The landings were commanded by US General Dwight D. Eisenhower and consisted of troops from many countries, most notably Britain, Canada and the United States. There were also many soldiers not so broadly spoken of who took part in this the third stage of the fight against fascism and Nazism in Europe.
The first stage, arguably consisted of the Battle of Britian in 1940 and the Soviet victory over the Third Reich at Moscow December 1941, and the second stage being the Battles of Stalingrad and Kursk in 1943. During the Battle of Britian many RAF pilots were not British at all but Free Polish airmen, Free Czech and Norwegian pilots who flew with the Royal Airforce (RAF). During the Normandy landings which were unquestionably heroic in themselves there were many unsung heroes who hardly receive a mention. For example, the Free Czechoslovakian armed forces had an armoured division fighting alongside the aforementioned countries troops in France. Indian soldiers and troops from the African continent also took an equally heroic part in neutralising the forces of the Third Reich. Why do these soldiers, not to mention the Brazilian forces who took part on the allied side during the war from August 1942, not get a mention and praise worthy of the name afforded to the main three countries of Britain, Canada and the United States?
Eisenhower’s second in command was British General Bernard Law Montgomery who almost fucked the entire venture up at Caen. He was supposed to take the town in a day - it took him two months. Yet this General, who after Caen was trusted less by Eisenhower, is constantly spoken of in the most heroic way. He gets all the plaudits for an almost fuck up while soldiers of non-white pigmentation are hardly recognised or mentioned. Why could this be? Incidentally the same man later also made a bollocks of ‘Operation Market Garden’ in Holland.
It is perhaps understandable the British will promote the part played by their armed forces in Normandy as any coverage by the United States and Canada would undoubtedly push the rolls played by their armies to the fore. I am not suggesting for one second that the British soldiers fighting the Nazis never played a most heroic role because they certainly did as, no doubt did the US and Canadian armed forces along with all the allied countries soldiers who fought in France. Over 130,000 Irishmen fought on the allied side in the British army, normally an antithesis to many, against fascism from both traditions on the island of Ireland and they too are seldom mentioned.
Eisenhower’s second in command was British General Bernard Law Montgomery who almost fucked the entire venture up at Caen. He was supposed to take the town in a day - it took him two months. Yet this General, who after Caen was trusted less by Eisenhower, is constantly spoken of in the most heroic way. He gets all the plaudits for an almost fuck up while soldiers of non-white pigmentation are hardly recognised or mentioned. Why could this be? Incidentally the same man later also made a bollocks of ‘Operation Market Garden’ in Holland.
It is perhaps understandable the British will promote the part played by their armed forces in Normandy as any coverage by the United States and Canada would undoubtedly push the rolls played by their armies to the fore. I am not suggesting for one second that the British soldiers fighting the Nazis never played a most heroic role because they certainly did as, no doubt did the US and Canadian armed forces along with all the allied countries soldiers who fought in France. Over 130,000 Irishmen fought on the allied side in the British army, normally an antithesis to many, against fascism from both traditions on the island of Ireland and they too are seldom mentioned.
What is open to scrutiny is why are soldiers of a different colour skin not given the same praise? The Soviet Union who lost upwards of 20 million souls and whose victories at Stalingrad and Kursk paved the way for the Normandy landings. These battles are not credited in the same way as D-Day but without those Red Army victories over the Third Reich it is unlikely the Normandy landings would have taken place, certainly not in 1944. Some Western historians try to blame the ‘Russian winter’ for the collapse of the Third Reich in the Soviet Union. This is, of course, bollocks because it was the same winter for both and the tank battle of Kursk took place in the middle of summer. Perhaps these same historians would have preferred a Nazi victory, after all the NSDAP (Nazi Party) were, in an albeit distorted way, pro-capitalist funded by Germany’s big business. If the USSR were not part of the allied collective bringing about victory maybe these historical supposed experts could speak their minds more openly?
On 5th December 1941 after six months of Nazi victories over the Red Army, due to Stalin’s policies in no small part was weakened and leaderless, Marshal Georgy Zhukov took command. One of his first tasks was to repel the Nazis from the gates of Moscow which he successfully carried out. Surely all the personnel, men and women, from many different countries deserve the same credit in the fight against fascism.
At the commemorations to mark the occasion in France British Prime Minister, Rishi Sunak left early and has been, rightly so, severely criticised for insulting the memory of the British and allied dead during the landings and subsequent victory in Europe. As the leading British parliamentarian Sunak should not have left the event early leaving David Cameron as the British Governments representative. This incident was criticised by far-right British politician Nigel Farage but criticised for all the wrong reasons. Farage said on 9th June on Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg over Sunak’s early departure; “he does not understand our culture,” hinting strongly that the Prime Minister based on skin colour was not really British. This was the kind of discourse Hitler in his first years of government would say about Jewish people not being “true Germans”. Farage, having made what could be described as a pro Hitlerite statement then tried to give his comments an air of respectability by praising the role played by soldiers from the British Commonwealth, still loosely referred to as the ‘British Empire’, in the battles in France and North Africa who were classed as British troops. Who was this praise aimed at, tepid as it was from the ‘Commonwealth'? Perhaps the Canadian, Australian and New Zealand soldiers, the majority of whom were white was who he was talking of. This thinly veiled attempt to give his statement about Rishi Sunak some form of respectability was less than convincing. Farage now heads the ‘Reform UK’ party who are seeking Conservative and Unionist party votes on the 4th July, date of the UK General Election.
Farage once headed the United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP) and employed Irish far-right politician, Herman Kelly, once describing the Irishman as a “big strapping Paddy lad” an ethnocentric if not racist remark in itself. Kelly was and, arguably still is, very much a protégé of Farage. How Kelly can support a united Ireland while supporting the United Kingdom far-right - the UK includes the six counties for now - is a not very clear. Perhaps he does not want a united Ireland at all as he goes about whipping up racial tensions across Ireland! He works very much to a Farage agenda, the same Farage who is strongly in favour of maintaining the partition of Ireland. Is Kelly a British fascist fifth columnist? Forty years after the defeat of fascism in Europe a leading British politician on live television shows his not so hidden contempt for those who gave their lives fighting such ideologies as his. What an insult. Perhaps we should ask the question: if Nigel Farage had been around during WW2 which set of ideological policies would he have supported?
It is perfectly understandable the British Prime Minister should face criticism for leaving such an important commemoration early but that criticism should be based on his policies, not his ethnic or racial origins. The criticism should be about the offensive nature of his leaving the event early and not, as Farage claimed, “he doesn’t understand our culture” which is the wrong argument. It showed Nigel Farage for what he is, a racist neo-fascist who will use any opportunity no matter how sensitive to promote his vile policies even the commemoration of the war dead of D-Day.
On 5th December 1941 after six months of Nazi victories over the Red Army, due to Stalin’s policies in no small part was weakened and leaderless, Marshal Georgy Zhukov took command. One of his first tasks was to repel the Nazis from the gates of Moscow which he successfully carried out. Surely all the personnel, men and women, from many different countries deserve the same credit in the fight against fascism.
At the commemorations to mark the occasion in France British Prime Minister, Rishi Sunak left early and has been, rightly so, severely criticised for insulting the memory of the British and allied dead during the landings and subsequent victory in Europe. As the leading British parliamentarian Sunak should not have left the event early leaving David Cameron as the British Governments representative. This incident was criticised by far-right British politician Nigel Farage but criticised for all the wrong reasons. Farage said on 9th June on Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg over Sunak’s early departure; “he does not understand our culture,” hinting strongly that the Prime Minister based on skin colour was not really British. This was the kind of discourse Hitler in his first years of government would say about Jewish people not being “true Germans”. Farage, having made what could be described as a pro Hitlerite statement then tried to give his comments an air of respectability by praising the role played by soldiers from the British Commonwealth, still loosely referred to as the ‘British Empire’, in the battles in France and North Africa who were classed as British troops. Who was this praise aimed at, tepid as it was from the ‘Commonwealth'? Perhaps the Canadian, Australian and New Zealand soldiers, the majority of whom were white was who he was talking of. This thinly veiled attempt to give his statement about Rishi Sunak some form of respectability was less than convincing. Farage now heads the ‘Reform UK’ party who are seeking Conservative and Unionist party votes on the 4th July, date of the UK General Election.
Farage once headed the United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP) and employed Irish far-right politician, Herman Kelly, once describing the Irishman as a “big strapping Paddy lad” an ethnocentric if not racist remark in itself. Kelly was and, arguably still is, very much a protégé of Farage. How Kelly can support a united Ireland while supporting the United Kingdom far-right - the UK includes the six counties for now - is a not very clear. Perhaps he does not want a united Ireland at all as he goes about whipping up racial tensions across Ireland! He works very much to a Farage agenda, the same Farage who is strongly in favour of maintaining the partition of Ireland. Is Kelly a British fascist fifth columnist? Forty years after the defeat of fascism in Europe a leading British politician on live television shows his not so hidden contempt for those who gave their lives fighting such ideologies as his. What an insult. Perhaps we should ask the question: if Nigel Farage had been around during WW2 which set of ideological policies would he have supported?
It is perfectly understandable the British Prime Minister should face criticism for leaving such an important commemoration early but that criticism should be based on his policies, not his ethnic or racial origins. The criticism should be about the offensive nature of his leaving the event early and not, as Farage claimed, “he doesn’t understand our culture” which is the wrong argument. It showed Nigel Farage for what he is, a racist neo-fascist who will use any opportunity no matter how sensitive to promote his vile policies even the commemoration of the war dead of D-Day.
 |
| Caoimhin O’Muraile is Independent Socialist Republican and Marxist. |
 landings by the allies in Normandy,...&p[url]=https://www.thepensivequill.com/2024/06/d-day-eighty-years-on.html&p[images][0]=https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhbylvCBPH7196afB3AxDRySjkNCH_FqglUDJgCbm8xvyqJRZVwDuOPfR3Js0jx2MrxXvKntjHVM2KUqhU2jpu6UmDUE49Gb3T0nXiew47SZ0rzCQ5Xwjgch-C9tWx_p7Vdr1MD6Ky-kUyHWlkmpssGxjxBKhpVZQCaK0YDepfPDfZHmQjYfvHYgaM3/s1600/01%20Quill%20Hand.png){kind=link}
The UK Armed forces did honour the efforts of the Indian ( and other Forces)..
ReplyDelete"Their valour was recognised with the award of some 4,000 decorations, and 18 members of the Indian Army were awarded the Victoria Cross or the George Cross. Field Marshal Claude Auchinleck, Commander-in-Chief of the Indian Army from 1942, asserted that the British "couldn't have come through both wars (World War I and II) if they hadn't had the Indian Army. British Prime Minister Winston Churchill also paid tribute to "The unsurpassed bravery of Indian soldiers and officers."
You also tend to find that when senior Royals go to visit these countries they pay hommage to their war efforts on behalf of the Commonwealth. One thing the Brits do well is congratulate those who fought for them.
On the otherside I believe that the Red Army won WWII and the Allies only got pushed into the D Day landings when they realised the speed of the German Eastern Front collapse.
Hence why the 'cold war' shortly after I.e the Russians were begging the allies to open a second front way before D Day, in order to stretch the Nazis military which was almost entirely directed at Russia. The Allies made excuses such 'they weren't ready'; 'timing isn't right' etc. Despite keeping up appearance I.e supplying Russia with some weaponry to show they were partners in the war, Russians to this day view the allies intentions with suspicion. Seeing as Russia was the only great area left in the world not successfully divvied up by European imperialists, some have a view that the allies were willing to let Germany conquer Russia and then the allies would have sought a compromise with the Nazis I.e more divvying up of land.
DeleteWhen we observe the mess today that was allowed to happen in Ukraine then the Russians could be forgiven if they thought the west was still unhappy that Russia hadn't fell to Germany.