Farage: Britain Should Never Have Signed Armistice – Beastrabban\’s Weblog

Admit it – you’ve been waiting for The Beast’s expert historical opinion on this ever since the smoking separatist voiced his ill-chosen words. Here it is:

While the rest of the UK on Tuesday was remembering the dead of the Great War, Nigel Farage was giving a speech stating his opinion that it should have gone on for longer. Even if this meant that a further 100,000 lives were lost. Farage made this bizarre and offensive claim speaking at the annual Tom Olsen lecture at St Bride’s Church.

His comments have been reported by a number of news agencies, including the MSN news. The anti-racist organisation, Hope Not Hate has an article on it, Armistice was the biggest mistake of the 20th century claims Nigel Farage, at http://www.hopenothate.org.uk/ukip/armistice-was-the-biggest-mistake-of-the-20th-century-claims-nigel-farage-4120.

Hope Not Hate quote Farage as saying, “I believe we should have continued with the advance We should have pursued the war for a further six weeks, and gone for an unconditional surrender. Yes the last six weeks of the war cost us 100,000 casualties, and I’m prepared to accept that a further six weeks of war might have cost us another 100,000.”

He goes on to say that this would have stopped the rise of the Nazis, as it would have forced Germany to surrender unconditionally, rather than negotiate the Treaty of Versailles.

The Treaty of Versailles and the ‘Stab in the Back’ Conspiracy Theory

This is an extraordinary claim, and shows that Fuehrer Farage has quite a bonkers grasp of history…

Conservative critics of Bush’s invasion of Iraq called Dubya and his fellow warmongers ‘chickenhawks’. They were men and women, who had never served in the armed forces themselves, and had no experience or understanding of the brutal reality of combat. They were perfectly happy to mouth off about war, and send others to their deaths in pursuit of American power and corporate profit, but had never, ever, risked their own lives for their country in combat.

Farage has the same attitude. It’s the mentality of someone, who sees himself as a commander, above the bloody, messy business of actually fighting in the trenches, in foxholes and mud and filth himself. It’s the same attitude of the out-of-touch generals, politicians and princes, who sent their citizens to die in pain, fear and misery, for military glory. It’s the attitude of a man, who seems to feel that victory for Britain was certain from the outset. All that was needed is to throw more men at it, and hang the consequences.

For the rest of this article – and The Beast’s verdict on Farage, visit the article on his blog.

Follow me on Twitter: @MidWalesMike

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
bringing you the best of the blogs!

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

4 thoughts on “Farage: Britain Should Never Have Signed Armistice – Beastrabban\’s Weblog

  1. Michele Witchy Eve

    Way to completely ignore the point, Farage. Hitler’s burning political anger came from the fact that he believed the terms for Germany under the Versailles Treaty were *too* harsh. What does Farage imagine Hitler’s feeling would have been with a further 6 weeks of war and then Farage’s version of total surrender? Or was Farage assuming all possible Hitlers would have been killed during that extra 6 weeks? The man’s a barmpot.

  2. Michelle

    Nigel seems to have little knowledge re the dynamics of war: bankers, power players and arms traders.

    For example, Sir Basil Zaharoff traded arms before and during WW1, he was also a close pal of Lloyd George (btw revelations after the war about this sent George out of office). In fact Zaharoff was so enriched by the WW1 slaughter at lowest estimate his personal fortune was said to be worth $100,000,000 after the war and even as high as a billion, “in 1917 when there seemed a possibility of peace through the intervention of the U.S., Lord Bertie British Ambassador to France, naively recorded in his diary: ‘Zaharoff is all for continuing the war…”

    Ref: page 57 and 113: http://www.scribd.com/doc/24390792/Arms-and-the-Men-Fortune-1934

Comments are closed.