Upon visiting my WEB-Page:
Http:// Arpad1.Com
MT sent me the following brief memo:
* * *
MT: It's right-wing maggots that think like you do who nearly got us into a nuclear war with the Russians over a piss-ass country like Hungary.
* * *
==================================
LE: Dear Mr/Ms/Mrs “MT”,
Since you forgot to sign your memo, I have no idea how else to address you.
Now what do you know?
Based on your “Highly articulated” comment, it appears, not much.
Your comment betrays several misconceptions, and errors that you are harboring.
I wonder: were you born already 50 years ago?
While I have no problem with allowing you to have an opinion, I feel it is sad that people betray their ignorance in this way.
Maybe you should open your mind, and read, study history.
By the way, as far as I am concerned, I was there and did put my life on the line for what I believe in.
I wonder what kind of conclusions I should draw about you, from your comments.
What have you done? (I mean other than being abusive in your language…) Anything to be proud of?
With best wishes,
Leslie Eloed
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
MT: "While I have no problem with allowing you to have an opinion, I feel it is sad that people betray their ignorance in this way."
Gee, thanks for allowing me an opinion.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
LE: Sorry, I did not mean to be sarcastic.
Maybe you should open your mind, and read, study history.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
MT: I have studied history and I have to conclude that President Eisenhower made exactly the right decision by not risking a nuclear war over tiny Hungary.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
LE: To reach that conclusion did not take much studying of history. That is a given…
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
MT: Sorry, Hungary is just not that important in the major scheme of things. You need to look at a map.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
LE: By the way: How do you define: “the major scheme of things”
By the way, as far as I am concerned, I was there and did put my life on the line for what I believe in.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
MT: Your putting you life on the line was very noble.
However, your request that millions of Americans put their lives on the line by risking nuclear war is not.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
LE: Wrong and exaggerated assumption.
Dear MT, (I still don’t know how to address you…)
1; Those of us who lived under communism, obviously had enough, and a popular - spontaneous revolt broke out in Budapest, on October 23, 1956.
2; To quote you: “However, your request that millions of Americans put their lives on the line by risking nuclear war is not.” I wonder, how and from where do you jump to this exaggerated assumption? Certainly not from studying history.
3; Any straight thinking person would not have wanted the US to get involved, it would have devastated all of Hungary, destruction etc. like in Vietnam.
4; If you read all the materials, historic, military etc, including those that have been declassified since, you would find, that Eisenhower had no intention ever to risk any kind -- nuclear or otherwise – war with the Russians over Hungary. And I am glad for that. The Suez-Canal issue with the help of England was quite an effective way to draw all attention away from events in Hungary. That was not an accident either.
5; Hungary is tiny, and I don’t need to look at a map to realize that. Of course its location and many of its accomplishments over the centuries count for something too. Take the US Atomic Energy Commission and the nuclear scientists, you will find Hungarians have been present way out of proportion to their national size. And there are many similar facts. Now if you have studied history, you must also recognize, that during the Yugoslavian – Serbian “conflict” of a few years ago, it was very safe, comfortable and advantageous for the US to use Hungary as the staging ground for the operations in that part of the world, the US exposing Hungary to a possible world-war, after the bombing of the Chinese headquarters in Beograd, and all other war-activities. (In those days [1994] I traveled throughout the war-zone, Bosnia-Herzegovina etc. for firsthand view of what was going on.
6; There is a certain arrogance in some of the political leaders of the US, wanting to force our ways, including the so-called “democracy” onto any other nation, regardless whether it agrees with their ancient lifestyle, habits, cultural – religious background. I personally am not in favor of military intervention as a solution to the societal problems of the world. Diplomacy yes. If I want to fault Eisenhower, a President who was dear to all Hungarians, it was his lack of diplomacy applied to the Russians, giving them free rain over whatever they wanted to do in the Russian satellite (East – Central European) region. He all but gave them a free hand. If you read the records, you will find the basis for this statement. You see, it is one thing to not interfere and so not risk a war, but almost guaranteeing that no matter what the Russians choose to do in Hungary, there will be no consequences that is something else.
7; The practical and symbolic values of 1956 in world history are a different issue…
Regards, Leslie
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
MT: To quote you: MT:“However, your request that millions of Americans put their lives on the line by risking nuclear war is not.” LE: "I wonder, how and from where do you jump to this exaggerated assumption? Certainly not from studying history."
I come to this conclusion by reading your webpage which says "The brave Hungarian people believed we would help -- that all they needed do was show their willingness to fight and we would spring to their aid. But we failed them in their hour of greatest need."
Your webpage also says: "It is of great importance to the Hungarian people who know the dangers, that the American people be warned of the insidiousness of Socialism."
As for myself, I am more concerned about the insidiousness of fundamentalist Christianity (and Islam). Many Christians seem to be ignorant of their own history. They seem to forget that there was a time -- between the collapse of the Roman Empire and the Renaissance -- when almost everyone in Europe believed in the Christian God. In what historians now refer to as The Dark Ages (for good reason), this period was also one of the most miserable in human history with wars, crucifixions, and pestilence. If the Dark Ages are any indication of what the fundamentalist Christians have in store for us, I want no part of it.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
LE: Hello MT, good to hear from you again… (I still don’t know how to address you…)
Yes, many Hungarians at the time behind the iron-curtain, believed in help coming from the US. Did they wish for it? Maybe a few did.
The expectation was fueled by the Voice of America and Radio Free Europe, (Voice of America maintained and financed by the US, Radio Free Europe I am not sure to what extent, but it did get its support from the West.)
In your last response, you voice valid fears and valid criticism about fundamentalists.
But, the answer I don’t believe -- after personal experience -- is not in Socialism or Communism, or at that rate any .ism whatsoever, or anti-Christianity.
Sadly, to war is part of basic human nature.
I don’t think that the Dark Ages would return just because of God fearing -- including fundamentalist -- Christians. If that would be the case, should we not also fear of civilization crawling back into the caves? The Dark Ages and caves have been in our past, no question about that. I have hope, that those days will not repeat themselves.
But look at what happened in Soviet Russia and / or China (and all other Communism-rules countries) in the name of Socialism and Communism.
What about terrorism and Iraq?
What about illegal aliens invading this Country, (10 to 22 million?) and in their illegal status being supported by the Liberal Left?
Quite a big bag of worms.
I would be really curious what do you think would be the answer. So far I have heard a lot of put-downs from you. What about the half full glass?
Regards, Leslie
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
MT: "But look at what happened in Soviet Russia and or China (and all other Communism-ruled countries) in the name of Socialism and Communism."
The Russian revolution would never have happened except for the stupidity of the Russian monarchy in allowing itself to be drawn into World War 1. This disaster is what destroyed the monarchy and allowed the Bolsheviks to come to power. Likewise Communism would have never been imposed on Eastern Europe had the anti-Communist Hitler not attacked the Soviet Union and then proceeded to lose the war.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
LE: Well now, here you sound like what you call: “right-wing maggots that think like …” You almost sound like you would have preferred Hitler to win the war? Then there would have been no Communism in Eastern Europe? You can’t mean that.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
MT: Likewise, the Chinese Communists probably would not have come to power except for the disruptions caused by the Japanese imperialists during World War 2. The Communists have only had success, because right-wingers in the form of the Russian monarchy, Adolf Hitler, and Japanese militarists have done stupid things.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
LE: By the way, Japan invaded China in the 1930 already, long before the official start of the Second World War.
Dear MT,
I still don’t know how to address you…, and would love to hear were you are coming from. I feel it is unfair, that you know quite a lot about me, and still are not divulging any info about yourself.
If at the end of the Second World War the USA would not have allowed Russia to take over East Europe with their agreement to stop at the German river Elbe, they, the US would have freed Eastern and Central Europe from Hitler. The Western allied forces -- or their leaders -- felt that after the Russians have lost so many lives in defeating the Germans on Russian soil, they should have the glory to march through Eastern-Central Europe, and keep it. Now I would call that stupidity, and at that the stupidity of US leadership, possibly including General Eisenhower’s as well.
Just imagine a different course of action at that time could have precluded the entire Cold-War era with its arms race, including all of its aftermath including the Hungarian Revolution of 1956. Now that was preventable stupidity on the part of the “experts.”
The Russian Communist rule in that region was more the fault of the US, then Hitler’s. At the same time, there was not much difference between Hitler’s National Socialism and Stalin’s Communist International Socialism.
Revolutions break out if conditions in a country reach a boiling point, so in Russia as well. At that time any spark, Lenin, Marx, Engels (the majority of them not even Russian) could ignite society.
It seems to me to be an oversimplification to blame the “stupidity” of the Russian Monarchy allowing itself to be drawn into the First World War. Without the war, conditions already have been ripe for the revolution. Don’t forget, the Monarchy was probably good only for the small privileged minority, not for the masses. Same way as in China… You can read about it in contemporary writer’s works and accounts of history (if you can find unbiased history-telling, after all, everybody has an ax to grind...)
Regards, Leslie
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
MT: "The Western allied forces -- or their leaders -- felt that after the Russians have lost so many lives in defeating the Germans on Russian soil, they should have the glory to march through Eastern-Central Europe, and keep it."
This is nonsense. The West did not give the Russians Eastern Europe. The Russians forces were already there - on the ground. Seventy-five to eighty percent of the 5 million Germans killed died at the hands of Russians on the Eastern front. The fact is that the US and its Western allies were late on the scene. By the time of the D-Day Invasion in the summer of 1944, the Russians had already recaptured most of the territory taken from them by the Germans and were on their way into Eastern Europe. The US and its Western allies would not have even been able to establish a beachhead at Normandy, except for the fact that the Germans had already expended most of their men and equipment fighting the Russians. Why do you think it took two-and-a half years after Hitler declared war on the US for the US and its Western allies to attempt an invasion of France? Obviously, because the US and its allies knew that they would be wiped out on the beaches at this early stage of the war.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
LE: Keep on dreaming MT,
but I guess you are just a Ghost, not willing to identify yourself. You hide behind anonymity without the courage of convictions, afraid to stand behind your words.
So far you have uttered only a lot of unidentifiable noise.
Without knowing anything about you, I have no idea how much weight I should give to your statements, and so I have no way to pay you respect, which you may well deserve.
Likely, our point of view is different, our knowledge, assumptions and conclusions and life-experiences are not identical. But I will not put labels on you, or your differing opinions.
Sure, I may have some of the dates and sequence of events somewhat out of order, but the fact remains, that without US agreement, as well as the agreement of the four super-powers, Eastern Europe would not have been given to the Russians at Yalta.
True, Hungary ended the war on the German side, but why? Germany forced Hungary into the war. There have been several unsuccessful attempts by the Hungarians to jump the German ship.
The Yalta peace-accord was unjust to Hungary. Just as much so, as the Trianon peace-treaty in 1920, which took away two thirds of Hungarian territory and annexed it to the neighboring countries, thereby creating the largest minorities in the region, with all the resulting conflicts. Approx. 6,000,000 Hungarians are still today living oppressed and in minority status as a result of that peace treaty in Rumania, Serbia, Slovakia. (Hungary proper has a population of Ten million) And you know what? Those who decided the fate of Hungary in 1920 included the US and lots of uninterested world leaders, who had no idea about the layout of Hungary, the internal conditions. Nobody asked or listened to the Hungarians. For instance at one section of the border they saw a small river on the map, one that dried up in summer, and called that the border, with no regard to the damages and future conflicts. And they went on to celebrate them-selves. Tensions in Europe have never since ceased.
In one of your earlier comments you mentioned Islam. I must assume, you are aware of the fact, that in fifteenth century days, Hungary was occupied by the Turks for 150 years, and it was the Hungarians who stopped the Turks from occupying and devastating Austria. By the way, do you remember how the First World War started?
When a nation of 10 million is willing to rise up and bare-handed oppose his 200 million strong oppressors, there must be rather terrible conditions. Just like in the Dark Ages. And taking the initiative to show the world how deceitful those oppressors are has some value.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
MT: Just answer one question and then we can be done with this discussion. Why was it that the Western powers delayed an invasion of Europe for two-and-a-half years after Germany had declared war on the United States? From June of 1941 to June of 1944, the Russians engaged the main thrust of the German offensive, while Britain and the United States played around with a few German divisions in North Africa. History shows that it was the Russians who broke the back of the Nazi regime just as they defeated Napoleon a century and a half earlier. Too bad Hungary and the rest of Eastern Europe were caught in the crossfire.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
LE: Good and valid questions MT,
In 1941 I lived in Hungary, I was 8 years old. So my first personal memories are of March 19, 1944 when the Germans marched into Hungary and occupied it. What the allied did or did not do, I have no first hand info on it, only what I read later. But this question was not a prime concern to us there and at the time.
I think, part of the delay may have been the disbelief of the cruelty that a civilized western country like Germany could inflict on the world. Nobody wanted to heed the warnings, just like the warnings about the possibilities of Pear Harbor.
Further, the expectation was that Germany would march on the more feared Communism. Little did the world realize, that Hitler’s goals of ruling the world with his “super-race” (while I am of German descent on my mother’s side, I am also a victim on my Hungarian father’s side) would be far more devastating then Communism at the time. (When comparing the numbers of millions killed by Hitler and by Stalin & Co. we don’t find much of a numerical difference.) With 20/20 hindsight it is easy to state now, that the ideal solution would have been to bring to its knees the Russians immediately after the German question was resolved.
If I recall correctly, it was Germany attacking Russia, and almost destroying it, before the Russians with unbelievable patriotic courage and sacrifice finally turned the trend. And thank God for the unbelievable harsh Russian winter both there and with Napoleon. I don’t think Stalin would have attacked Germany.
Hesitation by the Western allies was perhaps a costly error. And this brings to my mind the current situation in Iraq. If the terrorist treat by Iraq is read correctly, hesitation here would also be a fatal mistake.
I do hope, we will continue this discussion. Makes me think too …
Regards, Leslie
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
MT: After doing some research, here is a web page that I wrote and posted on the Internet. I tried to be as objective as I could but, as always, there are some things that are open to interpretation.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the full text of these articles and further comments by me, please go to the Comments page.
# end
