Newsgroup: it.politica.internazionale
Titolo: Una comparazione tra la situazione attuale e la "Guerra Finta" del 1939-40

Saturday, February 04, 2006
Re-reading William Manchester's "Alone"
In popular memory there was no interval between the end of the British 
policy of Appeasement towards Hitler and the new resolution ushered in 
by Winston Churchill. But in fact there was a phase known as the Phoney 
War during which Britain was technically at war with Nazi Germany 
without engaging in major operations against it. The Phoney War spanned 
the period from September 1939 to May 1940 -- the Fall of France -- and 
marked a time when though Appeasement had died its ghost had not yet 
been laid to rest. In addition to the natural fear of incurring mass 
casualties by confronting the Wehrmacht, some in Britain like Lord 
Halifax and perhaps Chamberlain himself, still Prime Minister, hoped 
that Hitler would not attempt the Maginot Line and turn his energies East.
Although today it is fashionable to think of Appeasement as the 
political embodiment of cowardice it was coldly calculated to bring the 
Dictators into conflict and -- so Chamberlain hoped -- into annihilating 
each other. By selling out Austria in the Anchluss, the Czechs in the 
Sudetendland and nearly betraying Poland over the Danzig corridor 
Chamberlain was tempting Hitler ever further east into what he hoped 
would be an eventual clash with the other monster, Joseph Stalin. He did 
not reckon that evil, while coarse, is surpassingly cunning. The 
announcement of the Molotov-Ribbentrop nonagression pact on August 23, 
1939, just a week before Poland was finally invaded by both Hitler and 
Stalin, made plain to Chamberlain that he had been outwitted. If Britain 
intended to drive Hitler East, Stalin had instead turned Hitler West. 
Nothing remained to Chamberlain and Britain's enervated armed forces but 
to gather up the tatters of their strategy and huddle behind the army of 
France. Having staked everything on diplomatically containing Hitler 
while neglecting Britain's defense -- not provoking Hitler was a deemed 
essential for diplomacy to succeed -- Chamberlain had no Plan B. He had 
wagered all and lost. Churchill assumed the Prime Ministership the day 
Hitler raced his armies across France. Every catastrophe he had warned 
against had come to pass. And he was finally handed the reins in haste 
by the very men who had taken Britain to the edge of precipice, its 
armies trapped on the continent, its allies smashed, its air force 
outnumbered; desperate and alone.
It is an old and familiar story which bears repeating because it 
illustrates how far leaders can be trapped by webs of their own making. 
Like the politicians of the 1930s the leaders of the West after 
September 11 each made their own calculation. In America's case it took 
the shape of thinking that it could make common cause with the most 
enlightened elements of Islamic civilization against fundamentalist 
extremists who were vying for Islam's soul. The strategy for achieving 
this goal, though reviled as simplistic, was anything but: America would 
not pick a fight with Islam itself. Rather it would make itself Islam's 
friend, ally with its most moderate elements, overthrow its worst 
oppressors and enlist the aid of the Muslim everyman against the Osama 
Bin Ladens of the world. In practice it would build a web of 
relationships with intelligence services, soldiers, intellectuals and 
politicians in Islamic countries who would provide the information and 
in cases the manpower to hunt down fundamentalist villains. The War on 
Terror would be to wars what Smart Bombs were to bombs. It would destroy 
the miscreants while leaving the surrounding structure untouched. It may 
be that Europe's calculation was more cynical. But it was equally 
sophisticated. It would pursue a policy of Appeasement which  like 
Chamberlain's was calculated to drive one nuisance against another, 
pitting America against Islamic fundamentalism in the hopes that one 
would wear the other out. And the key to Europe's establishing its bona 
fides with Islamic countries was to make nice at every opportunity; 
avoid giving offense; be lavish with aid; open to immigration and 
obstructive to America at every turn. Like the appeasers of the 1930s it 
paid for its diplomatic strategy by systematically weakening itself.
The crisis over the Danish cartoons depicting the prophet Mohammed has 
ironically struck the weakest point of both strategies. At present the 
crisis is not a danger to the grand strategies of either. But as the 
days pass the danger grows that it may get out of hand; that some 
Islamic cell may detonate a bomb in Europe or some skinhead burn a 
mosque. And then the consequences may incalculable. For America an open 
antipathy between the West and Islam would destroy its carefully crafted 
attempt to ally itself with the Muslim street. It would place Washington 
in the intolerable position of having to choose between its old European 
allies and its newfound friends in the Middle East and Central Asia. For 
Europe the consequences would be no less disastrous because in following 
the policy of Appeasement its leaders have risked falling so far behind 
their publics that they now find themselves unable to steer the course 
of popular events. Europe is angry and Chirac, like Chamberlain after 
the Sudeten crisis, is too far behind the curve of popular opinion to 
seize its leadership. Chamberlain understood it and brought Churchill 
into his cabinet to bolster his credentials when he himself had none.
The Dutch blog Zacht Ei shows how far things have come in the space of a 
few days.
     In a move which is both courageous and stupid, Dutch blogger 'Reet' 
(a Dutch colloquialism for 'ass') of the blog 'Retecool' (a Dutch 
colloquialism for, er, "really" cool) has started a Photoshop contest in 
which participants create parodies of Mohammed. The contest can be 
viewed here (a mirror can be found here).
A contest to humiliate Mohammed has been launched not in Texas, not in 
Israel but in the Netherlands. The Netherlands. Almost inconceivable. A 
smoldering match in a continent riddled with unassimilated Muslim 
enclaves. Now the European leaders who staked their careers on political 
correctness and oleagenous kowtowing to radical Islam find themselves 
unable to assert themselves. It's a moment when Nicolas Sarkozy or Hirsi 
Ali may count for more in dampening the anti-Mohammed wave than Chirac 
or Dominique de Villepin. The key challenge for the leaders of Europe is 
how to get out in front of their publics; hard because they are so far 
behind.
Yet the cartoon crisis has been cruelest to radical Islam because it has 
upset the timetable for the slow demographic conquest of Europe. It 
forced the crisis before the time was ripe to win an outright trial of 
strength. And it has deranged the carefully crafted plan to hold Europe 
politically neutral while the Islamists concentrated their force on 
their most dangerous enemy, the United States. Unless the Islamists can 
reverse or at least pause the process of confrontation it will find 
itself engaged on two fronts, against Europe and the United States 
simultaneously.
Like all historical comparisons this one is inexact. The world of the 
late 1930s can never be compared to the opening decade of the 21st 
century. Nazism is not Islam nor is Hitler Osama Bin Laden. But I think 
some valid correspondences still remain between the Phoney War and the 
period between September 11 to the present. Both are marked by an 
attempt to maintain a disintegrating status quo long after it became 
imperative to exchange it for a new model of relationships. Both are 
marked by miscalculation as political leaders find themselves struggling 
to overtake the tide of events. Both mark the end of the last boundaries 
between the familiar and the dark, unknown future. What did Churchill 
feel, one wonders, in those desperate days when he did not know the end 
yet went on?
     ‘I wonder what sort of a tale we’ve fallen into?’  said Sam. ‘I 
wonder,’ said Frodo.
     ‘But I don’t know. And that’s the way of a real tale… The people in 
it don’t know…’
     ‘The old stories! Why, to think of it, we’re in the same tale 
still! It’s going on. Don’t the great tales never end?’
     ‘No, they never end as tales,’ said Frodo. ‘But the people in them 
come, and go when their part’s ended.’
     ‘You and I, Sam, are still stuck in the worst places of the story,
     and it is all too likely that some will say at this point: “Shut 
the book now, dad; we don’t want to read any more.”’
posted by wretchard at 2:17 AM

 Re-reading William Manchester's "Alone"
Incitazione alla guerra totale degna dell'ottimo ultimo Goebbels, poi il
paragone tra i due eventi è veramente fuori di testa.

 paragone tra i due eventi è veramente fuori di testa.
Sarebbe questo il paragone dell'autore?
Like all historical comparisons this one is inexact. The world of the
late 1930s can never be compared to the opening decade of the 21st
century. Nazism is not Islam nor is Hitler Osama Bin Laden. But I think
some valid correspondences still remain between the Phoney War and the
period between September 11 to the present. Both are marked by an
attempt to maintain a disintegrating status quo long after it became
imperative to exchange it for a new model of relationships. Both are
marked by miscalculation as political leaders find themselves
struggling
to overtake the tide of events. Both mark the end of the last
boundaries
between the familiar and the dark, unknown future. What did Churchill
feel, one wonders, in those desperate days when he did not know the end
yet went on?
Ma leggi l'inglese o giudichi a spanne il contenuto in base a chi l'ha
postato?

 
Yet the cartoon crisis has been cruelest to radical Islam because it has 
upset the timetable for the slow demographic conquest of Europe. It 
forced the crisis before the time was ripe to win an outright trial of 
strength. And it has deranged the carefully crafted plan to hold Europe 
politically neutral while the Islamists concentrated their force on 
their most dangerous enemy, the United States. Unless the Islamists can 
reverse or at least pause the process of confrontation it will find 
itself engaged on two fronts, against Europe and the United States 
simultaneously.
e così ci sarebbe un piano per la lenta conquista demografica dell'Europa...
Qualche prova per favore? O dovremmo aspettarci la produzione di qualcosa
di simile ai protocolli dei savi anziani di Sion? Così gli immigrati non
vengono qui per lavorare, ma per conquistarci.

 e così ci sarebbe un piano per la lenta conquista demografica dell'Europa...
Guarda che non lo ha detto lui lo ha detto Bin Laden in svariati
comunicati. Correttamente l'estensore attribuisce l'intenzione al
"radical Islam" ossia agli "Islamists" che sono qualcosa di diverso
dagli Islamici.

webm...@olokaustos.org
 wrote:

Bin laden non ha mai detto di voler conquistare l'Europa mediante
l'immigrazione anche perché sa benissimo che è impossibile in un lasso di
tempo diciamo di un secolo.