DIANA WEST: WHAT WAS THE “SPECIAL RELATIONSHIP” OF THE 20TH CENTURY?
Michael Goodwin of the New York Post, a former colleague on the old Lou Dobbs shows at CNN, has a column out interpreting Obama’s unseemly behavior at Mandela’s funeral. He writes:
But the “selfie” episode also symbolizes the greater global calamity of Western decline. With British prime minister David Cameron playing the role of Obama’s giggling wingman, the “look at me” moment confirms we have unserious leaders in a dangerously serious time.
To say the very least.
Goodwin continues, lambasting Obama & Cameron as empty suits.
Obama and Cameron were posing as world leaders. They will never be confused with FDR and Churchill. The fratboys stand in stark contrast to the days when the “special relationship” meant two great leaders uniting two great countries in the fight for freedom.
Here is the AP photo that runs in the Post illustrating Goodwin’s point:
“Two great leaders”?
Wasn’t there someone else “uniting for freedom”? Yes, there’s a sleeve next to FDR’s cigarette-holding hand. Now, what was his name…?
Stalin.
Chances are, the photo editor simply cut Stalin out of the frame because Goodwin wasn’t talking about the third man of the so-called Big Three. As far as Goodwin’s argument goes, however, Stalin is the third rail.
As I argue in American Betrayal, FDR and Churchill allied to defeat Hitler; Stalin, however, had a completely different war goal: to supplant Hitler. And so he did, greatly if not essentially abetted by secret networks of traitors in London and Washington who all the while served as soldiers in a dirty intelligence war against Stalin’s “allies,” GB and the US.
Goodwin continues:
Those [two] leaders understood the consequences if evil prevailed and were committed to victory.
This is an expression of the conventional wisdom that the only evil on the march during World War II was Hitler.
By late 1943, Churchill at least understood there another evil — Soviet evil — while FDR remained effectively oblivious. But Churchill was powerless by then to do anything about it, effectively broken and marginalized as a power broker inside this still-celebrated “troika.”
Goodwin continues:
Churchill coined the term “special relationship” during World War II and used it again in his “Iron Curtain Speech” in 1946 that marked the unofficial start of the Cold War.
That “Cold War” was raging long before 1946. While the Soviet intelligence war on the US and the wider world began in the early days of the Bolsheviks, a realistic start date, I argue in American Betrayal, is November 16, 1933. That was the day FDR “normalized” relations with this abnormal entity, thus creating conditions for increased infiltration and subversion inside the US federal government and related institutions.
Fearful the West would disarm again, as it did after World War I, he wanted to combat communism by maintaining the “special relationship between the British Commonwealth and Empire and the United States.
The really “special” relationship of the 20th century was between the US and USSR.
Comments are closed.
