William Black
10/23/2011 12:12:00 AM
On 23/10/11 00:42, john0714 wrote:
> On Oct 22, 2:36 pm, "Nick P"<nicholasped...@npedley.freeserve.co.uk>
> wrote:
>> "Rich Rostrom"<rrostrom.21stcent...@rcn.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:2abb763b-cca6-442c-aeea-ccec951913c2@er6g2000vbb.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Oct 20, 12:18 pm, David Tenner<dten...@ameritech.net> wrote:
>>
>>>> Suppose Stalin ignores the "international disapproval"...
>>>> directs the invading force to capture Kabul, and
>>>> restores Amanullah.) Is Britain willing to
>>>> send troops to Kabul to oust Amanullah again?
>>
>>> It seems a distinct possibility. The Soviets would
>>> have explicitly violated the tacit agreement that
>>> Afghanistan would be neutral between Russia and
>>> Britain. And Soviet imperialism would be even more
>>> alarming than Russian imperialism.
>>
>>>> If not, are the Soviets stuck
>>>> in the same trap as in the 1980's, bogged down in Afghanistan trying to
>>>> prop
>>>> up an unpopular regime (since Amanullah will be widely viewed among
>>>> Afghans
>>>> as a puppet of the godless Bolsheviks)?
>>
>>> That could be amusing. Britain would almost certainly
>>> encourage Afghan resistance; the British political
>>> office in India might enjoy sponsoring a rebellion
>>> instead of fighting one.
>>
>> I can just imagine the movie (sequel), Lawrence of Afghanistan!
>> Airman Lawrence was based in India between 1926 and 1928 and was still
>> serving in the RAF until 1935. Not entirely impossible that he gets given
>> the task of returning to the sub-continent and fostering the Aghan
>> uprising...
>>
>> Nick P- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> I've often thought what Lawrence would have done had he lived at least
> until the end of WWll (however he might have butterflied that), but
> yours is good. Would he have learned that part of the world as much as
> he had previously learned Arabia to make much of a difference, seeing
> as how he moved about at the sufference of the RAF?
Modern research seems to indicate that Lawrence didn't actually make
that much difference, he just wrote about it really well.
The main fighting force was a battalion of Gurkha, two British armoured
car columns and a small Royal Naval force working its down the Red Sea
in support.
The Arab forces, almost all mercenaries, seem to have mainly ripped up
the railways, looted the odd train and then gone home to stash their loot.
Lawrence spent most of his time keeping the friendly Arab despots 'on
message' and pretending to them that the Sykes Picot agreement and the
Balfour Declaration didn't mean what they actually said.
All three deals plus a fourth secret deal with the Turks that nobody
knew about at the time, gave Palestine to four different parties.
Lawrence was just another instrument of the highly duplicitous British
foreign policy of the time.
Besides, Lawrence was an Arabic speaker who was also an archaeologist,
he wasn't an Urdu or Pashtun speaker and neither did he have
experience of mountains.
The British had plenty of people who did.
--
William Black
Free men have open minds
If you want loyalty, buy a dog...