Need A Historical 2nd Opinion RE: Churchill, Mussolini, Roosevelt. TomB Please.

[twyacht]

Alright TomB, this "historian" is French,....two strikes in my book, but do you know of any other reference to this admiration of Mussolini by Churchill, and Roosevelt? Headline does not reveal the whole article.

http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/ChurchillMussoliniassassinationWorld-War-II/2010/09/03/id/369209

Historian: Churchill Targeted Mussolini for Assassination to Cover Own Tracks
Friday, 03 Sep 2010 03:15 PM
Article Font Size  

British Prime Minister Winston Churchill targeted Italian dictator Benito Mussolini for assassination in part to get rid of secret, potentially compromising letters he had written to the fascist leader, according to a leading French historian.

Churchill had expressed admiration for Mussolini in the letters and wanted them quashed, says Pierre Milza, an expert on fascist Italy, according to a report in the London Telegraph on Friday. He wrote the letters before the outbreak of World War II.

“There is no doubt, judging by his public declarations back in the 1920s and early 1930s, that Churchill was a fan of Mussolini. Roosevelt, too,” the Telegraph quotes Milza as saying.

“Churchill even once said: 'Fascism has rendered a service to the entire world . . . If I were Italian, I am sure I would have been with you entirely,’” said Milza, author of “The Last Days of Mussolini.

“But that was understandable in 1927, as then a fascist did not mean a friend of Hitler and accomplice to genocide. But when you are head of state and legitimate war hero of the British people, you don’t really want all that put up in lights.”

The official story of Mussolini’s demise is that Italian Communist partisans seized him and his mistress, Clara Petacci, were seized on Lake Como as they tried to flee to Switzerland in April 1945. Both were shot and their bodies were displayed in a Milan square.

Milza’s book notes a theory suggesting that Churchill vacationed under a false name only a few miles from where Mussolini was seized so he could be close enough to help dispose of the letters.

For the full story in the London Telegraph — Go Here Now.

***

Any credibility to this? Really?... I know Fascism, caught the attention of many a nations political leaders/and countries, in the 20's and 30's, hindsight being 20/20, we saw where it led. But could Roosevelt, who also violated Executive powers, and suspended habeus corpus, been enthralled by this? Even Churchill?

Others feel free to chime in, if they can back it up.

Thanks Tom.

[fullautovalmet76]

I'm not Tom, but here's the link to the Telegraph article:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/world-war-2/7978285/Winston-Churchill-ordered-assassination-of-Mussolini-to-protect-compromising-letters.html

And here's another link to a blog from the same paper attempting to debunk what was written in the earlier article:

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/guywalters/100052284/no-no-no-churchill-did-not-order-the-assassination-of-mussolini/

TomB will give you the low down....

Take care,
FullAuto

[tombogan03884]

As far as I know WC thought Il Duce was a thug.
His hatred of Hitler was the only thing that softened his anti Soviet position.
It's possible he wrote such letters, but he was never that sort of "Hands on" Commander, He prefered to meddle from London.
The idea of fat, usually drunk, 70ish, Winny waving around his cigar in the middle of a commando raid is flat out ludicris.

[fightingquaker13]

As far as I know WC thought Il Duce was a thug.
His hatred of Hitler was the only thing that softened his anti Soviet position.
It's possible he wrote such letters, but he was never that sort of "Hands on" Commander, He prefered to meddle from London.
The idea of fat, usually drunk, 70ish, Winny waving around his cigar in the middle of a commando raid is flat out ludicris.

Not to mention that I highly doubt the Army would havr allowed it to happen even if he wanted to go. The war was still on, Hitler was still a threat. What idiot would let their CinC expose himself like that even if he did want to relive Omdurman?
FQ13

[Pathfinder]

Not to mention that I highly doubt the Army would havr allowed it to happen even if he wanted to go. The war was still on, Hitler was still a threat. What idiot would let their CinC expose himself like that even if he did want to relive Omdurman?
FQ13

I agree, but do have to point out that Churchill went to North Africa - usually after the fighting ceased and usually from safe Egypt. But yes, no one would have allowed him to go to northern Italy at that time. Also, that part of Italy was still pretty wild country - think Wild West only more dangerous - with armed bands like the partisans of questionable loyalties everywhere.

Also Churchill was a relative nobody in the 20's, maybe head of the Admiralty. Ambitious? On the hump? Yes, but also despised by most of the political establishment. He won the Prime Ministership almost by default when Lord Halifax could not come up with someone more acceptable after Chamberlain was drummed out by his own party.

I call total BS on the article.

OTOH, as PM, Churchill is said to have destroyed a telegram from Himmler late in the war as Himmler tried to make a deal with Churchill and other western leaders. Why destroy something like that?

[Sponsor]

[twyacht]

I read the story, and the second link FullAuto posted has some interesting comments. This seems all too late in the war to have actually occurred.

Some hidden trunks thrown in a lake, by Churchill? Letters dated Apr. 1940?? or earlier?. Churchill wasn't PM until May.

Seems some of the "Weekly World News" types, (mother was also an alien type stories) seems to have tried to get a flash of glory.

Oh, and he (author)  is French.

Just checkin' Thanks guys.

[DonWorsham]

In the 1920's almost everyone thought Mussolini had it right in the way he ran his country. I'm reading a book now, The Forgotten Man, and while is it not about Mussolini, it does go in to how the western leaders thought of him. There were alot of folks big on Stalin also.

[tt11758]

OTOH, as PM, Churchill is said to have destroyed a telegram from Himmler late in the war as Himmler tried to make a deal with Churchill and other western leaders. Why destroy something like that?

Himmler was trying to negotiate a surrender of the Third Reich with ONLY the western Allies.  Politically, that was unacceptable, since the Russians were already knocking on the door of the German Chancellry, and the war in the Pacific was still growing strong.  The west didn't feel they could afford to piss off Stalin at that point in history.

Looking back, I personally believe the world would've been better off had Patton been allowed to start the war with Russia that he wanted to at the end of the european campaign.  Our troops were already there, and the reds were tired.  Not to mention, WE had Patton.   

[fightingquaker13]

Himmler was trying to negotiate a surrender of the Third Reich with ONLY the western Allies.  Politically, that was unacceptable, since the Russians were already knocking on the door of the German Chancellry, and the war in the Pacific was still growing strong.  The west didn't feel they could afford to piss off Stalin at that point in history.

Looking back, I personally believe the world would've been better off had Patton been allowed to start the war with Russia that he wanted to at the end of the european campaign.  Our troops were already there, and the reds were tired.  Not to mention, WE had Patton.   

True, but they had Zhukov, a ramped up manufacturing base producing tons of T-34s, and a much shorter logistics train. Plus, both populations were war weary, the difference being that the the Sovs would shoot any anti-war movement types on sight. True we had the bomb, but even we weren't sure it would really work. Shaking hands with artillery at the river Elbe might have been the right thing to do, but it wasn't the smart thing. Besides which, we got the bastards anyway. It just took a while.
FQ13

[tombogan03884]

True, but they had Zhukov, a ramped up manufacturing base producing tons of T-34s, and a much shorter logistics train. Plus, both populations were war weary, the difference being that the the Sovs would shoot any anti-war movement types on sight. True we had the bomb, but even we weren't sure it would really work. Shaking hands with artillery at the river Elbe might have been the right thing to do, but it wasn't the smart thing. Besides which, we got the bastards anyway. It just took a while.
FQ13

And don't forget the tens of thousands of tons of lend lease material from US. 1/3 of the Red Air Force were flying P - 39's, not to mention, trucks and supplies.