• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

"What if??" A thread for people who like to speculate

From a strictly military point of view I suppose you scenario has some
merit,we may have done even better.From what we discovered after
1989 the tip of the Soviet spear was sharp and bright however what
was behind that tip was inefficient, worn and riven with corruption.
Add to that is the fact that following a couple of Russian setbacks
the Poles,Czechs and the Hungarians would have become very reluctant
allies, they may have decided that now would have been a very good
time to settle a couple of scores with their occupiers.
The airwar may not have gone so well as you claim,the Nato airforces
were equipped with plenty of F4s and F104s 2 very "not fit for purpose"
aircraft, one needs only look at the Vietnam air ops to see how poorly
both these aircraft did against a somewhat less than "first team"
equipped with various types of Mig.
Where the whole scenario comes apart is in the political arena.The
European governments IMHO would never have sanctioned a preemptive
strike even if the evidence of an upcoming Soviet attack had been
staring them in the face,they would instead have argued against the
evidence particularly if this evidence had been supplied by the US.
The "better red than dead" crowd would have attempted to stop
Nato troops from reaching their assembly areas,the railway union
in Germany would have paralysed the whole system and the large
number of Soviet sympathisers in West Germany would have ensured
that any element of surprise would have been lost.The truth of the
matter is that our Nato allies were even more unreliable that those
in the Warsaw Pact.
                          Regards 
 
Just a side note: You let german Tornado´s escort the Cargo plane´s. That´s highly unlikely as we only have/had IDS, RECCE and ECR version´s. No ADV´s. So if you use german escorts they are most probably Phantom´s.

Regards,
ironduke57
 
ironduke57 said:
Just a side note: You let german Tornado´s escort the Cargo plane´s. That´s highly unlikely as we only have/had IDS, RECCE and ECR version´s. No ADV´s. So if you use german escorts they are most probably Phantom´s.

Regards,
ironduke57
Actually, I didn't let them escort the cargo planes, it was SACEUR ;D

(Thanks).  I knew that the Luftwaffe had (and still has) Tornadoes, but I figured that even the IDS and other variants still had the capability to conduct air/air missions.  Still, the idea of Phantoms flying escort never even popped into my head.

Cheers
 
time expired said:
From a strictly military point of view I suppose you scenario has some
merit,we may have done even better.From what we discovered after
1989 the tip of the Soviet spear was sharp and bright however what
was behind that tip was inefficient, worn and riven with corruption.
Add to that is the fact that following a couple of Russian setbacks
the Poles,Czechs and the Hungarians would have become very reluctant
allies, they may have decided that now would have been a very good
time to settle a couple of scores with their occupiers.
The airwar may not have gone so well as you claim,the Nato airforces
were equipped with plenty of F4s and F104s 2 very "not fit for purpose"
aircraft, one needs only look at the Vietnam air ops to see how poorly
both these aircraft did against a somewhat less than "first team"
equipped with various types of Mig.
Where the whole scenario comes apart is in the political arena.The
European governments IMHO would never have sanctioned a preemptive
strike even if the evidence of an upcoming Soviet attack had been
staring them in the face,they would instead have argued against the
evidence particularly if this evidence had been supplied by the US.
The "better red than dead" crowd would have attempted to stop
Nato troops from reaching their assembly areas,the railway union
in Germany would have paralysed the whole system and the large
number of Soviet sympathisers in West Germany would have ensured
that any element of surprise would have been lost.The truth of the
matter is that our Nato allies were even more unreliable that those
in the Warsaw Pact.
                          Regards
Thanks for the feedback.  As for the minor Pact allies, the Hungarians aren't even brought to the table.  The Czechs are in defensive modes only.  Only the Poles and the Germans (of the eastern variety) are in on the attack plans.  The Poles cease offensive ops after the I GE Corps finalises the link up with Berlin, so...
As for the air war, yes, NATO had plenty of F 104s and F 4s.  I wouldn't look at Vietnam for an indicator, as the US already did that in the 1970's and applied "lessons learned".  NATO also had F 15s, F 16s and the like.  Canada was just beginning to field the CF-188.  Also, never discount surprise (such as the F-117, which achieved it's initial operational capability in 1983). 
As for the politics, one never knows.  The evidence of the build up in this case was provided by the Pact themselves when the barred access to Berlin. Also, I'm fairly certain that Herr Kohl would have been adamant as I portrayed in this story.

Even though you may have felt that our NATO allies were less reliable than the Pact Allies, please note the major combatants: Federal Germans and the Americans.  The Brits are in reserve (perhaps there was an underlying reluctance on their part?).  The Dutch play a peripheral role, and other than the shot-down Hercules, Canada isn't mentioned. 

Finally, it's just a story.  I tried to write something for people to enjoy.  I hope I succeeded.
 
Midnight Rambler
                    I was somewhat confused about the time frame
of your scenerio.
                    Regards
 
Midnight Rambler said:
Actually, I didn't let them escort the cargo planes, it was SACEUR ;D

(Thanks).  I knew that the Luftwaffe had (and still has) Tornadoes, but I figured that even the IDS and other variants still had the capability to conduct air/air missions.  Still, the idea of Phantoms flying escort never even popped into my head.

Cheers

AFAIK they are able to fire Sidewinder and IRIS-T but that´s it on AA missiles for the german Tornado´s.
--
If the war goes longer please let the Luftwaffe have some MBB Lampyridae fighter´s:
- http://www.rp-one.net/lampyridae/lampy.html
- http://www.f-104.de/exponates/english/exp_lampyridae_eng.html
They look so cool!

Regards,
ironduke57
 
ironduke57 said:
AFAIK they are able to fire Sidewinder and IRIS-T but that´s it on AA missiles for the german Tornado´s.
--
If the war goes longer please let the Luftwaffe have some MBB Lampyridae fighter´s:
- http://www.rp-one.net/lampyridae/lampy.html
- http://www.f-104.de/exponates/english/exp_lampyridae_eng.html
They look so cool!

Regards,
ironduke57:0

If you go that route, then CF-105 "Arrows" have to be included as well....;)
 
Kat Stevens said:
Actually, closer to 26 000 tanks crewed by poorly trained conscripts, vs roughly 11 000 NATO tanks crewed by motivated volunteer soldiers.  In a conventional punchup, if Ivan didn't finish us off completely within 10 days or so, his odds of victory dropped rapidly.

Apparantly the Soviet Union itself had 53,000 tanks dating back to T54s with about 20,000 deployed in central Europe.  The other Warsaw Pact countries had somewhere around 6,000.  NATOS's European troops were mostly conscripts but probably better trained.  While Soviet troops failed miserably in Afghanistan they may very well have been highly motivated in a fight for their homeland as it would have been sold.



 
Thucydides said:
If you go that route, then CF-105 "Arrows" have to be included as well....;)

Except the Lampyridae would fit in the timeframe. The CF-105 not.

Regards,
ironduke57
 
ironduke57 said:
Except the Lampyridae would fit in the timframe. The CF-105 not.

Regards,
ironduke57

Sure they would, on their third life extension program.    ;D

Of course, it's not like if they were fielded and actually lived up to the hype, that the WP wouldn't have spent any time, money or energy on matching technologies.
 
Dennis Ruhl said:
Apparantly the Soviet Union itself had 53,000 tanks dating back to T54s with about 20,000 deployed in central Europe.  The other Warsaw Pact countries had somewhere around 6,000.  NATOS's European troops were mostly conscripts but probably better trained.  While Soviet troops failed miserably in Afghanistan they may very well have been highly motivated in a fight for their homeland as it would have been sold.

53 000 Russian tanks in total, most of them antiques.  Not all of them were in Europe, don't forget Ivan had a pretty big land mass to dominate that would more than likely have rebelled as soon as the first tank unit headed West.  Every NATO gun in Europe was pointed East, not every Soviet gun was pointed West.
 
ironduke57 said:
Except the Lampyridae would fit in the timeframe. The CF-105 not.

Regards,
ironduke57

Considering how long we have made our other equipment last, having Arrows in service in 1985 would work out in this timeline (they would have been introduced into Squadron service starting in the early 1960's). Consider we still use CF-18's in front line service in 2009 and they reached service in 1982.

Oh, our Navy should be hunting Soviet submarines with FHE-400 series hydrofoils as well...... ;D
 
Thucydides,pray tell what role do you see the CF 105 fullfilling
in a Euro war in 1985?.The Arrow was a one trick pony a all
weather interceptor designed to shoot down,with missiles,a
high flying bomber.This threat dissapeared shortly after the
CF 105 would have gone into service,with the shotdown of
Gary Powers U2 by a Russian SAM.
                            Regards
 
Perhaps he envisioned the air frame seeing other roles developed over the hypothetical 30 years of the projected lifespan in this discussion.

 
Michael O'Leary said:
Perhaps he envisioned the air frame seeing other roles developed over the hypothetical 30 years of the projected lifespan in this discussion.
Exactly.  The CF-104 "Starfighter" was designed for high altitude intercept, adapted for low level, high speed nuclear strike, and ended up in the close support role (I believe).

Not being the air dude expert here (After all, I had Luftwaffe Tornadoes in the escort role!  I mean, what was I thinking?  LOL
 
Hitler's Britain.... a movie that shows what it would be like after the war for the uk and what the Nazis had in store.
 
Reviving a fine old thread, although formating makes this post pretty disjointed, go to link:

http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/home/moslive/article-2053692/Resistance-When-Nazis-took-Wales-new-film-Britains-secret-underground-army.html

When the Nazis took Wales: The truth behind Resistance, the new film about Britain's secret underground army
By DAN DAVIES
Last updated at 10:01 PM on 29th October 2011

In 1940 Churchill built a top secret army: a British resistance movement primed for a Nazi occupation. History tells us it was never needed – but a new movie imagines a very different scenario...

Resistance shines a light on the little-known story of the British Resistance Organisation (BRO). This top-secret and highly trained civilian army was designed to wreak havoc on occupying enemy forces

Autumn, 1944: Russia has fallen, the D-Day landings have failed and the German Wehrmacht has invaded Britain. The country is now under enemy occupation. Panzer divisions and columns of Nazi troops sweep westwards, striking fear into a demoralised nation whose forces lie decimated across the shell-pocked landscape of mainland Europe.

In a remote valley in the Black Mountains of Wales, farmers’ wives awake to discover that the men of the village have vanished during the night. Like women across Britain, they silently suspect their husbands, brothers and sons have melted away to join the Resistance, whose members are hiding out in the hills and woods, awaiting the inevitable arrival of German troops.

Although this might sound like just another imagined account of what might have been had Britain failed to hold Hitler at bay, Resistance, a new British film starring Michael Sheen, famous for his portrayals of Tony Blair and Brian Clough, shines a light on the little-known story of the British Resistance Organisation (BRO). This top-secret and highly trained civilian army was designed to wreak havoc on occupying enemy forces.
The author of the novel the film is based on insists this fictional past is based on ‘what was, at one point in time, an all too possible future’.
Owen Sheers explains his book was inspired by the stories he heard of wartime farmers in his native Wales going on training missions in the dead of night, armed with caches of weapons that were stashed away in elaborate underground bunkers in the woods. Such stories, it transpires, were not the stuff of local folklore, but rooted in the truth.

Established in 1940 on the orders of Winston Churchill, the British Resistance Organisation was the government’s highly classified response to the threat of imminent invasion following the evacuation of British troops at Dunkirk. Churchill stated that regular defences required ‘supplementing with guerrilla-type troops’ that would ‘be responsible for hitting the enemy in the comparatively soft spots behind zones of concentrated attack’.
The aim was to deny mobility and disrupt vital supply lines.

‘The order for a government-funded and -trained insurgency was extremely controversial,’ says Sheers. ‘It casts a chilling new light on Churchill’s 1940 speech in which he vowed that “we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender”. Churchill was effectively advocating continuing acts of sabotage regardless of the reprisals.’

Sheers goes on to explain that members of these Auxiliary Units recruited throughout Britain were informed that their average life expectancy would be two weeks once the enemy had been engaged.

They were also under orders to carry out selective executions of collaborators – even if they happened to be family members, friends or colleagues – if they compromised the security of a patrol.

‘We all assume we’d want to resist,’ says Sheers, ‘but the reality opens up some difficult moral questions.’

Colonel Colin McVean Gubbins was put in charge of recruiting about a dozen regional ‘Intelligence Officers’, who were in turn ordered to enlist this predominantly rural network of civilian saboteurs.

More than 100 cells were formed, each operating in areas with a 15-mile radius.
Units were divided into Special Duty Sections, who were required to gather intelligence and leave reports in secret locations, and Operational Patrols, or ‘combat units’, which were smaller groups of four to eight men who would carry out attacks using plastic explosives, bombs ingeniously concealed in tobacco tins and tyre-bursting mines disguised as lumps of coal.

The men recruited for operational duties were selected chiefly for their knowledge of the local terrain – farmers, poachers and gamekeepers among them. Having signed the Official Secrets Act, they received intensive training in guerrilla-warfare techniques, including unarmed combat, sabotage and demolition, on weekend courses at Coleshill House, the Auxiliary Units’ HQ near Swindon.

Colonel Gubbins published several training manuals, including ‘The Art of Guerrilla Warfare’. This set out nine principles to which the Auxiliary Units were to adhere, outlining the necessity of going to ground, operating under the cover of darkness and only embarking on missions when there was a secure line of retreat.

Some of the weaponry made available to resistance fighters on display at the Museum of the British Resistance Organisation in Suffolk
Other, similar booklets were also issued to the units, with innocuous titles such as ‘The Countryman’s Diary’ belying their deadly contents. Some of the men who read them would go on to join the SAS years after the Auxiliary units were shut down in 1944.

Among the trainees was Les Bulley, a lathe setter in a  munitions factory in Glascoed, Monmouthshire, just a few miles from the Olchon Valley, where Resistance is set. Bulley and his brother Charles were members of Jonah Patrol, one of eight Auxiliary Units in the county. They were issued with Home Guard uniforms, as a cover for their frequent nocturnal activities, and told to wait for ‘when the balloon went up’.
Sallie Mogford, a 50-year-old civil servant who acted as an adviser on the film,  only learned of her grandfather’s involvement in the British Resistance Organisation after his death in 2002.

‘I was shocked,’  she says. ‘Both he and his brother Charles were very gentle people who loved the country and were never aggressive. It’s hard to imagine them as trained killers and saboteurs, but the truth is that with their commando-style training and the weaponry  they had, they were better-equipped than most of the regular soldiers.

‘Some time after my grandfather’s death, I visited Oradour-sur-Glane in France. Hundreds of men, women and children had been murdered there by the Germans during the war because they suspected a resistance cell was operating from the village.

'If the Germans had invaded Britain and my grandfather had been called into action, this could well have been the fate that awaited my mother, grandmother and aunts.’

Mogford is a member of the Coleshill Auxiliary Research Team (CART), a group of volunteers that has been uncovering the story of Britain’s secret wartime army since 2009. CART’s investigations have also unearthed the remains of many of the 500-plus underground bunkers from which these patrols would have launched their clandestine raids on the enemy.

These concealed bunkers, or Operational Bases (OBs), were dug out by Auxiliary Unit members, or in some cases created by the Royal Engineers. Accessed via a camouflaged entrance, they generally consisted of a corrugated-iron main chamber fitted out with bunks, a cooking stove and provisions to sustain a patrol for up to a month, as well as a smaller secondary chamber and an emergency escape tunnel.

Some were more elaborate, with chimneys incorporated into hollow tree trunks or spring-loaded entrance hatches designed to look like woodpiles, while others existed in disused mines or caves. In Kent, the architect of some of the most ingenious bunker designs was none other than Captain Peter Fleming, older brother of James Bond creator Ian Fleming.

(Indeed, the author refers to an ‘ingenious secret bunker’ hidden in a woodland setting in a Bond short story, most recently published in a collection under the title Quantum Of Solace. Fleming had obviously been inspired by the work of his younger brother.)

Some 20 miles away from the steep escarpments of the Olchon Valley, the remains of the OB for Jonah Patrol can still be seen off a wooded path in Wentwood Forest. The second chamber and tunnel have now collapsed, although much of the brickwork remains intact.

In an early scene in Resistance we see a group of civilian fighters being pulled out of just such a bunker by Nazi soldiers before being executed.
Thankfully, the Germans never did manage to invade Britain, meaning the brave men of the Auxiliary Units weren’t made to suffer a similar fate.

‘Resistance’ is out on November 25.

For more information on the Auxiliary Units, visit coleshillhouse.com

Established in 1940 on the orders of Winston Churchill, the BRO was the government's highly classified response to the threat of imminent invasion following the evacuation of British troops at Dunkirk


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/moslive/article-2053692/Resistance-When-Nazis-took-Wales-new-film-Britains-secret-underground-army.html#ixzz1cIO5xjyW
 
A bit of speculation from the UK Daily Mail on the possible future of Europe. Reproduced under the relevant sections of the Copyright Act.

Europe at war - 2018. German troops storm Greece. Putin's tanks crush Latvia. France humbles the British Army. etc...

The date is October 29, 2018, and Britain faces its darkest hour. On the battlefields of Europe, our Armed Forces have been humiliated. In makeshift prison camps on the continent, thousands of our young men and women sit forlornly, testament to the collapse of our ambitions.

From the killing grounds of Belgium to the scarred streets of Athens, a continent continues to bleed. And, in the east, the Russian bear inexorably tightens its grip, an old empire rising from the wreckage of the European dream.

The crisis had been 'made in London', Sarkozy told French television in August 2016. By 2017, Britain's land forces were down to just 75,000 Yesterday, after a run of military defeats unequalled in our history, the Prime Minister offered his resignation. There is talk of a National Government, but no one has any illusions of another Churchill waiting in the wings.

In suburban streets across Britain, old men and callow teenagers are digging defensive positions in the cold autumn air. But with equipment scarce and ammunition non-existent, the Home Guard would barely last a week. And all the time, across the Channel, enemy forces make their final preparations for the inevitable invasion. Some talk of surrender;  no one speaks of victory. Less than ten years ago, millions still believed in a peaceful, united Europe. How did it come to this?

When future historians look back on our humiliation, they will surely judge that the turning point was the last week in October 2011.

Largely forgotten today, the main event was yet another interminable European summit in Brussels — the 14th attempt to ‘save the euro’ in just 20 months. Hoping to secure German support for a massive one trillion euro rescue package, Chancellor Angela Merkel gave her parliamentarians a chillingly prescient warning.

‘No one should believe that another half century of peace in Europe is a given — it’s not,’ she said.

‘So I say again: if the euro collapses, Europe collapses. That can’t happen.’

At the time, many observers scoffed that she was being absurdly melodramatic. But, seven years on, no one is laughing.

What Mrs Merkel had grasped — and what many European leaders refused to recognise — was that the Continent was threatened by a toxic combination of spiralling debt, economic recession, surging anarchism and a pervasive collapse of confidence in capitalism itself.

'No one should believe that another half century of peace in Europe is a given - it's not,' said Angela Merkel

That week, even St Paul’s Cathedral in London — whose survival had been a memorable symbol of British defiance during the last European war — was shut down by anti-capitalist protesters. At the time it seemed a tiny, even trivial incident. But it was merely a taste of what was coming.

For by February 2012, it was terrifyingly obvious that the latest eurozone package had failed. In Greece, protests against the government’s austerity measures had turned into daily running battles, while much of Western Europe had now sunk back into recession. A month later, after an angry mob had invaded the Greek parliament itself, Greece announced it was withdrawing from the euro. Almost overnight, the European markets were hit by the biggest losses in financial history.
As law and order collapsed on the streets of Athens, France and Germany sent in 5,000 ‘peacekeepers’ to restore calm. But when they came under attack from petrol-bomb throwing demonstrators, it was clear that more drastic action might be needed.

Meanwhile, the Greek collapse was sending shockwaves across Europe.

With the markets turning their attention to Italy, and Silvio Berlusconi’s beleaguered government struggling to maintain order, Europe’s fifth largest economy was suddenly at risk.

In the summer of 2012, massive anti-capitalist demonstrations in major Italian cities turned into outright rebellion. And when Berlusconi sent in the army to maintain order, the first bombs began exploding in the banks of Rome, Milan and Turin.

Anti-capitalism had caught the imagination of a generation. And the bomb alert at the Bank of England —when the entire City had to be evacuated after warnings from the so-called ‘Guy Fawkes Anti-Cuts Collective’ — was merely the first of many. July 2012, three people were killed by a bank bomb in Frankfurt. A month later, 15 people were killed in Dublin. And in September, in tragic events that will never be forgotten, 36 people were killed by explosions across the City of London.

By now demonstrations and riots were fixtures on the evening news. And as Germany and France struggled to keep the eurozone alive, there were the first signs of a disturbing new authoritarianism.

In Italy, where the Berlusconi government had declared a permanent state of emergency, some cities had degenerated into virtual civil war. And when Berlusconi formally requested assistance from his European partners, the French president Nicolas Sarkozy — who had narrowly won re-election earlier that year — was only too keen to flex his muscles.

By the end of 2012, there were an estimated 15,000 French troops on the streets of northern Italy — as well as a further 14,000 ‘European peacekeepers’ in Athens and Thessaloniki. Slowly but surely, the continent was sliding towards armed confrontation.

In Greece, protests against the government's austerity measures had turned into daily running battles

By the following year, a peaceful settlement to the implosion of the European Union seemed increasingly unlikely.

The last major Brussels summit, in March 2013, broke up acrimoniously when many smaller European nations refused to accept Germany’s demands for greater fiscal austerity and economic integration. With alarming speed, the threads of peaceful unity were unravelling. 

With the European economy heading into depression, nationalist movements were gaining support across the Continent. Skinheads were on the march; in cities from Madrid to Budapest, foreigners and immigrants were the victims of violent abuse.
'Europe's crisis is Russia's opportunity,' Putin announced.
'The days of humiliation are over; our empire will be restored.'

At another time, the terrible Spanish riots in the spring of 2014, when 63 people were killed in a shocking outbreak of arson and looting, would have dominated the headlines.

But most people’s attention was focused further east. No country had been hit harder by the financial crisis than little Latvia, which by 2014 had an unemployment rate of more than 35 per cent. And with almost one in three of its citizens being ethnic Russians, economic frustration soon turned into nationalist confrontation.

On August 12, 2015, after days of fighting on the streets of Riga, the Russian army rumbled across the border. The Russians had come to ‘restore order’, Vladimir Putin assured the world.

But his statement to the Russian people told a different story.

‘Europe’s crisis is Russia’s opportunity,’ Putin announced. ‘The days of humiliation are over; our empire will be restored.’

Once, the West would have come to Latvia’s aid. It was, after all, a member of both the European Union and of Nato — though the new American isolationism meant that Nato membership was effectively worthless.

But since French troops were already committed to Greece and Italy, Paris refused to intervene.

Apocalyptic: Fear and suffering emerge from the wreckage of the European dream

And in London, the new Prime Minister, Ed Miliband, assured the nation that he would never commit British troops to help ‘a faraway country of which we know nothing’.

In Moscow, the message was clear. Six months later, Russian ‘peacekeepers’ crossed the border into Estonia, and in March 2016, Putin’s army occupied Lithuania, Belarus and Moldova.

When Brussels complained, the Kremlin pointed out that European peacekeepers were already on the streets of Athens, Rome and Madrid. Why, Putin asked, should the rules be any different in the east?

And, indeed, he had a point. Even in Paris, there was chilling evidence of a slide towards ruthless suppression of civil dissent — justified as a short-term measure to check the rise of anti-capitalist terrorism. Aided by Spanish and Italian auxiliaries, backed by German money and quietly supported by neo-imperialist Russia, the French army has encircled our expeditionary force on the other side of the Channel and cut it to shreds.

That summer, Sarkozy amended the French constitution so that he could seek a third term, claiming that stability mattered more than legal niceties. Now more than ever he seemed to see himself as the reincarnation of Napoleon Bonaparte, ostentatiously tucking his hand into his military-style greatcoat.

Back in October 2011, he had told David Cameron to ‘shut up’, claiming that Europe had ‘had enough’ of British advice. Now he seemed to have tipped over into outright Anglophobia.

The crisis had been ‘made in London’, Sarkozy told French television in August 2016.

‘But Britain’s day is done. The future lies in a Russian east and a European — that is to say, French — west.’

For some British newspapers, his words were proof of an unspoken alliance between Moscow and Paris, sweetened with Russian oil and gas money. And, by now, Napoleonic ambitions seemed to have gone to the French president’s head.

Five days before Christmas 2016, Sarkozy told a cheering crowd in Vichy that ‘all European Union members must fully embrace our project and join the euro, or they will pay the price’.

In Britain, his remarks provoked a storm of outrage. Many insiders suggested that left to his own devices, Ed Miliband would have been more than happy to join the euro. But, by now, the weak Prime Minister was almost completely ruled by his overweening Chancellor, Ed Balls, who insisted that Britain simply could not afford to join a patently unfair Franco-German currency.

As France tightened the pressure, with French farmers ritually burning British imports outside the Channel ports, Miliband cracked, handing in his resignation and scuttling off to take up a teaching post at Harvard.

In a desperate attempt to reinvigorate Labour’s popularity, Ed Balls announced that he was opening talks on British secession from the European Union — even though France and Germany insisted that they would block this ‘illegal nationalist piracy’. But now events across the Channel took a bloody and decisive twist.

For years, Belgium had been crippled by antagonism between Dutch-speaking Flemings and French-speaking Walloons.
The country had not even had a proper government since the summer of 2010, being run first by a caretaker coalition and then, from 2014, by the European Union itself. But in the summer of 2017 inter-community rioting in the centre of Brussels became terrifyingly brutal.

From Wallonia, there came reports of Dutch speakers being beaten and intimidated out of their homes. On August 1, Sarkozy sent in French paratroopers.

‘Brussels is the very heart of Europe,’ he said. ‘Which is to say, it is properly part of France.’
In the summer of 2012, massive anti-capitalist demonstrations in major Italian cities turned into outright rebellion. And when Berlusconi sent in the army to maintain order, the first bombs began exploding in the banks of Rome, Milan and Turin.

For Britain, this was the final provocation. All parties agreed that, thanks to Britain’s long-standing pledge to defend Belgian independence, we had no choice but to dispatch peacekeepers of our own.

The events of the next few months make sorry reading. Even in 2011, Britain had only 101,000 regular soldiers to France’s 123,000, but years of swingeing spending cuts had taken their toll.

By 2017, Britain’s land forces were down to just 75,000. And when fighting broke out between French and British peacekeepers in the outskirts of Ghent, no one seriously doubted that the French would win.

So it is that, a year later, we find ourselves at our lowest ebb. Aided by Spanish and Italian auxiliaries, backed by German money and quietly supported by neo-imperialist Russia, the French army has encircled our expeditionary force on the other side of the Channel and cut it to shreds.

The Americans have deserted us, while every week brings fresh anti-war and anti-capitalist riots in our cities. The shelves are increasingly empty; national morale has hit  rock bottom.

In Scotland, polls show that  more than 70 per cent independence; in Northern Ireland, the bombs of the Real IRA explode almost daily.

Last week, addressing a vast crowd in French-occupied Brussels, Nicolas Sarkozy declared that it was ‘time to extinguish the stain of Waterloo’.

‘Britain has always been part of Europe — even if they have refused to recognise it,’ he said.

‘It is time to welcome them into our family — by force, if necessary.’

A few diehards talk of fighting in the last ditch. But no one seriously believes that Britain can hold out for long.

The Union flag hangs tattered and forlorn; our days of glory are long gone. And, in Brussels, our new masters are preparing for victory.

Even now, the transformation in our fortunes seems almost incredible.

Seven years ago, Angela Merkel’s talk of the threat to peace seemed implausible, even absurd.

What a tragedy that we did not listen when we still had a chance.

Article Link
 
Back
Top