Ten worst Britons (and Americans)

Oh come on. Where’s the spirit of Christmas cheer? Friends was quite good (even hard hearted misanthrope Charlie Brooker admits that) although it did jump the shark in a big way when Monica got it together with Chandler.

The person responsible for Different Strokes on the other hand….

The inclusion of MLK serves a useful purpose, to mark the lister as evil – not just a political opponent, not as somebody with some ideas that I don’t like, but evil. Worthy of no respect whatsoever.

My brief survey of the lists so far seems to indicate that the conservative bloggers seem to think that Jimmy Carter is without doubt one of the worst Americans of all time. While it’s fun to see life imitating the Simpsons (“Jimmy Carter?! He’s history’s greatest monster!”) I have to confess I find this perplexing. What is it about Jimmy Carter that conservatives loathe so?

J. Edgar Hoover.
Roger Taney.
Joe McCarthy.
Theodore Bilbo.
Nathan Bedford Forrest.
James Buchanan.
Curtis LeMay.
Ty Cobb.
(Do they have to be dead? If not:)
(tied) Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson.
George Bush.

Sorry, the link above to the list at Captain’s Quarters didn’t work as intended. It’s at http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/archives/006028.php

Those who put MLK in their 10WA list are tied for first place on my 10WA list, so listing any ten in particular would be arbitrary.

Any list that includes Jimmy Carter and excludes Henry Wirz–superintendent of the dreaded Andersonville Prison Camp–can’t be taken seriously.

Also, in some brief scannings, I haven’t seen Gover Norquist or L. Ron Hubbard come up. Strange.

The real hatred of Carter comes not from his Presidency of nanny-statism and middle-eastern terrorism appeasement, but what he has done after his Presidency.

Didn’t he help Clinton make sure N. Korea had a decade to develop their nuclear weapons? Didn’t he argue in 2002 any President who didn’t have a military background had no moral authority to wage war, which undermines the basic premise of civilian authority (See George Wallace for a military-politician who made some horrible decisions)? And who did Carter sit next to at the 2004 DNC Primary? Mr. Iraqi-terrorists-are-really-just-US-Minutemen aka Michael Moore. Which is telling about the modern politics of Carter.

Oh, and he made sure US nuclear energy would never be viable in the US.

How about Robert Moses, for immiserating so many American cities, especially New York, where he bulldozed communities to prep the city for a vehicle 90% of New Yorkers don’t use?

Ten Worst Americans (Dead)

1. Jefferson Davis
2. Robert E. Lee
3. J. Edgar Hoover
4. Joseph McCarthy
5. Richard M. Nixon
6. George Wallace
7. Andrew Jackson
8. Benedict Arnold
9. Nathan Bedford Forrest
10. Strom Thurmond

Japanese internment camps and attempting to pack the Supreme Court.

And while I might like much of the spirit of the New Deal, some of the actual policies were at best a bit questionable. (I think another poster has just pointed this out.)

Yea defeating facism and preventing a revolution kind of tip the scale, but there is plenty to hate/dislike about FDR and his strong arm tactics.

I thought a lot of lists where a combination of great and just plain silly.

A lot interesting nominations.

I would say the consensus list contains a traitor or two or three, Arnold, Burr, Hiss, Rosenbergs, etc, someone who massacared native Americans, Chivington, Jackson, etc., one or two segergationists/racists/secessionists, Bedford Forest, Calhoun, Wilkes, Booth etc., an over the edge cold warrior or two, Hoover or McCarthy, some kind of mass murderer like Bundy, one or two disliked Ameican presidents, LBJ, WW, Nixon, Carter, and or two sillier nominations like Fonda, and probably just missing the cut would be a disliked supreme court justice, generally Blackmun or Warren, and Jesse Jackson.

Most of the lists I read seemed to be of a general conservative bent.

If this is the general state of grass roots conservative thought in America, in general I can happily live with it.

Jet –

Your remarks on FDR are amazingly uninformed (or worse): we had farm surpluses that we couldn’t “afford to distribute”–funny, that efficient capitalism for making things work out the best.

As for inclusion on Worst Ever list, I’d have to add General George Van Horn Moseley to the list, along with Nathan Bedford Forrest, Joe McCarthy, Richard Nixon, et. al.

Can’t Joe Kennedy get a look-in?

Interesting to note that the left and right in the UK, despite being much further apart than the left and right in the US, probably will come up with a consensus candidate for the 20th century (Mosley). But in the US there isn’t any consensus at all as far as I can see. Even on Hoover. Coughlin?

FDR was less than forthright with the truth in his efforts to get the US into WWII? That speaks very badly for the US public of the time, imho.

Good points about Carter and FDR – even those who disliked them a lot, 10 worst Americans?

Would Edward Teller count, as a naturalized American?

Is this supposed to be the worst people who happen to be Americans, or the people who are worst at being Americans?

And who did Carter sit next to at the 2004 DNC Primary? Mr. Iraqi-terrorists-are-really-just-US-Minutemen aka Michael Moore. Which is telling about the modern politics of Carter.

Oh, and he made sure US nuclear energy would never be viable in the US.

Posted by jet · December 29th, 2005 at 11:18 am”>
and who sat near pickles @ the state.of.those.16.words.union.address ??

mr ahmed “i’m from a country that tried and convicted me for theft and at that time you were paying me $240,000/month while i was a spy for iran and i just got .89% of the iraqi vote because the people like me so” chalabi

Two words: Roy Cohn.

I don’t have a big background in Civil War history, but I’m always reluctant to include Robert E. Lee in these lists of “worst americans,” since he wasn’t one of the agitators of secession. He certainly makes a good case study in moral abdication– he’d have fought for the south regardless of what the confederacy stood for — but the “worst americans” with respect to the civil war were those who spearheaded secession. Refusing to make a moral judgment in favor of defense of one’s “team” is never admirable, but they’re only accessories to the crime.

The ten worst Americans, ever? Whatever their names, their crimes were plantation slavery and genocide of an entire continent. But revival of torture in the 21st century is close.

Benedict Arnold would probably rank as more of a sadly unsuccessful British (or even Canadian) patriot than a villain, for instance.

Michelle Malkin, Anne Coulter

Barry Goldwater
Ronald Reagan
Rupert Murdoch (now an American citizen)
Bill O’Reilly

“What is it about Jimmy Carter that conservatives loathe so?”

That he was successful in a life devoted to service rather than profits. This of course defines a Christian, which embarrasses them.

The thing about Carter is that he’s a sissy, a man Not to be Feared.

That’s certainly the image he’s acquired over the years, bizarrely enough. It’s even more amazing when you compare his military service record with that of the current occupant of the White House. Carter served seven years in the Navy, rising to the rank of lieutenant. As Hendrik Hertzberg has pointed out, “Except for his fellow service-academy graduate Dwight Eisenhower, no President of the twentieth century spent more years in uniform than Carter.”

Meanwhile, George “TANG” Bush buys a Potemkin “ranch” a year before he runs for President for the sole purpose of generating Reaganesque brush-clearing photo ops–and it’s like his years at Andover and Yale never happened.

What a weird world we live in.

Henry Ford, for his enduring legacy.

10. John C. Calhoun
9. Donald Rumsfeld
8. Arnold Rothstein
7. Henry Wirz
6. William J. Simmons
5. Karl Rove
4. Roy Cohn
3. Curtis LeMay
2. Jacob H. Smith
1. Dick Cheney

No contest for #1. My primary criterion was how quickly “—-ing bastard” came to mind.

I would also nominate Paul Robeson for the person showing up on the wingnuts’ lists that is least defensible.

INcluding Paul Robeson on one’s list is much, much, worse than including MLK. Whoever does it is at best an inconsiderate igoramous, at worst a complete bastard.

10 is not enough to do justice. The Confedrates have 10 all by themselves.

On Benedict Arnold. Is he really a worst American? Maybe this is blasphemy but I’m not so sure the War for Independence was a good versus evil affair. So he switched sides or acted as a spy. Whoopadeedoo! He had little to no effect on the outcome of the nation’s history.

I am amazed to learn from here that America is so well endowed with bad people whereas little ol’ Britain seems able to muster only one exemplary bad person from all the 20th century, the undoubtedly odious Sir Oswald Mosley. With the passing of decades perhaps few now recall much biographical detail for Mosley. He certainly has a strong claim to his status. He founded the British Union of Fascists in 1932 and used that as vehicle for parading his antisemitism through to the outbreak of WW2.

Curiously, it seems to escape the recall of many nowadays that before founding a fascist movement in Britain, Mosley had been a cabinet minister in Ramsay Macdonald’s Labour government of 1929-31 until he resigned in 1930 complaining that the government was doing too little to address the mounting problem of unemployment. He certainly regarded himself as a “leftist”. Indeed, he wrote to The [London] Times in April 1968: “I am not, and never have been, a man of the right. My position was on the left and is now in the centre of politics.”

We have from an entirely independent source some supporting testimony for Mosley’s startling claim. George Orwell kept a diary of notes in 1936 while researching for the book that was to become: The Road to Wigan Pier (1937). The diary was not published until after Orwell’s death and there is no reference in the book to the public meeting described in the diary entry for 16 March 1936. It is worth quoting the entry for the insights it provides into fascist rhetoric at the time and public reactions to it and because, importantly, it makes indisputably clear that the existence of “concentration camps” in Germany was already public knowledge in 1936. As Orwell reports: ” . . the (mainly) working class audience was easily bamboozled by M speaking as it were from a Socialist angle . . “:

“Last night to hear Mosley speak at the Public Hall [in Barnsley, Yorkshire], which is in structure a theatre. It was quite full – about 700 people I should say. About 100 Blackshirts on duty, with two or three exceptions weedy looking specimens, and girls selling Action etc. Mosley spoke for an hour and a half and to my dismay seemed to have the meeting mainly with him. He was booed at the start but loudly clapped at the end. Several men who tried to interject with questions were thrown out . . . one with quite unnecessary violence. . . . M. is a very good speaker. His speech was the usual clap-trap – Empire free trade, down with the Jew and the foreigner, higher wages and shorter hours all round etc. After the preliminary booing the (mainly) working class audience was easily bamboozled by M speaking as it were from a Socialist angle, condemning the treachery of successive governments towards the workers. The blame for everything was put upon mysterious international gangs of Jews who were said to be financing, among other things the British Labour Party and the Soviet. . . . M. kept extolling Italy and Germany but when questioned about concentration camps etc always replied ‘We have no foreign models; what happens in Germany need not happen here.’ . . . ”
[George Orwell: The Collected Essays, Journalism and Letters, Vol. 1 An Age Like This 1920-1940 (Penguin Books) p.230]

-R. M. Nixon: Tha Tricksta is the archetype for executive malfeasance.
-Lee Atwater: Without him Karl Rove might have ended up a gas station attendant.
-Joe McCarthy: The fact that this guy is gaining traction as a heroic figure with the current crop of right wingers tells you all you need to know.
-George Wallace: On the list as a representative bigot.
-Timothy McViegh: EVIL.
-Charles Manson: Evil, with a cult following.
-Dick Cheney: Just one more heart attack, please.
-Lee Harvey Oswald/John Wilkes Booth: Killing good presidents get you on the list.
-Nathan Bedford Forrest: Evil, with troops.
-James Earl Ray: Kill Martin Luther King, go straight to hell.
Cheers

In no particular order, Woody Allen, Newt Gingrich, Ronald Reagan, Sprio Agnew, Dick Cheney, Jim and Tammy Baker, Jerry Falwell, and Leonard and Felicia Bernstein (for their Radical Chic cocktail party).

Yes, of course, Leonard Berstein! Why didn’t I think of him right away?

keith:

“I agree that the Confederates get their own ten worst list. W.T. Sherman goes right up there in the top five.”

As long as we’re nitpicking…. Was this a nonsequitur or by “Confederates get their own” did you mean to list the worst 10 from the POV of Confederates? ;^)

Hmm, the British list is a bit strange, I mean Thomas Becket for the twelth? Also, what jumps out is the obscurity of a lot of these personas (what did the Lord of Cumberland ever do that most military leaders of his time didn’t?) – whereas the Americans pick the predictable, obvious, politically motivated choices; “I’ll see your Jane Fonda and raise you a Dick Chaney!” (though some like Nixon or Wallace definetly belong up there). Part of that is undoubtedly becasue Britain has history and US doesn’t. For 19th century Calhoun should be up there too, Andrew Jackson probably as well (much better representation of US Indian policy than Custer).

“The propensity of “conservative” blog commenters to include Jane Fonda, MLK, or Paul Robeson on their lists is somewhat worrying”

Uh, I hate to ruin everyone’s self-rightousness party here but having followed the links I don’t see any “conservative” blogs putting MLK on the list. All I see is one nutjob in one comments section. So am I just missing the conservative blogs that did so? I guess it could be true since I usually don’t read them. Or is this just a smear by innuendo (if they’re there I apologize in advance)(and we’re not talking the web page of the American Nazi Party or whatever)?

Let’s not forget Gen. Amherst and his smallpox blankets. The fact that there are cities named for him is a crime. They should all renamed with traditional Native American toponyms.

They selected Jimmy Carter because of his term in office as president, not because of his post-presidential choices. Nobody named Carter because of Habitats for Humanity. I will point out that in his re-election bid he carried only 4 states, including Georgia (his home state) and Wisconsin (his running mate’s home state). There was a reason for that. I would call that reason “incompetence.”

Mike,
Understood. And if I would have known your use of MLKJr was a rip on Buchanan, I probably would have laughed in the first place. But now, the plot thickens; Chris — who is saying MLKJr is one of the worst Americans?

As for Carter:

Most in the US are unaware that Carter served as a honourary pallbearer at the funeral of Pierre Trudeau. His fellow pallbearers included Leonard Cohen & Fidel Castro. (Carter & Trudeau had become friends following their retirments).

This always made me like Carter. I have wondered what the US right would due with this information.

I’m surprised that nobody has suggested Robert McNamara for the US list – I’m not qualified to say whether he should be or not, it’s just interesting his name has not come up. Also I fully agree that Mosley was a cop out for the British 20th Century – Kitchener was my vote for sheer stupidity leading to the most pointless deaths. And (as pointed out earlier) Cromwell would make any Irish persons list for worst Britons.

I think the problem with this ‘worst’ list is that it doesn’t distinguish between those who were bad as people and those whose actions merely had a bad effect. FDR or GWB or MLK may have done ‘bad’ things from various commenters points of view, but no one imagines they leaped out of bed every day with a cry of “evil, I take thee for my good.”

The sort of ‘worst person’ I have in mind is George Joseph Smith, who was hanged in England in 1915, ostensibly for murder but really on general principles as an embarrassment to the Human race.

General comments aside, I do wonder why several posters included Curtis LeMay. The only thing I can think of is civilian deaths in Japan, but LeMay wasn’t especially worse at causing civilian deaths than many other WW2 generals.

Dan, you may like number 8 on this list. I mean, who knew?

Chris Bertram- given that Churchill ordered the expansion of Bomber Command, authorised Harris’s ‘barn door’ strategy and personally endorsed the targeting of Dresden, I’d say that amounts to Churchll having rather belated qualms about one particular attack on one particular city- belated, since the attacks had by that stage been in progress for nearly five years and had been authorised and indeed demanded by Churchill himself.

In 1943, he witnessed footage of the bombing raids and asked ‘are we beasts, that we do such things?’- but he still supported the continuation of the raids, when his opposition would have killed the policy stone dead, in view of the resources it required. No Churchill, no Strategic Bombing.

You will, unsurprisingly, search Churchill’s memoirs and private papers in vain for endorsements of the ‘RAF as war criminals’ rubbish currently in vogue among the historically ignorant. You might care to read Frederick Taylor’s excellent book on the Dresden raid- rather than just a brief interview with him- should you be stricken by an unwonted desire for some facts.

“General comments aside, I do wonder why several posters included Curtis LeMay. The only thing I can think of is civilian deaths in Japan, but LeMay wasn’t especially worse at causing civilian deaths than many other WW2 generals.”

“Civilian deaths in Japan” is not a minor crime. Putting that aside, however, there is the fact that LeMay was a dangerous–perhaps ultimately dangerous–renegade. Believing that the President would be unable to make the decision in a timely manner, he took upon himself the ability to unleash the US’s nuclear arsenal on his authority alone by secretely negotiating an agreement with the relevant military personnel in charge of the weapons. During the Cuban Missile Crisis, he secretely ordered SAC overflights of Cuba, unknown to Kennedy and with the intention of starting a war. He ardently believed that the US must first-strike the USSR while it still had the numerical advantage in weapons.

Oddly, however, given that I’m aware of all these charges against LeMay, I don’t think I would include him on my list of 10 worst Americans. The same character traits that led him to his crimes also led him to successfully create and manage the Berlin Airlift. He was an intensely practical man, deeply arrogant but never in service to his own ambitions. He was a misguided patriot. Ultimately dangerous? Perhaps. Evil? I’m not so sure.

But the same sorts of things could be said about Teller, and I would include him on my list. But I have a real hatred of Teller, so perhaps I’m not the best judge.

Oddly, however, given that I’m aware of all these charges against LeMay, I don’t think I would include him on my list of 10 worst Americans.

Perhaps, and perhaps not. But LeMay deserves at least a few bonus points towards his inclusion for being on the ticket with George Wallace in 1968.

Chris, why have you not responded to comments about your original assertion that conservative bloggers have included MLK in their lists? Since I have seen at least 50+ lists, with none including MLK, I would say you are a liar or just take any opportunity to paint opposing view points in a negative light. Some sites did switch and ask for best 10 Americans, and those lists included MLK, so your basis for implying that conservatives are racist falls a bit flat. As far as you being on this list, it was sarcasm, something I thought you Brits excelled at.

Re #100:

Believing that the President would be unable to make the decision in a timely manner, he took upon himself the ability to unleash the US’s nuclear arsenal on his authority alone by secretely negotiating an agreement with the relevant military personnel in charge of the weapons.

First I’ve heard of it. Any cites?

Oh, and a happy New Year, Chris.

We could agree to disagree about whether, and to what extent, the ethical debate about general questions of what is permissible in war should be informed by historical fact. I’d be strongly in favour of letting lots of history in; perhaps you wouldn’t.

But I don’t even see that there’s an argument to be had over whether or not an assessment of a specific act of war (eg the wider Strategic Bombing campaign, or the attack on Dresden) needs historical perspectives. Of course it does- for anybody – except perhaps some weirdly extreme non-intentionalist-and-non-consequentialist- it’s necessary to know why an act was undertaken, what the actors were likely to know or perceive at the time and what the consequences of their actions were.

All these matters, in the cases of strategic bombing and of Dresden, are topics of considerable historical debate. You could write a book about it, and Frederick Taylor did. A cheery Christmas topic this is, to be sure.

Shorter Jimmy Doyle: since I am apparently unaware that there is a serious historical debate about whether Strategic Bombing contributed to the defeat of Hitler, and since it has not occurred to me that such a debate will have obvious implications the moral status of the Strategic Bombing campaign, I can bloviate to my heart’s content about how history has no bearing on the moral debate about Strategic Bombing.

Dan Hardie: You have misunderstood my position with a completeness that elicits a strange kind of awe. On the assumption, which you do not dispute, that Bomber Command’s policy counted as the intentional killing of noncombatants, whether the bombing campaign contributed to the defeat of Hitler is only so much as relevant to its justification on the further assumption that deontology is false. My claim was that this cannot be treated as an unargued assumption. The consequentialist can only maintain that additional circumstances are relevant if he has already established the truth of consequentialism. Consequentialism may be true (I concede for the sake of argument), but it is not uncontroversial, and among those who deny it are people we are not in a position to condescend to on matters of moral philosophy, such as Kant.

I certainly would not maintain that the RAF bomber crews were as culpable as the perpetrators of Rwandan genocide; that cannot be true, for obvious reasons, all of which are consistent with deontology. The wrongness of an act is one thing; the culpability of the agent another. Deontology is as much at home with the idea of mitigating circumstances as any other view.

I can’t believe I’m only the second to mention Roy Cohn. Did he get rehabilitated by Angels in America?

Why hasn’t Lyndon LaRouche made the list yet? I don’t know enough about his actual politics, but his cult is a pretty devastating one on some college campuses. And besides, I saw his followers on a bridge in Melbourne complaining about Dick Cheney! Just like the guy Al Franken tackled at the Howard Dean rally, who was a LaRouchie claiming Dean was a puppet of Cheney.

“In defense of Chris…” (re: MLK)

Um, that ain’t much of a defense, since it makes a mistaken 2, into a correct 1, out of 50+ and not even that since that 1 was a comment by some shmuck, not a blog.

And all I hear is crickets.

Since Chris said “‘conservative’ blog commenters”, I don’t see why the fact that it wasn’t a blog post is relevant (though there being only one is still a reasonable objection).

I would limit my list of “10 worst Americans” to those who acted as Americans (people fighting for another country, even if the US tried to claim them as citizens, don’t count (so no Confederates)–same principle for Brits (no American Founders or Irish Home Rulers)).

With that definition in place, my number one is:

1) William Tecumseh Sherman, war criminal extraordinaire. He started his brutal career by destroying the South’s ability to feed and sustain itself by destroying crops and buildings and brutalizing civilians, and continued it by doing the same to the Indians. His goal was always to wipe out the entire civilization he was fighting, and he was quite successful. Honorable mentions to Lincoln (who endorsed his tactics in both cases) and to Sheridan (who imitated him on a smaller scale).

Carter? More a figure of pathos than true evil, IMO, but his record of defending the legitimacy of dictators’ rigged “elections”, and befriending killers like Castro makes his inclusion on such a list not totally absurd.

But not his successor, right, Brett?

In 1982 an Amnesty International report estimated that over 10,000 indigenous Guatemalans and peasant farmers were killed during the March to July period, and that 100,000 were made homeless. According to more recent estimates, tens of thousands were killed by regime death squads in the subsequent eighteen months.

Given Ríos Montt’s staunch anticommunism and ties to the United States, the Reagan administration continued to support the general and his regime, paying a visit to Guatemala City in December 1982. During a meeting with Ríos Montt on December 4, Reagan declared: “President Ríos Montt is a man of great personal integrity and commitment. … I know he wants to improve the quality of life for all Guatemalans and to promote social justice.”

Reading this and other stuff about the good ol’ days of “morning in America” has dredged up another delightful blast from the past, one who inexplicably hasn’t been mentioned yet: Jesse Helms. Lord knows he deserves it.

This is truly sad. No wonder America is doomed. That ‘divide and conquer’ thing works after all.
That said, here’s my list of top ten worst Americans of ALL TIME:
1. Dick Cheney
2. Karl Rove
3. George W. Bush
4. Donald Rumsfeld
5. Richard Perle
6. Paul Wolfowitz
7. Condoleeza Rice
8. Antonin Scalia
9. Colin Powell
10.Ken Lay
Each one represents a particular species of snivelling bottom-dweller that feed off of fear, power, lies, and money.
And, to the people who nominated Martin Luther King, F*** You!

The issue, I think, with Curtis Lemay is not necessarily with his conduct in WW2, which some criticize but was consistent with all the powers in intention, if not ability to execute, but his conduct in nearly every war the USA was involved with after WW2, he always lobbied to use nuclear weapons. In his position of considerable inlfuence he wanted to escalate Korea, Vietnam to who knows what. He would make my list of most evil Americans easily.

Interesting that nobody can come up with a clear winner among the indian killers. Andrew Jackson and Sherman seem like decent choices, but they did a lot of good things too.

Also, I don’t see anybody to represent imperialism. Sam Houston is the best I can come up with, but maybe William Walker, freelance invader of Nicaragua?

Finally, what about Woodrow Wilson, a vicious racist, who got us into a pointless war, and botched the peace treaty. Not to mention invading various countries in Latin America and intervening in the Russian Civil War. He set the stage for pretty much evey horror of the 20th century.

Brett,

Robeson was, indeed, a Stalinist. So were many tens of thousands of Americans. And many tens of thousands were fascists. And lots were serial killers. And, over the years, lots of truly wicked people who actually did wicked things because they had money and power. And Robeson, what exactly did he do that would put him even in the frame for a top ten? He was a great black singer, who also happened to be a Stalinist. His life was also, in fact, tragic, partly (though only partly) because he was hounded by wicked people who had real power not because he had done anything wrong or bad but simply because he was a Stalinist; well, because he was a great black singer who was a Stalinist. He just doesn’t get anywhere near the list. People who think he does are either ignorant or wicked. I’m sure you don’t, do you? (this is a bit of an echo of anna’s comment (117) — the worst Americans, like the best Americans, are for the most part people none of us have ever heard of.

I haven’t read the Taylor book, but I did read Freeman Dyson’s autobiography “Disturbing the Universe”. Dyson was a physicist who worked as an analyst for the RAF during WWII. According to him, the British were impressed by the slaughter at Hamburg and tried to create a firestorm with every bombing raid they conducted afterwards. They were unsuccessful until Dresden. To me this sounds like numerous successive attempts to slaughter civilians. I read some of the reviews at Amazon.com, and apparently the Taylor book mentions this repeated attempt at creating firestorms. Which again leaves me perplexed–if Taylor himself says that Bomber Command wanted to create Hamburg-like firestorms over and over again, how is that a moral defense of what happened at Dresden, when they finally succeeded?

#91 Dan: John, I know about the Irishmen who fought in WW2, as my great-uncle was one of them. All we needed were bases on the Irish coast, not full Irish belligerence, and Dev didn’t even give us them.

I think a dose of reality is needed here. Chamberlain had already handed back the Treaty Ports before the outbreak of WWII: if we – as a supposed neutral – had voluntarily given the British war facilities, then that would’ve been quite reasonably taken as a belligerent act against the Axis, bringing us into the war.

This also leaves the extreme sensitivity of allowing British troops back onto the territory of the South. This is a taboo subject even now: barely a generation after the War of Independence, it would’ve been tinder for renewed civil war.

(note: with the benefit of historical hindsight, I think we should’ve voluntarily joined the war against Nazi Germany. But we chose to remain neutral unless/until attacked, just like so many other democracies such as the US.)

Andrew Johnson
Larry Flynt
WR Hearst
Jack Kevorkian
Gore Vidal
Joseph McCarthy
Nelson Bunker Hunt
Pete Rose
Aaron Spelling
MLC (Ciccone)

Note: the actual explanation of why The Right hates Jimmy Carter so would be “liberal sanctimony.”

Donald,
regarding Dresden and Taylor, I haven’t read his book either, but the impression I got from the interview he gave the spiegel was that he himself has quite a nuanced view.
The leading paragraphs:
“SPIEGEL ONLINE: Some critics have accused you of writing a justification of the bombing of the city of Dresden. Is this accusation misplaced?

Taylor: Yes it is. Some people mistake the attempt at rational analysis of a historical event for a celebration of it. My book attempts to be distanced and rational and where possible I try to separate the myths and legends from the realities. I personally find the attack on Dresden horrific. It was overdone, it was excessive and is to be regretted enormously. But there is no reason to pretend that it was completely irrational on the part of the Allies. Dresden had war industries and was a major transportation hub. As soon as you start explaining the reasons for the attack, though, people think you are justifying it.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: Was it a war crime?

Taylor: I really don’t know. From a practical point of view, rules of war are something of a gray area.”
…I suggest to read the rest, too.

Of course it’s entirely possible that the impressions and conclusions one can draw from his book are different, e.g. that the idea it could have been a warcrime (whatever that exactly is supposed to be) is totally absurd or whatever.

Thanks for the tip, Christian. Some of the Amazon reviewers seem to have read Taylor as justifying Dresden, along with one or two other people I’ve seen. I suppose nuance is easily misinterpreted, no matter which side of the issue you fall on.