Tuesday, September 26, 1944WHEN WILL THE WAR END? (VIII) Could it be Europe won’t see peace before the spring of 1945? So says General de Gaulle, according to United Press --"Warning that the hardest fighting still lies ahead inside Germany, Gen. Charles de Gaulle told French army commanders and civilian leaders today that the end of the European war must not be expected before next spring, 'contrary to hopes too hastily conceived.'" posted by Michael 8:07:00 AM . . .
LANDING NEAR IN THE PHILIPPINES? The Japanese-installed "independent" Philippine government seems to think so -- they’ve declared martial law in expectation of an imminent American landing somewhere on the islands. According to United Press, this comes after two days of raids on Manila by carrier-based planes of the U.S. Pacific fleet. They piled up a nice, big score -- 11 Japanese ships sunk, 26 others "probably" sunk, 205 enemy aircraft downed. This was the first time since April 15, 1942, that the Allies have been able to strike a blow in the Manila sector. And in a nice enough irony, it’s reported to have caught the Japanese completely by surprise. The U.P. report makes it sound like the Philippines is about to get hotter --"Japanese broadcasts reported by the FCC said that the United States has moved 'three or four powerful task forces' into the area, and that munitions are being rushed to the Japanese garrisons. Tokyo complained of the 'overwhelming material odds of the enemy America' being brought to bear against Japan."For what it’s worth, the F.C.C. also recorded a Philippine broadcast announcing that the Manila puppet government has declared war on the U.S. and Britain. I guess Tokyo and Berlin can take comfort that the Axis has a new "ally" this week. posted by Michael 8:04:00 AM . . .
ROOSEVELT HITS A NEW LOW. When President Roosevelt accepted his party’s nomination for a fourth term in July, he piously said, "I shall not campaign, in the usual sense . . . . [I]n these days of tragic sorrow, I do not consider it fitting." So, what then does one make of the President’s hell-for-leather, rip-snortin' political speech delivered Saturday night to the Teamsters’ Union? Just another broken promise? Or, did he have something important so vitally important to say about the issues of the campaign that he was justified in going back on his word?Well, a look at the speech, broadcast on C.B.S. and N.B.C. and reprinted in many of Sunday’s papers, shows not one word about the great challenges of the war and the coming peace. Instead, the President told us shaggy dog stories. Literally --"These Republican leaders have not been content with attacks on my, or my wife, or my sons -- they now include my little dog, Fala. Unlike the members of my family, I resent this. Being a Scottie, as soon as he learned that the Republican fiction writers had concocted a story that I had left him behind on an Aleutian island and had sent a destroyer back to find him -- at a cost to the taxpayers of two or three or twenty million dollars -- his Scotch soul was furious. He has not been the same dog since. I am accustomed to hearing malicious falsehoods about myself -- such as that old, worm-eaten chestnut that I have represented myself as indispensable. But I think I have a right to object to libelous statements about my dog."While upbraiding the G.O.P. for unfair attacks, F.D.R. casually compared Republicans to Nazis -- "Perhaps the most ridiculous of these campaign falsifications is the one that this Administration failed to prepare for the war which was coming. I doubt whether even Goebbels would have tried that one." Good grief. But the President knows, of course, that his own running mate, Senator Truman, has admitted in past years that in the wake of Pearl Harbor we were "woefully unprepared for war" because of "the lack of courageous, unified leadership and centralized direction at the top." So Governor Dewey gleefully pointed out while campaigning in Oklahoma City yesterday.And by the way, did anyone notice how gaunt and drawn the President looked in the wire-photo that accompanied press reports of the Teamsters speech? It makes it clear why the Democrats are distributing an "official campaign photo" of the President that was taken fourteen months ago.Isn't it time to put this old horse out to pasture? posted by Michael 8:02:00 AM . . .
STOP THE PRESSES. From Time magazine’s Miscellany section -- "In Cincinnati, the Procter & Gamble research department furrowed its collective brow over a freak bar of Ivory Soap that would not float." posted by Michael 8:00:00 AM . . .
Sunday, September 24, 1944SIX WEEKS TO VICTORY? The Allied drive on the Western Front has definitely slowed down, but an analysis published in today’s Washington Post by Max Werner still evinces optimism that things can be wrapped up soon in Europe -- "I am convinced now that no more than four to six weeks of a United States-British-Russian coordinated offensive are required to crush the Wehrmacht." Mr. Werner goes on to emphasize the importance of the flanking movement in the Arnhem sector in keeping the U.S. and British armies moving forward --"The air landings in Holland, unprecedented in size and strategic function, indicate determination of the United States-British high command to overcome any possible stalemate; to achieve final military decision in the shortest possible time. The offensive from Holland is important. It has outflanked the Wehrmacht from the north. Whoever has a longer flank has freedom of movement and United States-British forces will possess this freedom at the most sensitive sector German defense, hardly more than 50 miles from the Ruhr. Because of shortage of German reserves Allied strategy has a supreme interest in extension of front lines. The outflanking of the Wehrmacht in the north through lengthening the front has the same effect as a breakthrough; produces free spaces through into which Allied forces can be poured. The offensive in Holland also is combined with the breakthrough operation in the Aachen area. Thus a pincers aimed at the entire Ruhr-Rhine area from Essen to Cologne is developing. One major breakthrough south from the Ruhr area will unhinge that sector. . . . Meantime a complementary Allied offensive is probable in the sector between Trier and Karlsrube. . . . Our offensive forces the German high command into an untenable situation. They cannot know where the main Allied blow will come; must disperse meager forces into five or six concentrations over 4000 miles. Any strengthening of the Wehrmacht is impossible because of the Red army. This is the main trump for quick victory."Sounds good, but this week-end’s reports still indicate that the British "lost division" of paratroopers in the Armhem sector remains hard-pressed as ever and largely cut off by German troops. Even though today’s A.P. dispatch says that British Second Army patrols have established a "tenuous link" with the heroic airborne man at Arnhem, who are so far the only Allied fighters to establish a position across the Rhine.There are plenty of optimistic reports out there right now that Hitler has reached t he end of his strength -- Walter Cronkite of United Press writes from Holland today that the prisoners he’s seen are "the bottom of Hitler’s manpower barrel." But clearly the Germans have some fight left in them, and they’re putting up a lot of it around Arnhem. posted by Michael 7:55:00 AM . . .
ADMISSIBLE IN COURT?. From Time magazine’s Miscellany section -- "In Dallas, a deaf, elderly lady listened to two detectives who wanted her description of a traffic accident she had witnessed, brushed them off with: 'I’m sorry, but I’m already taking all the magazines I can read.'" posted by Michael 7:51:00 AM . . .
Tuesday, September 19, 1944WHEN WILL THE WAR END? (VII) The answer we’re hearing now from those in the know is that even though the German Army will likely be kaput by sometime in November, the war might not really "end" anytime soon in the normal sense. Drew Middleton explains why in a New York Times analysis that takes a bit of cheer out of the glorious front-page headlines of late --"[E]ffective resistance by the German armies as armies in the field will probably come to an end late this autumn. But it is unlikely that there will be any one day when men can say 'The war is over,' for after the surrender of the German armies, the conflict is likely to degenerate into guerrilla war between Allied forces in Germany and SS units that have escaped the debacle on the western front and police and other party forces, such as concentration camp guards. These units will be broken inevitably but scattered resistance from underground bands of Nazis may continue. Surrender offers nothing to these last-ditch Nazis. Those convicted of war crimes will be hanged and many others equally culpable will certainly be murdered by relatives of their victims if they surrender. Even those who have not been guilty of individual crimes will probably choose the life of a guerrilla soldier, rather than submit to what they will term the degradation of Germany. The fanaticism of tens of thousands of young Nazis is a sobering fact for post-war planners. No enduring peace in Germany is possible until they are dealt with by the Allies."Mr. Middleton predicts we’ll see this essentially in three stages: (1) a battle at the Siegfried Line, (2) a battle at the Rhine, then (3) German dissolution. In his words --"The first stage of the military defeat of the enemy is well under way. The Siegfried Line is crumbling under the assault of weapons not yet planned when the Line itself was constructed . . . . Presuming that the Line is penetrated in enough places to make it useless as a defensive position, what is there left for the German Army? The easiest course is to fall back on the Rhine and try to hold it until winter beings to impede Allied operations. Yet the Rhine, like the Siegfried Line, is not an impenetrable barrier and a German position along it also would suffer from the numerical weakness of the army defending it. Once the Rhine Line is breached by the Allies and they move across into the body of the German state, the doom of the German armies is sealed. The situation will then be fairly chaotic and thousands of Germans, SS troops and Nazi fanatics may be able to make their escape into the mountains and forests to carry on guerrilla war. Others may shut themselves up in towns, holding out to the last, while elsewhere the Wehrmacht’s divisions will surrender one by one."According to Mr. Middleton, many of these won’t be rag-tag dead-enders. They’ll be seasoned combat veterans who will murder with impunity until they are killed or caged by the Allied occupation forces --"All reports of interrogation with prisoners and all that this correspondent has observed in the last three months lead to the conclusion that there is a large group of Germans whose complete faith in the Nazi doctrine is unshaken. Disasters in the field have not undermined their belief in the infallibility of their political creed, and similar defeats in Germany will presumably have just as little effect on their fanaticism . . . . Their numbers are small, but in inverse proportion to their nuisance value. Moreover, thousands of them are well-trained soldiers of SS divisions, and thousands more are men accustomed to handling rifles or machine guns. . . . We can be sure that the Germans in conquered towns where there are no underground movements will pay lip service to whatever new form of government they think will please the Allies. But until the SS, the Hitler Youth and all those generals and political policemen to whom unconditional surrender means either the firing squad or the rope in punishment for past crimes are dead or captured, fighting will continue."I notice that the current issue of Time reports on the O.W.I. statement downplaying expectations for a V-Day celebration when the Nazis are finished off. As Time puts it, "V-Day may be spread gradually over days or weeks." Or, if you believe the grim analysis of Mr. Middleton, perhaps months or years. posted by Michael 8:01:00 AM . . .
BEING A LITTLE TOO FRUITFUL. From Time magazine’s Miscellany section -- "In Bogotá, Columbia, Abjon Jaramillo, 75, father of 43 (30 by his first wife, 13 by his second), was reported father of quadruplets." posted by Michael 7:58:00 AM . . .
Sunday, September 17, 1944ASSAULT ON AACHEN. A week ago it looked as if the predominantly U.S.-British assault on the Western Front was slowing down, but now the Allies are hammering at their first major city on German soil and have breached the Siegfied Line in a number of places. Our doughboys are in the third day of an full-scale assault on Aachen, a linchpin in the Line that offers the shortest route directly to Berlin, and the A.P. says today that the city "might be toppling." Even better, the First Army "fought out into the open today on one of Hitler’s superhighways within 26 miles of Cologne." The seemingly unstoppable fighters of General Patton’s Third Army have moved up to Thionville, only 15 miles away from the Saar Basin, threatening that rich region of coal, iron, and heavy industry that has fueled the Nazi war machine for so many years.No doubt western Germans are alarmed by the Americans’ sudden arrival on their doorstep, and judging from a story published today by the International News Service, they have every right to be --"There is no pussyfooting or hesitation. The watchword is 'kill and destroy.' One American commanding officer said, ‘I give the Germans inside their defenses a fair chance to fight and am willing to take them prisoner. But whenever crazy holdout fighting by Nazi-mad youngsters or fanatic S.S. troops, it’s different. . . . They won’t get the chance to surrender after any protracted monkey business."And this, from the A.P. --"Liberation has been left behind in France and Belgium and now American troops are waging war in hostile country and are determined to stop forever the attempts of the German army at world conquest. Associated Press Correspondent Edward D. Ball reported from Third United States Army Headquarters that Wallendorf in the First Army sector had been set afire and every building burned because of persistent sniping."It sounds harsh, all right. But has there ever been a people more deserving, after all they’ve done to inflict misery on three continents? posted by Michael 7:46:00 AM . . .
DID THEY RUSSIANS TRICK THE POLES? The sub-headline on this New York Times analysis by Edwin L. James is, "Story Very Far from Clear." But the story itself seems to say something very clear indeed, and not pleasant to contemplate. Mr. James writes of the tragic Warsaw rebellion, led by non-communist Poles and disowned by Moscow --"For six weeks now General Bor has been waging war in the capital. He has been waging it without aid from the Russian armies which during most of that time have been but a few miles away. A considerable number of British planes and some American planes dropped munitions and supplies to Bor’s men, but the Russians did not do so. The planes flying from London had a 2,000-mile trip out and back, whereas Russian airfields were close at hand. Now, with the Russians out to capture Warsaw from the Germans and with Bor’s men fighting for the same purpose, naturally the question arose as to why the Russians did not see fit to aid Bor. . .From Moscow came two sets of reasons. . . . The second set took the line that Moscow had no responsibility for the uprising in Warsaw, that it had been ordered by the Polish refugee government in London without the agreement of Moscow."But, if the Times is to be believed, the Soviets themselves were a major instigator of the uprising and its exact timing --"In Moscow there is established the Polish Committee of Liberation. This committee uses a radio station called the Kosciusko station for communication with Poles in German-occupied territory. Both the committee and its station are under strict Moscow control. Therefore it is a pertinent question as to whether on July 30, the eve of the Polish patriot uprising, the Kosciusko station made an appeal to the Poles in which it said: 'People of Warsaw -- to arms! The whole population should gather around the underground army. Attack the Germans!' If such an appeal were made, as it seems to have been, it puts a different angle on General Bor’s actions. If it be true that twelve other appeals were made by the station, thirteen in all, that factor should be taken into consideration.""As it seems to have been." In other words, we know that the Stalin-controlled Poles did deliberately try to incite the Warsaw uprising on July 30, and the Russians must have approved of this -- Moscow’s junior partners don’t run around doing things like this on their own. For the Soviet government to have sparked this rebellion, or at least green-lighted it, and then to have disowned it on the specious grounds that it wasn’t "coordinated" with Moscow -- that’s just witheringly cynical. The only possible conclusion is that Stalin’s men want to eliminate any and all non-communist rivals to the Soviets’ hand-picked Polish government, and are willing to inflict even more hardship on the long-suffering people of Warsaw to advance their political objectives.Has the Stalin regime really been a true and reliable ally during this war, as we’ve been told so often? Or, have they never really given up their old ways of 1939, when they were on par with Hitler in cold-bloodedness? If the latter, what does that say for the chances for postwar cooperation among the Big Three? And why is the New York Times so namby-pamby about pointing out the obvious conclusions to be gleaned from these facts about the Warsaw uprising?Tough questions, all. Here’s one more -- does anybody in the government or the press feel like trying to answer them? posted by Michael 7:43:00 AM . . .
WHO’S NEXT, PLEASE? From Time magazine’s Miscellany section -- "In St. Louis, Inez Bock served a customer four soft-boiled eggs when he ordered three, refused to take back the fourth, hurled the whole order at him when he tried to walk out." posted by Michael 7:38:00 AM . . .
Tuesday, September 12, 1944WILLKIE INDORSES WORLD GOVERNMENT. That’s my take, at least, on the former G.O.P. presidential candidate’s article in the current Collier’s magazine. Mr. Willkie scores the Republican and Democratic parties alike for drafting similarly mushy positions on the need for a post-war international organization, and for not recognizing what a new League of Nations would require for success --"For the sake of . . . imaginary harmony, [both parties] failed to face our problem squarely, and so prepared soil for the sowing of World War III. . . . Both the Democratic and Republican parties propose to create an international organization to prevent aggression and to preserve peace, while this nation, and every other nation concerned, maintains its traditional sovereignty. The phraseology of the two parties is strikingly similar . . . . Both platforms and both parties used the word 'sovereign' to indicate something that must be securely guarded, lest we lose our independence as a nation. And in so using it, they were deliberately trying to soothe the fears of those people who do not want us to give up a single selfish advantage for the sake of a common good. We are presented with an extraordinary proposition: We are jealously to guard our sovereignty; other nations are likewise to guard their sovereignty; but somehow all nations are to be welded together into an international organization with the power to prevent aggression and preserve peace. When every party to a proposed agreement stands pat and refuses to yield any individual right or privilege, there is no agreement. Yet it is under similar conditions that we talk of creating or participating in an international organization."Mr. Willkie maintains that if we are to make this organization a success, the Big Three must be willing to sacrifice a portion of their power --"An international organization empowered to maintain 'permanent peace', 'organized justice' and 'security' demands something more. To attain such an organization, nations must agree to joint responsibilities and to limitation of individual freedom of choice in certain specific situations, as in a limited partnership. To be realistic, we should say frankly, 'We are exchanging this small measure of our traditional sovereignty for the greater good of preventing wars among men.' Only when we, among other 'peace-loving' nations, are willing to make such exchange for the common welfare will the rights of small nations be observed, and only then can our 16-inch guns be used with those of other nations as a necessary final recourse in the prevention of future wars. If this is no comfort to the nationalists in our midst, it is probably no comfort to them, either, to be told that in helping create an organization which will limit the sovereign right of all nations to make war at will, we shall be using, not sacrificing, America’s sovereignty to the end for which it was intended: the security and peace of the American people."My question to this is, "How 'small' a measure of sovereignty would we have to give up?" A truthful answer might well make me (and a lot of other Americans) nervous, and I think in this respect Mr. Willkie is a bit mushy himself. Still, I applaud him for otherwise squarely facing the problem. His clear implication is that we may face a devilish choice after this war. It is this -- do we want to retain our country’s full freedom of action, even if that meant we might have to one day fight another devastating war? Or, would we be willing to live in an America different from the one we’ve known all our lives -- an America less free to chart its own course -- if doing so would usher in an age of world peace? It’s not an easy question at all, and deserves a lot of thoughtful debate in this election campaign. Which it probably won’t get. posted by Michael 8:08:00 AM . . .
MOPPING UP THE NAZIS IN FRANCE. After the dramatic gains of the last two weeks, you’d think over the past few days American tanks would dashed across the Rhine and made it halfway to Berlin. Nope -- not yet anyway. This has been a week of consolidating the tremendous gains made since the U.S.-British breakout from Normandy in late July, and General Patch’s invasion of southern France one month ago. Troops of General Patton’s Third Army have successfully hooked up with General Patch’s Seventh Army troops as the latter advanced northward near Dijon. Meanwhile, the First Army has pushed five miles into German territory south of Luxembourg, only 55 miles from the Rhine. The Second British Army has pushed rag-tag Nazi units north-eastward out of Belgium and into Holland. Plus, General Patton’s troops seized a large section of France’s old Maginot Line, completely intact, while clobbering the Nazis’ last defense line in France, at the Moselle River. It was speculated at one time that the Germans would make a serious stand at the Maginot Line, but in the end the German Army was too anxious to get the heck out of France. The Nazis continue to hold some bypassed French cities, a few ports among them, but these aren’t expected to hold out for long. After a little over two months since D-Day, the German position in France has been reduced to a series of pockets.Ahead is the Siegfried Line, Hitler’s last fortified defense barrier in the West. Once that’s broken, the end of the European war is truly in sight. posted by Michael 8:04:00 AM . . .
TILL SKUNKS US DO PART. From Time magazine’s Miscellany section -- "In Stockbridge, Mass., Mrs. John F. Decker argued that no woman should be expected to put up with a man who kept six skunks in the coalbin. She got the divorce." posted by Michael 8:02:00 AM . . .
Sunday, September 10, 1944KEEPING UP NAZI MORALE. Or maybe not. This, according to United Press, is what Nazi commentator Rudolf Semmler said on Berlin radio yesterday --"The most dangerous animals are those who have been trapped or mauled. Such beasts are very dangerous. Every step closer to them is a stop closer to death. So it is with us at present. . . . We have no guarantees that the situation may not become more acute yet."That help you feel better, kamerads? posted by Michael 7:49:00 AM . . .
A HARSH OR "EASY" PEACE FOR GERMANY? Today’s Washington Post gives us two points of view on the question of whether the soon-to-be victorious Allies should subject Germany to a harsh peace or an "easy" one. So here’s a debate of sorts between two British statesmen, Professor Harold Laski and Lord Vansittart, on what we need to do to cure post-war Germany of the war-mongering bug --Professor Laski -- "That Germany has been in the forefront of world aggression for something like 80 years is obvious, but it seems foolish to argue this aggression is due to some congenital tendency in Germans. It seems even more foolish to imagine that we shall free ourselves from the danger of a recurrence of the German threat by the wholesale execution of Germans or by dividing up Germany. Nor do I believe in the political wisdom of a long military occupation, or an attempt to reeducate the German people. Insofar as 'Vansittarism' means any of those things, after the defeat of naziism, I think it is dealing with symptoms, not causes. I agree leaders of the Nazi Party must be executed. I agree the Gestapo must be broken and members of the SS punished. . . . I accept, also, the necessity of excluding from any future place in the political life of Germany those who have voluntarily assisted the Nazis. But the real German problem seems to me essentially a problem of organizing a wholesale shift in the distribution of class power in Germany. We have to break down the authority of the Junkers [and] to socialize heavy industries. . . . I am fully prepared to see Germany prohibited from having a navy, army, or air force. . . . I think it folly to attempt the forcible decentralization of German government, to set the stage for a passionate nationalist revival with centralization as its objective."Lord Vansittart -- "I do not think German savagery is necessarily congenital. All I say is that for many generations the Germans have been becoming more barbarous, whereas other nations have advanced. This I attribute largely to the fact that the Germans have been miseducating themselves. Professor Laski deprecates what he calls the wholesale execution of Germans. I reply that the number of subhuman brutes in Germany is legion. If Laski intends to leave them at liberty we will have another and worse European war in 10 years. Professor Laski deprecates a long occupation of Germany. Yet without a long occupation every possible reform will collapse. Laski further deprecates any attempt by other peoples to reeducate the German people. Yet we must see to it that they shall not be taught racialism, militarism, imperialism and revenge. To implement that insistence a prolonged occupation is necessary . . . Professor Laski says it is folly to decentralize the German administration. We have had two German world wars ruthlessly and popularly carried out by overcentralization." posted by Michael 7:46:00 AM . . .
THE ONE THAT GOT AWAY. From Time magazine’s Miscellany section -- "Off Block Island, R.I., Fisherman Paul Campbell let down $400 worth of drag gear, had to cut it loose to free himself from an unusual catch -- a U.S. submarine." posted by Michael 7:44:00 AM . . .
Tuesday, September 5, 1944"PEOPLE AT PEACE WITH THEIR GOD." One more comment, in this week’s issue of Time, on the tidal wave of emotion that broke when Allied troops began to roll into Paris. This, from Time’s Chief War Correspondent Charles Christian Wertenbaker --"I have seen the faces of young people in love and the faces of old people at peace with their God. I have never seen in any face such joy as radiated from the faces of the people of Paris this morning. This is no day for restraint, and I could not write with restraint if I had wanted to. Your correspondent and your photographer Bob Capa drove into Paris with eyes that would not stay dry, and we were no more ashamed of it than were the people who wept as they embraced us."Surely this is the sweetest victory of all, even with the many others in its wake? posted by Michael 8:04:00 AM . . .
HITLER’S EMPIRE SHRIVELS ON ALL FRONTS. Since the liberation of Paris, the wheels seem to have fallen off the German Reich. The latest examples ---- The tanks of General Patton’s Third Army have made a breathless leap across the width of France, and are said to have actually plunged across the French-German border. An N.BC. Report quotes something called Radio Atlantic (apparently a clandestine station inside Germany) as reporting the Americans have taken the German town of Perl, just below Luxembourg. There’s an official blackout on the whereabouts of Patton’s troops, but the United Press speculates that the Yanks might well have made it into Germany this past week-end and even reached the West Wall forts some 20 miles in.-- Another Allied spearhead has shot northward from the Paris region into Belgium, liberating Brussels and Antwerp in the face of what the A.P. calls "flimsy" German resistance. The drive has gone some 310 times in six days. The U.P. says that in the wake of this push, about 100,000 German troops are now trapped along the Channel coast. With the taking of Antwerp, Nazi occupation forces in Belgium have been cut in half.-- British troops have driven five miles into Holland.-- In this past week’s sweep, Allied troops have taken the great French cities of Reims, Verdun, Sedan, Metz, Nancy, and Lyon. In the eastward push, they’ve moved a hundred miles since just last Friday.-- On the Eastern front, Soviet forces have taken Hungary’s capital city of Bucharest, and arrived at the Bulgarian border. Nearly half of Romania is now in Russian hands, and the Reds have moved to within 50 miles of the Yugoslav border. German troops here are not only fighting the Soviets, but also their own former Romanian allies.-- The A.P. reports this morning on the Russo-Finnish ceasefire, now in effect. Finnish troops are to fall back immediately to their 1940 borders, and peace talks will begin. I was a little startled this week-end by Finnish Premier Hackzell’s speech, in which he said that the Germans have been asked to withdraw from Finnish soil -- and Berlin has agreed.-- A report on Stockholm radio says the Germans are getting ready to quit Denmark, presumably so they can rush the occupation troops there into other theatres.I know we’re not supposed to get overly optimistic, but, really, how can you avoid it? I agree it’s likely the German Reich will finally die its well-deserved death this Fall, but might the end even come sooner than that? Are we seeing the beginning of the complete German collapse we’ve barely dared to hope for?Just think of it -- a 310-mile British and U.S. advance in one week. At that rate -- we could be in Berlin by the end of September. posted by Michael 8:00:00 AM . . .
VIVE LA HAGUE. From the pages of Time magazine -- "The news that Paris was free stirred BBC’s Director General to an act of Gallic impulsiveness: he ordered a tricolor flown from the roof. It floated proudly until a sharp-eyed Frenchman phoned to ask the reason. 'Paris is free!' a delirious voice replied. 'Hadn’t you heard?' 'Yes,' replied the Frenchman, 'but why are you flying the Dutch flag?'" posted by Michael 7:54:00 AM . . .
Sunday, September 3, 1944WHEN WILL THE WAR END? (VI). Suddenly the smart money is saying that the war in Europe only has a couple of months to go. So says Edward T. Folliard in today’s Washington Post --"If you back one of these authorities up against a wall and insist on a date, he might say it will be over with by October 15. More likely he will say November 1. A war correspondent who flew back here from the cathedral town of Chartres the other day said that November 1 was the favorite date among the Yanks and he added that they were willing to back up their judgment with money. Lloyd’s of London has been offering five to eight on practically the same date -- October 31. They take the short end. That is, if you want to bet that the war in Europe won’t be over by October 31, you have to put up eight to win five."But what kind of finish are we talking about?"One great difficulty on speculating on the defeat of Germany is that nobody is able to foresee just how the end will come. It could come as it did the last time with a formal announcement and with a 'cease-fire' order on both sides of the lines. On the other hand, the fighting -- to quote Mr. Churchill -- could just 'peter out.' A military man along Embassy Row discussed these and other possibilities with The Post yesterday . . . . 'If this was 1918,' he said, 'the Germans would have given up some time ago. They are beaten and the German Generals know it. However, the German general staff is not in command; the Nazis, and the SS, are. Nobody knows how long this situation is going to last. The generals, after one abortive revolt, may succeed next time and take over. In that case, they will undoubtedly ask for an armistice. But suppose they don’t. In that case the Germans might fight on right up the Rhine and we may see the SS fanatics making a last stand in the mountains with Poles and Czechs and other outraged soldiers hunting them down.' The authority agreed that, in the West, there was a strong possibility that the end might come before the Rhine is reached, with a general crack-up in the German army and mass surrender on a scale even beyond what we’ve seen so far."My guess is that it could come suddenly and abruptly -- and within a pretty short amount of time. It wouldn’t end like the World War did, but instead with a "general crack-up" as the German war machine just simply gives out. But there’s one nagging problem, even if that happens --"In the last war, the German generals were able to strike a bargain that kept the Allies out of Berlin and saved most of Germany’s soil and industry. This time the terms are 'unconditional surrender.' No German likes that, not even the Prussian general who would agree with Mr. Churchill that Hitler is a filthy guttersnipe. . . . John Gunther once described the Fuehrer as a 'whole hogger or nothing' and the record has borne him out. How Hitler will end up is anyone’s guess. But this much is obvious: He’s not going to have the end come in August if he can put it off to November."I’m pessimistic that the "end" of the war in Europe will be the complete finish. The Nazis are brutal fanatics, and they have nowhere to go except to mountain redoubts. There might be a nasty guerilla war to fight after Hitler is brought down, and we could see skirmishes go on for months or even years.Still, it’s increasingly clear that Hitler’s Germany can’t go on as a nation beyond this autumn. posted by Michael 7:53:00 AM . . .
THE WAY TO AN ENEMY’S HEART. From Time magazine’s Miscellany section -- "In New Guinea, a captured Jap sheepishly explained that the aroma from the G.I. bakery had been so tantalizing that he had just had to surrender." posted by Michael 7:50:00 AM . . .
