Fire Generals Sympathetic To Fascism


The defeat of France by the Nazis in May-June 1940 could likely have been avoided by just one factor: firing the Commander In Chief, Gamelin, on the job since 1931. Several French Prime Ministers intended to do it several times, but it didn’t happen, although the reasons the PMs had to fire Gamelin were prescient. Most prominent of all reasons, Gamelin was not exhibiting enough enthusiasm in fighting fascism. Gamelin made many decisions which were ridiculous, foolhardy, catastrophic, and completely outside of millennia of military science… And Gamelin made strategic mistakes on or before 1936. In 1939-40 his errors became astronomically baffling (for example sending the French reserve as far from France as possible!) Gamelin was fired within 5 days of the all out invasion, but by then Gamelin had ordered irreparable errors.

Studying Gamelin’s horrendous ways (Gamelin used landlines or messengers, not wireless radio as the Nazis did), one comes out with the impression that Gamelin wanted the Nazis to win… And that is confirmed, when he admits in his memoirs, written after WWII, that he, Gamelin, was more worried by the Jewish Socialist French Prime Minister Blum in 1936, than by the Nazi tyrant who had invaded Spain and the Rhineland the same year!

The top US general advocates to force Ukraine to negotiate with Putin. This is more than deplorable. It is a betrayal of democracy. It’s a cause for dismissal.

Right the democracies are running out of ammunition, and the Pentagon is fetching basic artillery shells all the way to Korea. But that’s because the democracies are in denial that they are in a situation similar to 1936. Had the democracies counterattacked the fascist regimes in 1936, or stopped collaborating with them (by sending fuel to Hitler, Mussolini and Hirohito, among other things)… World War Two in its full rage and attending genocides, would have never happened. In 1936, the British and US ground forces were tiny, completely unable to fight a world war, so UK and US decided that there was no world war, and that there would be no world war, as long as they averted their eyes from genocide (having deported 40,000 Ukrainian choldren from Kherson Oblast alone, the Kremlin regime is clearly genocidal…).

The Ukrainians are well equipped, because they are defending themselves and 50 democracies provide them with weapons, and even more with other non-lethal assistance. Now, clearly the democracies had decided peace would last 1,000 years. Instead a tyrant has threatened them to be visited “with destruction as they had never seen in their history” (to use Putin’s exact expression).

So the democracies are not armed either in quality and quantity to fight the world war they find themselves engaged in.

Some will pretend that this is not a world war. Such a denial is typical. Indeed, in the 1930s, there was clearly a world war situation in 1936, by the time when Hitler helped invade Spain and occupied the Rhineland, while Italy attacked Ethiopia, and Japan pushed deeper into China. However, it took another five years for the USA to get ready to fight a world war. France and Britain, who had declared war to Hitler were themselves slack in getting enough weapons at the ready (in particular France didn’t arm hundreds of brand new fighter planes… and Britain had a tiny army) 

Ukrainians can, and will fight through the winter. Winter is a friend of armored units maneuvering on hard ground. 

Russia is a corrupt tyranny, its soldiers are ill equipped, ill trained, ill motivated and will suffer through winter. They must surrender: Putin has resurrected “blocking sections” shooting fugitives.  

That the top US general advocate negotiating with the tyrant, the first tyrant who ever threatened to annihilate humanity, is not tolerable. Fighting Putin is like fighting a rattlesnake inside one’s bed: you can’t stop and go cuddly all of a sudden, just because you are ahead at some point. Any pause in the fighting will benefit Putin, as it will give him replenishment, and the opportunity to look so terrible that his enemies have to cease-fire.

Ceasefire was what the French Republic did with the Nazis on June 23 1940. US betrayal of France was an important reason for it (US “guarantees” given by FDR were not respected. Instead FDR sent his right hand man 5 star admiral Leahy, recognizing the collaborationist Vichy junta explicitly). 

All those advocating for a cease-fire with Putin advocate for a situation similar to that with Hitler when France agreed to a cease-fire in June 1940.

Ukraine can and should fight through winter. It fights for all of us. 

 France actually had the means to keep on fighting in July 1940, by retreating to Corsica, and North Africa.  Hitler could never have got there (the French Navy and Air Force were too strong, even without counting the British air force and navy). Why this did not happen has everything to do with the USA’s cat and mouse game with Europe: the USA had given guarantees to France in helping to fight Nazism, and then defaulted spectacularly on those guarantees in 1939-40. Understandably, many French leaders did not feel like doing most of the fighting and dying as in 1914-18, just to see the US grab most of the fruits of victory!

… And the question is: are we facing something similar today? Trying to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory? Yes, production and quality of weapons has to dramatically increase in the democracies, should they want Earth not to turn into a hellscape. So what? Nothing new there. Democracy is expensive.

Patrice Ayme

***

Notes:

Context of the WWII cartoon below which is making scathing fun of US pro-Nazi policies of 1939-40: when the commanding US general finally arrived in France in 1917, after three years of the French Republic being attacked and invaded by the fascist imperial German plutocracy of the Kaiser, he said: “La Fayette we are here!”. Both in 1914-1917 and in 1939-42, US powerful US plutocrats were entangled with the fascit regimes in Germany… to the point of insuring the survival of these fascist regimes. For example in WWI, after the US finally participated in the blockade of fascist Germany, German shell production collapsed and became a tenth of French production…

Auschwitz and similar events can be traced directly to the US’s astounding betrayal of democracy in 1939-40. Not only that but there were explicit guarantees to France, and also France (in two ways) and Britain are the parents of the USA… Not just allies. That Hitler basically planned to kill all Jews, like Putin basically plans to kill all Ukrainians (what Putin and Lavrov call fighting to the last Ukrainian… accusing others of the idea, but actually promoting the notion by evoking it…) 

***

ON Military Momentum During A Rout: When an army is routed, it is important to keep pushing it… That’s called a rout. World War Two showed several examples of this. Reciprocally, the Nazis, after a calamitous defeat in July-August 1944, pushed by the disembarkment in Normandy and Provence, were able to stabilize the front because of the one-bridge-too-far UK-US offensive in Belgium/Netherlands which turned into a costly semi-defeat for the democracies. The Germans actually called this miraculous stabilization the “Miracle on the Western Front“. If the bridge-too-far offensive had not been unlucky, with the presence of undetected SS armor, the Nazi Reich would have promptly collapsed in a matter of weeks, as intended.

Right now the Ukrainian are routing the Russians. That Mark Milley, the US C In C uses the occasion of a rout of Putin’s forces by the Ukrainian democracy to urge for “negotiations”, a cease-fire, that is, surrender is cause enough for dismissal. The ex C in C in France is advocating a similar surrender. One should not underestimate the “Hybrid Warfare” promoted by Gerasimov, the present Russian C In C. That includes betrayal by supposed adversaries which are actually secret allies. An excellent example is what happened with the French Communists in 1939-41, when their master in the Kremlin was allied officially with Hitler. This had dramatically adverse consequences for the military preparedness of France (planes were unarmed, less the Communists grabbed the guns…) 

Tags: ,

6 Responses to “Fire Generals Sympathetic To Fascism”

  1. nigelsouthway Says:

    The real issue is that the Berlin wall should not have come down… The USSR should have been maintained and then we would have had a better peace.

    Nigel Southway

    TBM Advocate.

    TAKE BACK MANUFACTURING

    Dedicated to the restoration of our manufacturing sectors

    http://www.sme-tbm.org http://www.sme-tbm.org/

    nsouthway@bell.net nsouthway@bell.net

    http://www.nigelsouthwayauthor.com http://www.nigelsouthwayauthor.com/

    http://www.nigelsouthway.com http://www.nigelsouthway.com

    905 464 5517

    Like

    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Who took the Berlin Wall down?
      Who would have maintained the USSR?
      Leaders of the Soviet Republics, including the RUSSIAN FEDERATION, meeting in Bielorussia, decided to dissolve it, UNANIMOUSLY, Dec 26, 1991. They then informed Gorbachev in the Kremlin that he presided a dead legal entity.

      The Belovezh Accords (Russian: Беловежские соглашения, Belarusian: Белавежскае пагадненне, Ukrainian: Біловезькі угоди) are accords forming the agreement declaring that the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) had effectively ceased to exist and established the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) in its place as a successor entity. The documentation was signed at the state dacha near Viskuli in Belovezhskaya Pushcha (Belarus) on 8 December 1991, by leaders of three of the four republics which had signed the 1922 Treaty on the Creation of the USSR:

      Russian President Boris Yeltsin and First Deputy Prime Minister of the RSFSR/Russian Federation Gennady Burbulis
      Ukrainian President Leonid Kravchuk and Ukrainian Prime Minister Vitold Fokin
      Belarusian Parliament Chairman Stanislav Shushkevich and Prime Minister of Belarus Vyacheslav Kebich

      The dissolution of the Soviet Union[a] was the process of internal disintegration within the Soviet Union (USSR) which resulted in the end of the country’s and its federal government’s existence as a sovereign state, thereby resulting in its constituent republics gaining full sovereignty on 26 December 1991. It brought an end to General Secretary Mikhail Gorbachev’s (later also President) effort to reform the Soviet political and economic system in an attempt to stop a period of political stalemate and economic backslide. The Soviet Union had experienced internal stagnation and ethnic separatism. Although highly centralized until its final years, the country was made up of fifteen top-level republics that served as homelands for different ethnicities. By late 1991, amid a catastrophic political crisis, with several republics already departing the Union and the waning of centralized power, the leaders of three of its founding members declared that the Soviet Union no longer existed. Eight more republics joined their declaration shortly thereafter. Gorbachev resigned in December 1991 and what was left of the Soviet parliament voted to end itself.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dissolution_of_the_Soviet_Union#:~:text=The%20dissolution%20of%20the%20Soviet,sovereignty%20on%2026%20December%201991.

      Like

  2. Gmax Says:

    This what learning from history means. Please send this to Biden

    Like

What do you think? Please join the debate! The simplest questions are often the deepest!

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 )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: