Well, it would strike an unprejudiced person that if this were true,
there is a great deal of doubt put upon Mr. Lloyd George's former
statements by Mr. Lloyd George himself. Persons who plot carefully,
skilfully, insidiously and clandestinely, do not glide; they do not
stagger or stumble, especially through folly. They keep going, as we in
America were assured that the German Government did keep going, right up
to The Day of their own choosing. Moreover, they are not likely to be
headed off by discussion; highwaymen are notoriously curt in their
speech and if one attempts discussion with them they become irritable
and peremptory. This is the invariable habit of highwaymen. Besides, if
discussion would have averted war in 1914, why was it not forthcoming?
Certainly not through any fault of the Austrian Government, which made
every concession, as the British Ambassador's report shows,
notwithstanding its grievance against Serbia was a just one. Certainly
not through any fault of the German Government, which never refused
discussion and held its hand with all the restraint possible under the
circumstances just described. Well, then, how is it so clear that German
responsibility for the war should be treated as a _chose jugée_?
VII
People who have a clear and simple case do not talk in this fashion.
Picking now at random among the utterances of politicians and
propagandists, we find an assorted job-lot of aims assigned and causes
alleged, and in all of them there is that curious, incomprehensible and
callous disregard of the power of conviction that a straight story
always exercises, if you have one to tell. In November, 1917, when the
Foreign Office was being pestered by demands for a statement of the
Allied war-aims, Lord Robert Cecil said in the House of Commons, that
the restitution of Alsace and Lorraine to France was a "well-understood
war-aim from the moment we entered the war." As things have turned out,
it is an odd coincidence how so many of these places that have iron or
coal or oil in them seem to represent a well-understood war-aim. Less
than a month before, in October, 1917, General Smuts said that to his
mind the one great dominating war-aim was "the end of militarism, the
end of standing armies." Well, the Allies won the war, but judging by
results, this dominating war-aim seems rather to have been lost sight
of. Mr. Lloyd George again on another occasion, said in the House of
Commons that "self-determination was one of the principles for which we
entered the war ... a principle from which we have never departed since
the beginning of the war." This, too, seems an aim that for some reason
the victorious nations have not quite realized; indeed in some cases, as
in Ireland, for example, there has been no great alacrity shown about
trying to realize it. Viscount Bryce said that the war sprang from the
strife of races and religions in the Balkan countries, and from the
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account