
Afghanistan was part of British India, although not wholly accepted by the Pashtoon, and Britain, after a number of wars had to withdraw, only to return a mere hundred years later with renewed American vigour only to suffer the same end, I think. The British if nothing else are persistent, particularly when there is a bit of business to be done (Central Asian minerals,oil and gas).
With respect to the Cuban Missile Crisis, remember that the Soviet Union was surrounded by US missiles from Turkey to Britain, and yet the US could not tolerate Soviet Missiles in Cuba, rather an unbalanced position I would say.
In short avoid war at all costs, but please note that there are very powerful interest advocating the contrary.
War can be most profitable to the usual suspects.
It is also useful to look at any given situation from your opponent’s viewpoint, I am sure this would make our world a lot safer.
Joe, I always try and look at myself as my opponent would see me and it can be most disconcerting.
Suddenly you become the bad guy and your opposite number is the good guy.
To this end I recommend a book written by Tariq Ali about the Crusades from a Moslem perspective, an eye opener indeed.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: