Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Sir Arthur Nicolson, 11th Baronet

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Sir Arthur Nicolson, 11th Baronet

    Sir Arthur Nicolson, 11th Baronet

    Sir Arthur Nicolson was the third member of the British Triumvirate secretly seeking to defeat Germany. While serving as Grey's Ambassador to Russia, Nicolson helped prepare the diplomatic ground for the 1907 Anglo-Russian Entente, a startling development in view of recent hard feelings with regard to the "Eastern question" - especially the disposition of Persia. This was almost as dramatic as the entirely unexpected 1904 Entente Cordiale with France, following hard on the heels of the Fashoda Incident when the two traditional enemies narrowly averted war.

    To assure the Russians that they could expect more of the same cordiality, Grey in 1910 appointed Nicolson as the permanent Under-Secretary of the British Foreign Office. Already in 1909, Nicolson had helped spread the myth that Germany had humiliated Russia with an ultimatum, and now he became an ardent advocate of ever-closer relations with Russia. Fay wrote that "Finally on July 29th . . . officials in the English inner circle in England came to regard a European war as almost inevitable." He quotes Nicolson on that date: "What is the use of exchanging views at this juncture? I am of the opinion that the resources of diplomacy are, for the present, exhausted."

    While giving this opinion, Nicolson was in receipt of Bethmann's telegram notifying the Powers of the efforts he was making at Vienna. No effort was made to stop the Russian order for general mobilization (which was changed at the last minute into an order for partial mobilization), nor was any effort made on July 30th after Sasonov had explicitly informed the British Ambassador that he was about to order full mobilization.

    The warmongering trio of Grey, Nicolson, and Crowe operated secretly and reported nothing to either Cabinet or Parliament. Their purpose may be seen in the fact that any rapprochement with Germany, however slight, was strictly verboten as this might tend to alienate France.

    When the War came, the British delegation in Paris which had been organized by Nicolson for the purpose of furthering Anglo-Russian naval cooperation returned to London: Mission accomplished!

    The Grey-Nicolson-Crowe clique carried out their subterranean anti-German intrigue with the knowledge and approval of Asquith, Churchill, Haldane, and a host of lesser lights. They were determined from the beginning to make use of the Sarajevo crisis to crush a potentially troublesome competitor and played their cards with the deftness of a carnival hustler.
    Last edited by peterhof; 09 Dec 12, 15:12.
    "We have met the enemy and he is us." Pogo

  • #2
    This is just getting silly.
    Signing out.

    Comment


    • #3
      The Babylonian Brotherhood is everywhere!

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Full Monty View Post
        This is just getting silly.
        No! This is the only way Peterhof posts. The same posts are littering every infected forum, with many of the same answers repeated over and over.

        This is not a search for, or interest in the accurate recording of history, it is nothing more than one man endlessly re-posting the 1920's propaganda myths. One subject ends, an almost identical one arises or one with a new title that quickly drifts onto the same subject as before.

        It is elaborate trolling.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Teseren View Post
          This is not a search for, or interest in the accurate recording of history, it is nothing more than one man endlessly re-posting the 1920's propaganda myths. One subject ends, an almost identical one arises or one with a new title that quickly drifts onto the same subject as before.
          A well-nigh perfect description of some - especially British - posters on this forum.
          "We have met the enemy and he is us." Pogo

          Comment


          • #6
            There's WOODS in Laguna???
            ARRRR! International Talk Like A Pirate Day - September 19th
            IN MARE IN COELO

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by peterhof View Post
              A well-nigh perfect description of some - especially British - posters on this forum.
              You are the person who refuses to enter into honest discussion, refuses to accept any historian or document that proves you are wrong, and repeatedly tries to steer all topics back to one or two subjects.

              You have still to answer me in the previous thread about why you lied by claiming it was Austria that refused Grey's suggestion of the Four Power Conference when in fact it was Bethmann. Others have even more outstanding points you have refused to address, oddly enough the points you refuse to address on forum after forum.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Teseren View Post
                You are the person who refuses to enter into honest discussion, refuses to accept any historian or document that proves you are wrong, and repeatedly tries to steer all topics back to one or two subjects.

                You have still to answer me in the previous thread about why you lied by claiming it was Austria that refused Grey's suggestion of the Four Power Conference when in fact it was Bethmann. Others have even more outstanding points you have refused to address, oddly enough the points you refuse to address on forum after forum.
                Fay devotes six pages to the Four Power Conference and Germany's response. If you would trouble yourself to do some homework you would know that the issue is too complex to be addressed by a two-paragraph post. (Hint: Bethmann had very good reason for opposing this suggestion as did Austria.)

                In any case, there is little point in addressing the infantile humor of which Idajw is so fond. Likewise, throwing revisionists under the bus is an exercise in futility as an entire fleet of London double deckers would not suffice for the purpose.

                Cogent argument is grist for the mill. B.S belongs in cow pastures.
                "We have met the enemy and he is us." Pogo

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Teseren View Post
                  You are the person who refuses to enter into honest discussion, refuses to accept any historian or document that proves you are wrong, and repeatedly tries to steer all topics back to one or two subjects.

                  You have still to answer me in the previous thread about why you lied by claiming it was Austria that refused Grey's suggestion of the Four Power Conference when in fact it was Bethmann. Others have even more outstanding points you have refused to address, oddly enough the points you refuse to address on forum after forum.
                  Fay devotes six pages to the Four Power Conference and Germany's response. If you would trouble yourself to do some homework you would know that the issue is too complex to be addressed by a two-paragraph post. (Hint: Bethmann had very good reason for opposing this suggestion as did Austria.)

                  In any case, there is little point in addressing the silly, infantile humor of which Ijadw is so fond. Likewise, throwing revisionists under the bus is an exercise in futility as an entire fleet of London double deckers would not suffice for the purpose.

                  Cogent argument is grist for the mill. Bulls#t belongs in cow pastures.
                  Last edited by peterhof; 09 Dec 12, 18:05.
                  "We have met the enemy and he is us." Pogo

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by peterhof View Post
                    Fay devotes six pages to the Four Power Conference and Germany's response. If you would trouble yourself to do some homework you would know that the issue is too complex to be addressed by a two-paragraph post. (Hint: Bethmann had very good reason for opposing this suggestion as did Austria.)

                    In any case, there is little point in addressing the infantile humor of which Idajw is so fond. Likewise, throwing revisionists under the bus is an exercise in futility as an entire fleet of London double deckers would not suffice for the purpose.

                    Cogent argument is grist for the mill. B.S belongs in cow pastures.

                    Austria did not reject the suggestion, Bethmann did.

                    The fact you claimed Austria rejected something they never saw does not require looking at Fay to get an answer as the claim rests with yourself.

                    You said Austria rejected the claim when in fact it was Bethmann, so now tell us why you said that?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Teseren View Post
                      Austria did not reject the suggestion, Bethmann did.

                      The fact you claimed Austria rejected something they never saw does not require looking at Fay to get an answer as the claim rests with yourself.

                      You said Austria rejected the claim when in fact it was Bethmann, so now tell us why you said that?
                      Okay Teseren. Sharpen your pencil and sit up straight. History class is in session.

                      Fay wrote: Germany rejected Grey's Conference for several reasons. She had not quite abandoned her hope, though she was to do so in a few hours, that the Austro-Serb conflict could be treated as one to be "localized." She hoped, as Jagow told Goschen, that the "direct conversations" which were being opened between St. Petersburg and Vienna, might prove a more satisfactory method of averting trouble between these two countries. She [Germany] also knew that a Conference would not be palatable to her ally, for Austria retained bitter memories of the decisions of the London Conference during the Balkan Wars, and of its impotency in enforcing its decisions against Serbia. Bethmann naturally feared that in such a Conference of four Powers as Grey proposed, Germany would inevitably be in a minority of one to three; Italy would side with the Triple Entente rather than with her nominal allies, and so Germany at the Conference would stand alone in representing Austria's point of view against England, France, and Italy." (Bethmann-Hollweg, Betrachtungen zum Weltkrieg, I, 133, 144)

                      I have always wondered (haven't you?) why Grey would submit such an unsatisfactory proposal which he had to know would be rejected.

                      Fay severely criticized Bethmann for this rejection, but he chastised Poincare far more severely for rejecting Grey's earlier proposal for "direct conversations" between Austria and Russia - a rejection far more significant than Bethmann's. This same suggestion was put forward by Pourtales and resulted in a long and fruitful conference between Sasonov and Szapary.

                      The very next day saw the start of Bethmann's long string of telegrams to Vienna demanding that she negotiate and threatening her with abandonment if she refused. Where, meanwhile, was Entente pressure on Russia?
                      Last edited by peterhof; 09 Dec 12, 21:00.
                      "We have met the enemy and he is us." Pogo

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by peterhof View Post
                        Okay Teseren. Sharpen your pencil and sit up straight. History class is in session.

                        Fay wrote: Germany rejected Grey's Conference for several reasons. She had not quite abandoned her hope, though she was to do so in a few hours, that the Austro-Serb conflict could be treated as one to be "localized." She hoped, as Jagow told Goschen, that the "direct conversations" which were being opened between St. Petersburg and Vienna, might prove a more satisfactory method of averting trouble between these two countries. She [Germany] also knew that a Conference would not be palatable to her ally, for Austria retained bitter memories of the decisions of the London Conference during the Balkan Wars, and of its impotency in enforcing its decisions against Serbia. Bethmann naturally feared that in such a Conference of four Powers as Grey proposed, Germany would inevitably be in a minority of one to three; Italy would side with the Triple Entente rather than with her nominal allies, and so Germany at the Conference would stand alone in representing Austria's point of view against England, France, and Italy." (Bethmann-Hollweg, Betrachtungen zum Weltkrieg, I, 133, 144)
                        None of which answers why you wrote the following,

                        Originally posted by peterhof View Post
                        The proposal for a Conference of Ambassadors at London was sent out to Paris, Berlin, and Rome on July 26, 3:00 P.M. Austria rejected it on account of her unhappy experience with this procedure after the Balkan Wars.
                        That is untrue, it is not what happened or what Fay said happened so trying to quote him on why Bethmann did as he did, as this does not explain why you wrote made such a claim.

                        Why are you unwilling to answer why you said it was Austria that rejected the suggestion when it was Bethmann that did so???

                        As to the points about Grey, I will answer that when you bother to answer my actual question and not ignore it.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Teseren View Post
                          None of which answers why you wrote the following,



                          That is untrue, it is not what happened or what Fay said happened so trying to quote him on why Bethmann did as he did, as this does not explain why you wrote made such a claim.

                          Why are you unwilling to answer why you said it was Austria that rejected the suggestion when it was Bethmann that did so???

                          As to the points about Grey, I will answer that when you bother to answer my actual question and not ignore it.
                          Bilinski: "The course of the London Conference was so horrible to recall to memory, that all public opinion would reject the repetition of such a spectacle." This Austrian attitude was well known and meant that Austria would reject any such solution by whomever offered. It was therefore Austria who rejected out of hand any Conference of Ambassadors.

                          Furthermore, as Fay wrote:

                          Sir Edward made to Russia his proposal for mediation between Austria and Russia by the four less directly interested Powers. (July 25) In view of the sweeping statements often made that Germany blocked all Sir Edward's peace proposals, it is interesting to note the attitude of Germany and compare it with that of France and Russia. Germany at once expressed approval. And Germany "was quite ready to fall in with your [Grey's] suggestion as to the four Powers working in favor of moderation at Vienna and St. Petersburg." (Rumbold to Grey, July 25, 3 P.M.., B.D., 116) After receiving this, Lichnowsky informed Grey, who was out of town, in a written note: "My Government accepts your suggested mediation a quatre."


                          Fay concludes:

                          "Thus, it was not so much Germany, as Russia and France, who failed to give approval to Sir Edward Grey's proposal for mediation by the four Powers if Austria and Russia should mobilize."

                          Now the question is for you to answer: Why did Russia and France fail to give approval to Grey's several proposals which were approved by Germany? The later Conference of Ambassadors, initially rejected by Bethmann for the reasons stated above, was later accepted in modified form.
                          "We have met the enemy and he is us." Pogo

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by peterhof View Post
                            Cogent argument is grist for the mill. Bulls#t belongs in cow pastures.
                            You keep chewing on the cud, expelling the methane and filling the pastures kiddo!

                            What is very noticeable is your failure to properly cite anyone you quote, whether on discussion boards or in your e-book. Choosing long-dead historians over modern ones because their estates are unlikely to sue for plagiarism, assuming their work is still in copyright that is, is pretty ****-poor really.
                            Signing out.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Here we must make a distinction betwen the war party in Britain: Nicolson, Crowe, Grey and Churchill and majority of the Liberal government of Asquith. The majority of the cabinet did not care what happened in Europe. Most important of all the vast majority of British had no interest or education about the endless stream of political garbage coming from the continent.

                              Screaming fanatics promoting an advanced naval program with their "We want eight and we won't wait" represented a minority of Parliament, who were carefully organized to demonstrate in the navy's program, much to the delight of the rich industrial warmongers. These people only served to promote the 'military-industrial complex' which the conservative American president General Dwight Eisenhower warned about in 1959, about his own country.

                              There was a military industrial complex in Britain during the 1900s. It chose Germany as its enemy, for reasons I do not understand. When France has almost gone to war with you over Fashoda in 1898; and you have supported Japan, and prevented Zyinovy Rodzhestvensky's Baltic fleet from passing through the Suez canalin 1905. How is it that the war party in Britain justifies its sudden friendship with Russia not five years after the Battle of Tsushima?
                              Last edited by Nickuru; 09 Dec 12, 23:35. Reason: spelling
                              When looking for the reason why things go wrong, never rule out stupidity, Murphy's Law Nș 8
                              Those who do not remember history are doomed to repeat it. George Santayana
                              "Ach du schwein" a German parrot captured at Bukoba GEA the only prisoner taken

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X