Churchill believed he could charm anyone - even Stalin.

 

1. That… was NOT an easy read.

   I mean, perhaps it is escapism of a sort, but I have always found it tempting in my games to try and reserve the tide of history in matters like this. Because it’s a game, and once you get it right, BOOM, French and British tanks crash through the Siegfried Line in 1939 and are advancing across Western Germany crushing all foolish enough to resist, BOOM, the Belgians hold out in 1914 and the Germans are pushed across the Rhine in the first months of the war, BOOM, the Western Allies host a parade through Red Square as Stalin and his henchmen either commit suicide, are killed resisting/trying to escape, or are dragged out to be tried and executed at a later date… all of which are the vanguard that herald a far gentler, less bloody, more humane future for the world and its people…

   But when you step back, you realize that for however nice or sweet these alternate histories are, in the end, they are just pixels on your computer screen. You can bask in the glory for a few minutes, but when you exit, all traces of it are compacted into a save file somewhere in the library of folders on your computer, and you are forced to face the fact that the real world did not turn out that way. That for Eastern Europe and the Western Empires, there either was no happy ending, or that it was overwhelmingly softened.

   The reality of the matter is that in the real world, you get exactly ONE try to get it right, and if you blow that, the results will be carved into the inflexible pillar of history just as truthfully as they are etched in blood.

   The number one problem the West has is that we have never truly vanquished Russia. The singular delusion we enjoyed in 1989 and 1991 was that the fall of the USSR would herald a world of peace and freedom as the evil Soviet Union had finally fallen. But the truth is that only one face, one form of the Russian threat- albeit the most powerful form that had ever existed- had fallen. The only times we even came close was in 1856- which was a valuable check, but in the grand scheme of things amounted to a humiliating flesh-wound- and 1919, when the possibility of intervention and reformation was at its peak.

   The bottom line is that we have been so focused on avoiding a direct confrontation with the Russians that we have lost sight of perhaps the most important reason behind these confrontations. So far, we have been content to kick the can up the road for a few centuries, counting on the fact that when the blowup would happen, it would not be on “our” watches. But what we never consider is that we leave the poor SOB up the drive in a fix trying to deal with it.

   We have been obsessing over how much of Eastern Europe and Central Asia we must sacrifice to whet the bear’s hunger and prevent war that we fail to recognize that perhaps this is merely an indication of HOW far off the mark we are. Perhaps the CORRECT answer is not to feed the bear or the dragon or the Islamist snake in human blood and tears, but to refuse and to BREAK THEIR GODDAMN NECK.

   Yes, it would be a gamble that, if we loose, would negate much of what we have gained over the past centuries, but so was 1914 and 1939. I cannot guarantee victory, I know that if we fail, we will open up the gates for the bear and its demented, twisted kin to enslave yet more multitudes into the Jailhouse of Nations, but if we were to pull it off, would it not be all worth it?

   Because what else is left? Being forced to cower to a moribund tyranny on its rotting throne of bayonets as it slowly disintegrates, leaving a vacuum open for the Chinese or the Islamists? Do we REALLY want the Russians to continue acting like the Turks of the Chinese, completely ignoring all the injustices they have wrought on the world while perverted the records of history to their own disgusting agendas?

   I believe that a common saying is that “Diplomacy is the art of surviving until next century, Politics is the art of surviving until next week.”

   I say that we have become so obsessed with politics, with the weekly tripe that floods in, that we have missed the great strands that will shape the world of the next century. We do not need more politicians as our leaders, we need more leaders as our politicians.

   Because until Russia, the Turks, and the Chinese literally have crimes like this SHOVED INTO THEIR EYE and beaten into them, what “peace” are we maintaining, what future are we creating anyway?

   I am sorry for the rant, but I just get fed up with this.

   Posted by Turtler       08/29/2009  at  02:45 PM  



2. T.
   It was just an excerpt from his book published in the Daily Mail as part of the anniversary week. Actually almost two weeks. It’s one of the best bios written on Churchill, so say the critics. I wouldn’t know as I haven’t read all the other bios. But I do like Hastings generally and have read some of his other books.

   Posted by peiper       08/31/2009  at  02:36 AM  

Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.