Try to find Mr Pearson inventing peacekeeping:
Book review: ‘Eisenhower 1956: The President’s Year of Crisis — Suez and the Brink of War’ by David A. Nichols
Less here. Via Spotlight on Military News and International Affairs.
Meanwhile the NY Times finds Mickey I. trying to get noticed:
Looking to Lead Canada, and for a Little Name Recognition
At least Mike succeeded in becoming prime minister.
Peacekeeping: Old Indian word that means ‘government take guns away from warriors and give them brooms’…
and then there was the ‘mercun author stephen ambrose’ treatment of D-Day which devoted, what, a couple paragraphs to the Canadian contribution. you know, the part where out lads went further inland faster than either the brits or yanks.
DON’T refer to ‘mercun authors for anything related to Canuckistan.
but such admonition falls on deaf ears within the rabid right wing.
Isn’t the point we did notice? We egaltarians are saying not likely?
PET Cemetery’s Question Period.
Count the questions:
>>> “Murphy: Where’s the Gadaffi Apartheid Week?”
“Did I miss Saudi Arabian Gender Apartheid Week? Or let’s take another example: This very week in Libya, there is a zealous tyrant turning fire on his own people. Is there, or has there ever been, a Gadaffi Apartheid Week or its equivalent anywhere?”
http://www.nationalpost.com/todays-paper/Where+Gadaffi+Apartheid+Week/4428168/story.html
…-
Perhaps the answers will come from this Liberal* from Liberal Iggy’s Liberal Party?
The other one with no hat*:
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/40646000/jpg/_40646393_martin203.jpg
“Canada’s Prime Minister Paul Martin has had talks with Libyan leader Colonel Gaddafi that were expected to focus on trade and business opportunities.”
“do I want to be a spectator, or teacher, in someone else’s country?”
Does that mean he wouldn’t be accepting a teaching position at Queens (or even York) but would just head back home to Harvard?
Mark, old bean, you might want to actually read the book rather than expect the whole story to be told in a review. Seems the people of the day thought Pearson had done something important. They gave him the Nobel Prize back in the day when it was still awarded for brokering peace, rather than for advocacy.
Evidently Ike learned a lesson about not trusting Britain after they talked him into getting the CIA to overthrow the elected government of Iran. The Brits were upset that BP was supposed to pay more than 16% of its net Iranian profits (not gross) for Iranian oil.
Mickey’s biggest problem is the LPC and not the other way around. Just as resentment smoldered in Iran for decades after the political theft of oil, the Liberals will never get a vote from those burnt by NEP.
“no one approached him or even waved. In a random sampling, few of the skaters that day even knew his name.”
Sad, one of the Greatest Canadians ever,and no one knew him! I bet if he’d been accompanied by David Suzuki there’d a been a crowd!
Iggy, just another Liberal Piece of Dogsh*t on the sidewalk. Look out for the dogsh*t. Turdo poisoned the well in the west for the LPC, and Chretien poisoned the whole country with his corruption. Peppergate, Adscam, Shawinagate, stole 54B from the E/I Fund, sold off all of the 700Metric Tonnes of Gold Reserves, money still missing, with the last two he had the help of his Madoff Finance Minister Martin.
Lloyd, old bean. I cannot check the book’s index. But if it is similar to those of most non-Canadian accounts our role will not be central. As I wrote at the CDFAI’s “3Ds Blog”:
http://www.cdfai.org/the3dsblog/?p=105
“…The “peacekeeping” force was in fact as much an American idea as Canadian; the U.S. asked us to front it for them at the UN as a way of salving Franco-British amour propre, i.e. so it did not look publicly as if the latter were bowing to the overwhelming power of the former. Which of course they were. The U.S was threatening to bring down the pound amongst other things.”
And remember that UNEF ended in utter failure in 1967. Nasser demanded its withdrawal; it left; the Six Day War followed. Great peacekeeping success, what, old bean?
Mark
Ottawa
After the fall of the USSR…KGB files disclosed that Pearson was not merely a dupe but rather a KGB agent.
There is merit to the notion that the LIBRANOs lost their grip on power gradually after the Berlin Wall fell….more than just a coicidence….but then I will admit prejudice.
Re Suez….back in the 80’s during my sojourn with the Legion, I easily identified the causes of French anti-Americanism.
1) the attempt by the US to install a US military government in France, rather than De Gaulles crowd. The communist exploited this bigtime.
2) the Suez….while this offended both the Brits and the French….the French probably still harbour a grudge about that….the communists couldn’t get any traction on that…due to the USSR support for Nasser.
To quote dmorris above, “no one approached him or even waved”. Simple explanation, “No One Likes To Be Seen With A Loser and a Hoser”. Iggy just another “Insignificant Piece of Liberal Dogsh*t on the Sidewalk” Stay way from the dogsh*t…
Beagle:
Ambrose made no attempt to give equal time to the non-american forces on D-Day and he was up front about it.
The canadians had some of the easiest landings of the day BTW.
Gord Tulk
[……The canadians had some of the easiest landings of the day BTW…….]
That’s funny the US War College would disagree.
The easiest landing was Utah Beach…lightly defended and with near total surprise due to being the first landing because of the tides.
Omaha was a disaster due to Bradly’s idiot refusal of specialized armour produced by the Brits….as a result of Dieppe.
The Canadians were credited by Hitler as being the most combat effective. Juno Beach was heavily defended but all the Canadian/British landing doctrine worked….close support by destroyers in shallow water…swimming tanks..specialised armour immediately available to breach beach defences…..and airbourne forces who landed directly on their objectives.
Indeed the breakout from the Beach-head hinged upon this opinion by the Germans. They concentrated their armour opposite the Canadians at Caen…..creating a weak spot for the US forces to exploit futher west.
Ambrose is an ignorant fool.
thanks for that input sasquatch.
‘World at War’ with narration by Laurence Olivier, episode ‘Morning’ says it all.
I copied the VHS onto betamax (to bypass the copy protect, which ironically worked its way onto the copy but was not picked up by the betamax play back function) in the late 80s and then when the DVD came out I bought it to continue periodic viewing. I think I’ll take in that chapter again.
The Libs made one fundamental mistake with Iggy. Instead of letting him be who he is and lead the party back to the space of true traditional liberalism, they expected him to fit into the tired, bankrupt, worn out Canadian Liberal Party ideology, which ain’t growing nowhere. What we have now, thanks to that mistake, is a Conservative Party that is more middle of the road, and a Liberal Party that can’t make up it’s mind what it is. No wonder the electorate is basically apathetic.
Totally correct, saquatch 8:41.
And where were was Juno?
The most northern beach, that’s where.
And where were the reserve heavy Panzer brigades?
North of Normandy, that’s where.
The Canadians were put on the northernmost beach because Eisenhower knew that when the reserve Tigers and Panthers were deployed against the invasion force they would hit the Canadians first before the Brits and then the Americans afterward.
If the reserve Panzer Corps had penetrated the Canadian forces and then the Brits they would have been depleted before the Americans had to face them.
As always, the Americans get the glory.
Too bad they only entered WWI after it was 3/4 over and WWII after it was half over, but Americans think they were the deciding factor in both wars.
Oz
Whether or not we wish to believe it, the Yanks were the deciding factors in both WW1 and WW2. There is a situation termed “a shrinking army” although it applies to all service branches. It means the number of 17 year olds turning 18 (and thus becoming available for combat duty) is less than the battle casualties. In WW2 the Brits became a shrinking army in July 1944. Canada reached it in January 1945. The Germans reached it in 1942 and only slowed it by a) putting women into the industrial labour force, b) Albert Spear reorganizing industry and moving toward “value engineered” (i.e. less top notch production and finish) weapons design c) heavily recruiting in occupied lands and finally d) expanding service arges to, ultimately 15 year olds and old men in their 60’s. The Red Army started shrinking in 1943: they “created” new divisions by not replacing losses in existing units. By late 1944 many Red Army “corps”, normally 45,000 to 50,000 men, were down to 3,000! That is why one can read about 2 German divisions attacking and defeating 3 red army corps (20,000 Krauts v. 9,000 Russians). Read “When Titans Clashed”, a history of the Earstern Front written by a LCol Professor of History at West Point (I forget his name).
The US forces never experienced shrinking army status in WW2.
WW1 was worse. By 1917, all combatants had become shrinking armies and in fact may be characterized as punch drunk heavyweight fighters in the 27th round. Someone was going down: it was just a matter of which haymaker was going to do it and to whom. In march the Yanks in late 1917, green but fresh. At that point, no matter how poorly the Yanks fought (and they did not fight badly) the German and Austro-Hungarian Empires were going down, sooner rather than later.
Its sad to see such ignorance of DDay. The US did deploy specialized armor at Omaha, unfortunately of the 32 deployed only two (I believe made it to the beach). Omaha was a disaster because the Germans had moved the 352nd there replacing the static troops who had defended the beach and who the Canadians had to deal with. These static troops were not only substantially older than those of the 352nd, but numbered a number of Russian volunteers among them.
As for the Reserve Panzer Corps these played zero role on DDay. The only armor that made an appearance was the motley 21 Panzer which cut through the British and Canadians and actually reached the sea before being driven back.
The clowns posting here have no idea of the numbers of troops the Germans actually had, actually shockingly few and they were outnumbered 10 to one by the intial assault waves.
The lack of a thorough bombardment (compared to the three days or more pre invasion bombardment that the Pacific saw) was one of the factors that contributed to the disaster. Wherever the Germans could maintain a coherent defense system they inflicted heavy losses.
In sum any check of the original goal lines of DDay were not meant and the timetable was badly upset until the breakout. As for the Canadians, they fought as valiantly as the French did. But weren’t up to the Poles. Its odd that the Germans rated the Canadians on a par with the British.
Its sad to see such ignorance of DDay. The US did deploy specialized armor at Omaha, unfortunately of the 32 deployed only two (I believe made it to the beach). Omaha was a disaster because the Germans had moved the 352nd there replacing the static troops who had defended the beach and who the Canadians had to deal with. These static troops were not only substantially older than those of the 352nd, but numbered a number of Russian volunteers among them.
As for the Reserve Panzer Corps these played zero role on DDay. The only armor that made an appearance was the motley 21 Panzer which cut through the British and Canadians and actually reached the sea before being driven back.
The clowns posting here have no idea of the numbers of troops the Germans actually had, actually shockingly few and they were outnumbered 10 to one by the intial assault waves.
The lack of a thorough bombardment (compared to the three days or more pre invasion bombardment that the Pacific saw) was one of the factors that contributed to the disaster. Wherever the Germans could maintain a coherent defense system they inflicted heavy losses.
In sum any check of the original goal lines of DDay were not meant and the timetable was badly upset until the breakout. As for the Canadians, they fought as valiantly as the French did. But weren’t up to the Poles. Its odd that the Germans rated the Canadians on a par with the British.
Mark, before you try to passs yourself off as knowing whether Pearson is mentioned in the book and try to create an argument based on that premise, you should at least look at a copy of the actual book. Otherwise, well, you’re either dishonest or ignorant, or both. In other words, know what you are talking about, for a change.
By the way, for any winged monkeys who want to know the rationale behind Pearson’s Nobel Prize, it’s here:
http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/1957/press.html
“When Titans Clashed” was written by David M. Glanz, along with other well written books. I am currently reading his “The Battle of Kursk”, a decicive tank battle of WWII. Re; June 6, 1944, reading from East to West, the 5 beaches are: Sword (Brit), Juno (Can), Gold (Brit), Omaha & Utah (U.S.). For those interested Mark Zuelke has 4 books outlining in detail Can. infantry operations in France thru Holland and 4 Books on the Can. contribution to the Italian campaign.
@ Elli Light:
Yes, the disaster of D-Day was so sad.
But take heart! Maybe one day Hitler can be defeated!
*rollseyes*
* Ellie Light —
agree to parts of your post, however, after much research, I believe the greatest mistake made in both European wars and [Hong Kong] was putting our Canadian army, et al. under the direct command of the British. More particularly that arrogant little sh*thead — Montgomery.
Never again.
“As for the Reserve Panzer Corps these played zero role on DDay. The only armor that made an appearance was the motley 21 Panzer which cut through the British and Canadians and actually reached the sea before being driven back.
The clowns posting here have no idea of the numbers of troops the Germans actually had, actually shockingly few and they were outnumbered 10 to one by the intial assault waves.”
~Ellie Light
Too bad you weren’t there to tell Eisenhower all that before they invasion was launched.
Then General Eisenhower wouldn’t have had to draft his “In Case Of Failure Speech”.
http://tinyurl.com/3x8hadh
Iggy forgot a cardinal rule for political campaigning.
Never wear a hat.