Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Suez campaign of 1956
 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
  Share Topic Share Topic  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
nuvolari View Drop Down
Earl
Earl


Joined: 14-Jul-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 269 		  Quote nuvolari Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Suez campaign of 1956
    Posted: 23-Jul-2007 at 10:12
There will be many who feel that Great Britain, France and Israel were severely let down by the actions of the Americans in undermining their collective efforst to recover the Suez Canal from the Egyptians, who unlawfully nationalised it.  Speaking for myself, I take the view that any campaign that can get the Brits., the French and the Israelis all pulling together should get every buggers support just because of the sheer unique bizarreness of it ! but there will be others who have different views, of course ( I'm not talking about the Egyptians, since nobody wants to hear their views anyway ! ). Anybody care to air their opinion on the actions of the Americans ?
Back to Top
Dolphin View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke

Suspended

Joined: 06-Feb-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1551 		  Quote Dolphin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23-Jul-2007 at 10:18
Lol, you are funny, nuvolari, but its more at than with, If ya get me?!  Thumbs%20Up
Back to Top
nuvolari View Drop Down
Earl
Earl


Joined: 14-Jul-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 269 		  Quote nuvolari Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23-Jul-2007 at 10:40
Originally posted by Dolphin

Lol, you are funny, nuvolari, but its more at than with, If ya get me?!  Thumbs%20Up
 Yes, I quite agree,Dolphin, the actions of Colonel Nasser were both illegal and unconscionable. There also cannot be any doubt as to the importance of the Suez Canal to the British; and the actions of the French as principal shareholders in the original construction company, and whose then vested financial participation in the continuation of the canal more than justified their commitment to its recovery from the Egyptians. I do, however, Dolphin, find it difficult to entirely understand your explanation as to the correctness of the American action in destabilising the pound in the Worl'ds currency markets, since it must be clear to all that this action on their part was politically motivated ( given their longstanding anti-Empire attitude ). Of course, I am very pleased to hear your suggestion that we must take as a major mitigating factor, the pending Presidential re-elction campaign of Eisenhower in that year.  This is a factor that I had quite overlooked, but am exceeddingly grateful to have had you remind me of.  As for the actions of the Israelis - well, then as now, they are a bloody law unto themselves !
Back to Top
edgewaters View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar
Snake in the Grass-Banned

Joined: 13-Mar-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2394 		  Quote edgewaters Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23-Jul-2007 at 10:48
Originally posted by nuvolari

Anybody care to air their opinion on the actions of the Americans ?


Yeah, they kept Khruschev from nuking Paris and London.

The big mistake wasn't going in, it was leaving. Going in was brilliant, though it wasn't an American idea really - it was Lester Pearson's brainchild. Unfortunately the US didn't have the sense to push hard enough for the UNEF to have any teeth, which it was supposed to have, and it ended up having to be withdrawn which merely led to a continuation of problems. But at least it got the USSR out of the picture.

Speaking for myself, I take the view that any campaign that can get the Brits., the French and the Israelis all pulling together should get every buggers support


It's great when people work together, but not if they're getting together and machine-gunning refugees, butchering police in their stations, and so on. Part of the reason everyone was so alarmed by the British/French/Israeli action was the atrocities. Today we are desensitized and such things seem remote and unconnected to us personally, but back then the world had a different viewpoint and it was very, very tired of that sort of thing, having experienced it far more intimately than most of us today. The US was particularly fed up with European aggression, especially when there were racist factors at play.
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23-Jul-2007 at 11:57
The US was fed up,of imperial empires and had been insisting their disestablishment. This was one time that events at swaying by claiming hat the other guy was a commie did not work.
Back to Top
nuvolari View Drop Down
Earl
Earl


Joined: 14-Jul-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 269 		  Quote nuvolari Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23-Jul-2007 at 12:21
Originally posted by Sparten

The US was fed up,of imperial empires and had been insisting their disestablishment. This was one time that events at swaying by claiming hat the other guy was a commie did not work.
 
You are SO right !  and, of course, what is the USA attempting to do right now but build itself a bloody Empire.  I'ts enough to sicken a cat, ain't it !
Back to Top
Dolphin View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke

Suspended

Joined: 06-Feb-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1551 		  Quote Dolphin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23-Jul-2007 at 12:32

LOL
Back to Top
nuvolari View Drop Down
Earl
Earl


Joined: 14-Jul-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 269 		  Quote nuvolari Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23-Jul-2007 at 12:47
Originally posted by edgewaters

Originally posted by nuvolari

Anybody care to air their opinion on the actions of the Americans ?


Yeah, they kept Khruschev from nuking Paris and London.

The big mistake wasn't going in, it was leaving. Going in was brilliant, though it wasn't an American idea really - it was Lester Pearson's brainchild. Unfortunately the US didn't have the sense to push hard enough for the UNEF to have any teeth, which it was supposed to have, and it ended up having to be withdrawn which merely led to a continuation of problems. But at least it got the USSR out of the picture.

Speaking for myself, I take the view that any campaign that can get the Brits., the French and the Israelis all pulling together should get every buggers support


It's great when people work together, but not if they're getting together and machine-gunning refugees, butchering police in their stations, and so on. Part of the reason everyone was so alarmed by the British/French/Israeli action was the atrocities. Today we are desensitized and such things seem remote and unconnected to us personally, but back then the world had a different viewpoint and it was very, very tired of that sort of thing, having experienced it far more intimately than most of us today. The US was particularly fed up with European aggression, especially when there were racist factors at play.
 
Both the British and the french had nuclear weapons long before the Suez
campaign, and were equally capable of a retaliatory strike upon Moscow in the event of Russian nuclear aggression.  Where America tipped the scale was in the size of her conventional forces, but given her longstanding reluctance to accept casualties, whether she would have used them in Northern Europe against the Russians is entirely a different question  !  Insofar, as any atrocities committed in Egypt is concerned, the average Arab has gotten the art of committing atrocities down to a science ; likewise his use of propaganda and agitprop.  If I had to put money on a French Poilu or British Tommy doing an atrocity on any arabs, or vice versa, I know where I'd be betting. Of course, if it was French legionairre, then that is sumptin' entirely different !
 
Talking of the US being fed up with racist based European aggression; tell me, just where did the Ku Klux Klan thrive and exist up until only a few years ago ?  Oh ,yeah- and just what was the attitude of American troops to the Vietnamese or even the Iraqis today. Have you never heard of My Lai or Abu Gharaib ?
Back to Top
edgewaters View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar
Snake in the Grass-Banned

Joined: 13-Mar-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2394 		  Quote edgewaters Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23-Jul-2007 at 17:34
Originally posted by nuvolari

Both the British and the french had nuclear weapons long before the Suez


Wrong.

France did not have a nuclear arsenal at all yet - Suez caused it to embark on the construction of the Force de Frappe. Their first nuclear test, Gerboise Bleue, didn't take place until 1960, four years after Suez.

Britain did not have an arsenal "long before" Suez. They had built their first weapon in '53, 3 years previously. They did not have a large arsenal by '56; certainly not enough to form a credible deterrent against the Soviet stockpile. Moreover they were not yet capable of penetrating Soviet air superiority to any great distance.

Insofar, as any atrocities committed in Egypt is concerned, the average Arab has gotten the art of committing atrocities down to a science ; likewise his use of propaganda and agitprop.


It wasn't the Arabs who reported them.

Talking of the US being fed up with racist based European aggression; tell me, just where did the Ku Klux Klan thrive and exist up until only a few years ago ?


The KKK drove American foreign policy? News to me.

Oh ,yeah- and just what was the attitude of American troops to the Vietnamese or even the Iraqis today. Have you never heard of My Lai or Abu Gharaib ?


Absolutely. Vietnam marks a sea-change both in American military culture and in the US civil society's attitudes towards the US role in the world. The optimistic postwar society gave way to a darker and more pessimistic outlook. Roles are reversed these days. Different society in the US altogether and different relationship with the outside world.

Edited by edgewaters - 24-Jul-2007 at 04:06
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
King
King

Suspended

Joined: 06-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7035 		  Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24-Jul-2007 at 06:00
Nobody mentioned the unfortunate fact that the Suez invasion completely took the heat off the Soviets for their repression of the Hungarian rising at the same time.
 
There probably never was a worse timed military intervention.
 
It does however indicate that the US action was not all that benevolently inspired, since they were perfectly content to accept the Soviet invasion, though not the British/French one.
 
It's not an episode that any of the major powers comes out of smelling sweetly.
 


Edited by gcle2003 - 24-Jul-2007 at 06:01
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24-Jul-2007 at 06:31
The Yanks certainly did. Its not like they could have done much to help the Hungarians anyways.
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
King
King

Suspended

Joined: 06-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7035 		  Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24-Jul-2007 at 09:21
Originally posted by Sparten

The Yanks certainly did. Its not like they could have done much to help the Hungarians anyways.
 
I was in Vienna in '56, working with the refugees. It didn't look that way to them. Or me.
Back to Top
Parnell View Drop Down
Suspended
Suspended

Suspended

Joined: 04-Apr-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1409 		  Quote Parnell Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24-Jul-2007 at 09:24
Originally posted by Dolphin

LOL

 
You love him really LOL
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24-Jul-2007 at 11:09
Originally posted by gcle2003

Originally posted by Sparten

The Yanks certainly did. Its not like they could have done much to help the Hungarians anyways.
 
I was in Vienna in '56, working with the refugees. It didn't look that way to them. Or me.
THe US had just fought a war in Korea, its conventional forces were busted and Ike was making deeper cuts and to save cash and rely on nukes instead. The US had little room to force the Soviet's at all.
Back to Top
nuvolari View Drop Down
Earl
Earl


Joined: 14-Jul-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 269 		  Quote nuvolari Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24-Jul-2007 at 11:39
Originally posted by Sparten

Originally posted by gcle2003

Originally posted by Sparten

The Yanks certainly did. Its not like they could have done much to help the Hungarians anyways.
 
I was in Vienna in '56, working with the refugees. It didn't look that way to them. Or me.
THe US had just fought a war in Korea, its conventional forces were busted and Ike was making deeper cuts and to save cash and rely on nukes instead. The US had little room to force the Soviet's at all.
 
To be more accurate, the United Nations had just fought a war in Korea, the USA was the principal element in that force, of course, but even much smaller nations like Turkey had sent it's troops there. Insofar as Hungary was concerned, one may query Great Britain declaring war on Germany in WW1 over the latter's invasion of Belgium, but the British had a 1000 times more reason to do that than the USA ( or indeed any other country ! ) had to declare war on the Soviets over Hungary.
Back to Top
Beylerbeyi View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: Cuba
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1355 		  Quote Beylerbeyi Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24-Jul-2007 at 13:46
the actions of Colonel Nasser were both illegal and unconscionable.
 
They were perfectly legal. He did the right thing by kicking the imperialists out.
 
When the stupid imperialists tried to invade, it didn't work due to the Soviets telling them to fornicate off.
 
US and Soviets had an understanding that the world was now bipolar, and they did not tolerate old-school imperialism by some second-rate powers who still thought they ruled the seas and carried the white man's burden on their shoulders.
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
King
King

Suspended

Joined: 06-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7035 		  Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25-Jul-2007 at 06:36
Originally posted by Beylerbeyi

the actions of Colonel Nasser were both illegal and unconscionable.
 
They were perfectly legal. He did the right thing by kicking the imperialists out.
 
When the stupid imperialists tried to invade, it didn't work due to the Soviets telling them to fornicate off.
The Soviets had nothing to do with it. They were too busy defending their own imperialism.
 
Suez failed because the USA cut off financial support for the pound and the franc.
 
US and Soviets had an understanding that the world was now bipolar, and they did not tolerate old-school imperialism by some second-rate powers who still thought they ruled the seas and carried the white man's burden on their shoulders.
That's closer. The US had accepted Soviet domination of Eastern Europe in return for Soviet acceptance of US hegemony over its spheres of influence.
 
Within a decade things of course had changed immensely, with the passing of Khruschev and Eisenhower plus the focus of attention on Asia.
 
Back to Top
Beylerbeyi View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: Cuba
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1355 		  Quote Beylerbeyi Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25-Jul-2007 at 13:49
The Soviets had nothing to do with it. They were too busy defending their own imperialism.
 
Soviet supremacy in Hungary was not threatened by the West. They were not too busy. Europe was too busy with Egypt to talk about USSR, but this does not mean they were only looking there.
 
Suez failed because the USA cut off financial support for the pound and the franc.
 
Europeans acted without American consent, and when the Soviets threatened them, America refused to back their little adventure. If Soviets hadn't said anything, it could have been different. Israeli army could have advanced deeper into Egypt.
Back to Top
nuvolari View Drop Down
Earl
Earl


Joined: 14-Jul-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 269 		  Quote nuvolari Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25-Jul-2007 at 14:35
Originally posted by gcle2003

Originally posted by Beylerbeyi

the actions of Colonel Nasser were both illegal and unconscionable.
 
They were perfectly legal. He did the right thing by kicking the imperialists out.
 
When the stupid imperialists tried to invade, it didn't work due to the Soviets telling them to fornicate off.
The Soviets had nothing to do with it. They were too busy defending their own imperialism.
 
Suez failed because the USA cut off financial support for the pound and the franc.
 
US and Soviets had an understanding that the world was now bipolar, and they did not tolerate old-school imperialism by some second-rate powers who still thought they ruled the seas and carried the white man's burden on their shoulders.
That's closer. The US had accepted Soviet domination of Eastern Europe in return for Soviet acceptance of US hegemony over its spheres of influence.
 
Within a decade things of course had changed immensely, with the passing of Khruschev and Eisenhower plus the focus of attention on Asia.
 
 
Not true, my freind !  In the same way that the Panama Canal is effectively owned by the USAdespite it being in Panama, the Suez Canal in Egypt was oned/leased by the Suez Canal Company and it's shareholders.IT DID NOT BELONG TO EGYPT !!!  So, when Nasser took it he was stealing in just the same way as if I came round to your house, beat you up and stole your car. Mind you, you are quite right about the Yanks screwing the Brits and the French by de-stabilising the currencies . The USA has always had an anti-Empire foreign policy despite their own failed wishes to build an empire of their own.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.139 seconds.