What would Winston do? Oddly enough, he had a chance to deal with Iraqi insurgents.

[Bucky]

Our conservative friends and compatriots love to quote Churchill. They see him as one of their own, a Tory Richard Perle, a thinking man's Don Rumsfeld. So in the spirit of bipartisanship, which our Republican brethren in politics have recently become fond of, I offer this following primary source document. In 1922 Winnie was serving as Colonial Secretary--giving him responsibility for managing Britain's newly acquired territory of Iraq. He, indeed, had an exit plan from Iraq.

After the World War, Britain had taken over the province of Iraq, which Churchill called Mesopotamia in public and "Messpot" in private, from the rubble of the Ottoman Turks' devastated empire. The Western-installed local leader, King Faisal (the British spelled it "Feisal"), was proving difficult to control. The country had been carved out with great respect for existing oil deposits and no respect for the different religious and ethnic groups contained within those boundaries. Throughout the British occupation resurgent Turkish power threatened the fragile psuedo-nation from without. Starting in 1920 a relentless insurgency broke out and the British occupying troops suppressed it with extreme measures, possibly including a chemical weapons attack on Kurdish rebels.

After two years of dealing with the rebellion and the intrasigence of the Iraqi government the Brits had installed, Churchill wrote the following letter to Prime Minister David Lloyd George (a bit of a Dubya himself--Lloyd George's harsh policies on German reparations laid the ground work for a subsequent German war). Particularly ironic passages have been highlighted.

Winston S. Churchill to David Lloyd George
(Churchill papers: 17/27)
1 September 1922

I am deeply concerned about Iraq. The task you have given me is becoming
really impossible. Our forces are reduced now to very slender proportions.
The Turkish menace has got worse; Feisal is playing the fool, if not the knave;
his incompetent Arab officials are disturbing some of the provinces and failing
to collect the revenue; we overpaid £200,000 on last year's account which
it is almost certain Iraq will not be able to pay this year, thus entailing
a Supplementary Estimate in regard to a matter never sanctioned by
Parliament; a further deficit, in spite of large economies, is nearly certain
this year on the civil expenses owing to the drop in the revenue. I have had to
maintain British troops at Mosul all through the year in consequence of the
Angora quarrel: this has upset the programme of reliefs and will certainly
lead to further expenditure beyond the provision. I cannot at this moment
withdraw these troops without practically inviting the Turks to come in. The
small column which is operating in the Rania district inside our border against
the Turkish raiders and Kurdish sympathisers is a source of constant anxiety
to me.

I do not see what political strength there is to face a disaster of any kind, and
certainly I cannot believe that in any circumstances any large reinforcements
would be sent from here or from India. There is scarcely a single newspaper -
Tory, Liberal or Labour - which is not consistently hostile to our remaining in
this country. The enormous reductions which have been effected have
brought no goodwill, and any alternative Government that might be formed
here - Labour, Die-hard or Wee Free - would gain popularity by ordering
instant evacuation. Moreover in my own heart I do not see what we are
getting out of it. Owing to the difficulties with America, no progress has
been made in developing the oil. Altogether I am getting to the end of my
resources.

I think we should now put definitely, not only to Feisal but to the Constituent
Assembly, the position that unless they beg us to stay and to stay on our own
terms in regard to efficient control, we shall actually evacuate before the
close of the financial year. I would put this issue in the most brutal way, and
if they are not prepared to urge us to stay and to co-operate in every
manner I would actually clear out. That at any rate would be a solution.
Whether we should clear out of the country altogether or hold on to a portion
of the Basra vilayet is a minor issue requiring a special study.

It is quite possible, however, that face to face with this ultimatum the King,
and still more the Constituent Assembly, will implore us to remain. If they
do, shall we not be obliged to remain? If we remain, shall we not be
answerable for defending their frontier? How are we to do this if
the Turk comes in? We have no force whatever that can resist any
serious inroad. The War Office, of course, have played for safety throughout
and are ready to say 'I told you so' at the first misfortune.

Surveying all the above, I think I must ask you for definite guidance at this
stage as to what you wish and what you are prepared to do. The victories of
the Turks will increase our difficulties throughout the Mohammedan world.
At present we are paying eight millions a year for the privilege of
living on an ungrateful volcano out of which we are in no circumstances
to get anything worth having.

from Martin Gilbert, WINSTON S. CHURCHILL IV, Companion Volume
Part 3, London: Heinemann, 1977, pp. 1973-74.

Original source from WinstonChurchill.org

[NOLADEM]

1. Thanks for posting this...How very interesting

That old saying about history repeating itself sure is amazingly accurate, ain't it?

[Bucky]

2. Indeed. Thankfully the British voters quickly got rid of that notorious cut-and-runner, Churchill

Whatever happened to him?

[LynnTheDem]

3. "I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilised tribes."

"I do not understand squeamishness about the use of gas,"
-Winston Churchill
http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,939608,00.html

[Bucky]

5. If you read the whole quote you'll see he was talking about tear gas

It's not nice to be tear gassed, but the standard policy at the time was to use bullets. Tear gas is decidedly a more human solution to putting down an insurrection. Here's the full quote:

“I do not understand this squeamishness about the use of gas. We have definitely adopted the position at the Peace Conference of arguing in favour of the retention of gas as a permanent method of warfare. It is sheer affectation to lacerate a man with the poisonous fragment of a bursting shell and to boggle at making his eyes water by means of lachrymatory gas.

“I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilised tribes. The moral effect should be so good that the loss of life should be reduced to a minimum. It is not necessary to use only the most deadly gasses: gasses can be used which cause great inconvenience and would spread a lively terror and yet would leave no serious permanent effects on most of those affected.”

He wasn't advocating phosgene or mustard gas here. It was the same gas American police use today to put down riots. Not nice stuff, but hardly the wholesale murder implied when you take the quote out of context.

[LynnTheDem]

6. Incorrect.

Churchill authorized the use of mustard gas.

"As the Mesopotamian resistance gained strength, the British resorted to increasingly repressive measures, and Winston Churchill himself, in his role as Colonial Secretary, argued for the use of chemical agents, mostly mustard gas,..."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_warfare

http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/Columnists/Toronto/Eric_Margolis/2004/12/19/790077.html

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/FH18Ak02.html

http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/iraq/history/britishindex.htm

Many argue that quotes from this passage are often taken out of context, because Churchill is distinguishing between non-lethal agents and the deadly gasses used in World War I and emphasizing the use of non-lethal weapons; however Churchill is not clearly ruling out the use of lethal gases, simply stating that "it is not necessary to use only the most deadly". Reportedly "non-lethal" gas killed many young and elderly Kurds and Arabs when the RAF used mustard gas in 1920 against rebelling villages in Iraq during the British occupation.
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Winston_Churchill

[NNN0LHI]

8. Oh balls. Tear gas wasn't even discovered until 1928

http://www.answers.com/topic/cs-gas

CS or 2-chlorobenzalmalononitrile (chemical formula: C10H5ClN2) is a substance that is used as a riot control agent and is usually claimed to be non-lethal by the forces who use it. CS was discovered by two Americans, Ben Carson and Roger Staughton in 1928, the first letters of the scientists' surname giving us the name of the substance, 'CS'. It was developed and tested secretly at Porton Down in Wiltshire, England. Apparently this testing occurred in the 1950s and 1960s when CS was used firstly on animals, then subsequently on British Army servicemen volunteers. Notably CS has a limited effect on animals due to "under-developed tear-ducts and protection by fur".


Production

It is synthesized by the reaction of 2-chlorobenzaldehyde and malononitrile via the Knoevenagel condensation:

ClC6H4CHO + H2C(CN)2 → ClC6H4CHC(CN)2 + H2O


The reaction is catalysed with weak base like piperidine or pyridine. The production method has not changed since the substance has been discovered by B Carson and R Staughton. Other bases, solvent free methods and microwave promotion have been suggested to improve the production of the substance.

The physiological properties have been discovered already by the chemists first synthesising the compound in 1928: "Physiological Properties.-Certain of these dinitriles have the effect of sneeze and tear gases. They are harmless when wet but to handle the dry powder is disastrous. (sic)"


'CS Gas' - a misnomer

In common parlance CS is referred to as 'CS gas' or 'Tear gas', however this description is incorrect because 2-chlorobenzalmalononitrile is a solid at room temperature, not a gas. A variety of techniques have been used to make this solid usable as an airborne irritant. For example in Waco, Texas, CS was dispersed in droplet form. CS was dissolved in the organic solvent Methylene chloride (MC) and when this evaporated, the CS crystallized into fine particles.

It is worth noting that many types of tear gas have been produced with effects ranging from mild tearing of the eyes to immediate vomiting and prostration. CN and CS are the most widely used and known, but around 15 different types of tear gas have been tested worldwide. CS has become the most popular due to its strong effect and lack of toxicity in comparison with other similar chemical agents. The effect of CS on a person will depend on whether it is packaged as a solution, or if it is an aerosol; the size of solution droplets and the size of the CS particulates after evaporation, are factors determining its effect on the human body. Certain individuals however have been found to be particularly sensitive to CS and or the organic solvents that are utilised. Studies on the use of CS on the public have noted that it may be ineffective against persons who are either mentally ill or who are under the effects of alcohol.

Persons which had contact with CS sometimes develop allergic contact dermatitis, even with blisters and crust Studies show that most of the effects are of a relative short term, but individuals notice some mild effects even after months.

[Bucky]

9. Look up the phrase "lachrymatory gas", which Churchill uses. He's talking about tear gas.

"Lachrymatory" has only one definition. It may not be the same eye irritant used today, but it was not the kind of gas they used in the trenches of WW1, either.

Anyway, this subthread is beside the point, which is that as harsh a hawk as Churchill still thought it insane to occupy Iraq and thought the best solution was to leave. It never ceases to stun me how people can use ad hominem attacks to side step the points in question. Churchill is aggreeing with us--what more do you want?

[LynnTheDem]

4. dupe

[savemefromdumbya]

7. I guess the west needs to take heed

people of the middle east have not and are not going to be messed around with by western 'nation builders' and 'oil predators')