Hacker News Reader

Comment by 5_minutes | Hacker News Reader

Let's also not forget that that Churchill had to beg the Americans for quite some time to come and help him out. And they didn't. He even attacked and sank a French naval fleet, just to proof he was serious, to them.

And that in the meantime, the Nazis were very much into the occult business.

I'm just saying that one shouldn't be surprised that Churchil was looking at all possible options out there.

Here is the intro video, that gets you up to speed: https://youtube.com/watch?v=p_37IU4n834

View on HN

You referring to when he had the French Vichy fleet sunk? Was that aimed at the US?

Churchill's fun. Probably saved the West by rallying the Brits, foresaw the Cold War. On the other hand incredibly bumbling at Gallipoli and completely wrong about Gandhi.

Back on the topic of aliens, Reagan has one of the more interesting references:

I occasionally think how quickly our differences worldwide would vanish if we were facing an alien threat from outside this world. And yet, I ask you, is not an alien force already among us? What could be more alien to the universal aspirations of our peoples than war and the threat of war?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ag44dRO8LEA

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/reagan-and-gorbache...

Yes that's correct. According to the documentary, "Secrets of the Dead: Churchill's Deadly Decision", as a last desperate attempt to get some support from the Americans. Who had been promising reinforcements for quite some time, but eventually did very little until the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor.

Churchill's fun. And Reagan is also just fun.

Even for his quotes, which are called "Reaganisms".

It wasn't quite as 'desperate' and unique an action against the Vichy as is often portrayed, bearing in mind that two years later British forces invaded Vichy-ruled Madagascar with no-holds-barred battles against the French forces there.

https://www.combinedops.com/MADAGASCAR.htm

There were also extensive operations by the British against the Vichy in Syria and Lebanon, and there again both sides were ruthless.

> completely wrong about Gandhi.

Was he?

I've always thought his worst error was in shipping the Cossacks back to Stalin's machine guns.

I feel like it. Didn't he have a patronizing view of Indians, being much more concerned with the glory of the Empire than the happiness of Asians? He at least disrespected Gandhi.

I've always thought his worst error was in shipping the Cossacks back to Stalin's machine guns.

I thought that was just a sub-plot of Goleneye. Guess some googling is in order...

>I thought that was just a sub-plot of Goleneye. Guess some googling is in order...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Repatriation_of_Cossacks_after...

> Didn't he have a patronizing view of Indians, being much more concerned with the glory of the Empire than the happiness of Asians? He at least disrespected Gandhi.

I rather think he thought (or at least told himself) that the Empire would lead to greater happiness for them in the long run. And I'm unconvinced that Gandhi deserves all the respect he gets — he was a man, not a perfect saint. The Brits weren't certainly not saints in India either, of course.

> Guess some googling is in order...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Repatriation_of_Cossacks_after...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com