What Do We Know About It?

Northern Advocate, 11 May 1940, Page 10

What Do We Know About It?

SPHERE never was a war which did ' not produce a crop of strategists and military tacticians in their own light, who, if they had been allowed to move from the street corner or the bar counter to the fields of battle, would have made short work of the enemy and brought victory tp their country. * * * & TT is probably not any sense of superior knowledge which makes us set up as authorities —for we all do it; deny it how we majn Most likely it is the old story of the'' spectator seeing most of the game. Take football, ior instance. If players would only adopt the advice given to them freely and at length, and with great lung power, from side-line watchers, how easily victory would be gained! The trouble, of course, is that both sides cannot win, and therefore both cannot heed the advice given by the master minds among their respective supporters. * a * * OUT, to deal with the deadly game of war, rather than the game of football I am reminded of a discussion of the war in Norway which I heard at a festive board during the week. The discussion was probably typical of that which is taking place at all sorts of places at the preterit time, and my readers may be able to adapt it to their own experiences in th ; s regard. * * # * “V ( OW, what do you think of this war?” one of the party asked. Immediately all ears were trained on the questioner, but it was not long before each individual was setting out his own views upon a subject which is undoubtedly more important than any other today—not excepting the stopping of remittances to an overseas gambling establishment. The latter must be a most important matter, for I heard one young fellow declare that it was “rotten that a man’s liberty should be interfered with like that.” interference with liberty, indeed! The objector, should be in one of the countries which. Hitler has taken under his protection. Interference with liberty would be then understood. But that is by the way. I was

Observations By “The Man On <The Lookout"

about to recount what I heard at a festive board. * * * * ir pHE majority thought that the war was no good at all. This in reply to the questioner who wanted to know what the company thought about the important subject. ‘‘l can’t for the life of me understand,” said one, “why the" British did not go into Norway before the Germans did. If they had done so, and got possession of the ports and aerodi’omes. Hitler would have been absolutely done.” “Is that so?” queried one of the listeners. “If the Allies had done this, do you think Hitler would have tried to get into Norway? Anyway have we not been told by Mr Churchill that the invasion of Norway was the greatest mistake, strategically and politically, that Hitler has made. If that is so, we have done Hitler a good turn by allowing him to walk into a trap.” >;? # <« * “gUT has he walked into a trap?” queried another listener. “Is it not more likely that he had made a real good haul. He will be able to improve the .already good landing fields in Norway, and. when he hag completed his defences, be able to harry the British coasts and shipping, thus immobilising a large fleet of bombing and fighter planes which the Allies might need urgently in another theatre of war? “Yes,” said another, hand he will no doubt try to take Narvik, which will immobilise a large British force which might be needed elsewhere. And then, as sure as can be, he ‘will either invade Sweden ahd take that country’s iron mines or negotiate with the Swedes for unobstructed shipments.”

“\TTELL, what will be the result of ’ all these things? Will Hitler have gained or lost, by taking possession of southern Norway?” This from a quiet member of the party, who ven-r tured the opinion that all that had been said did not count for anything, for the simple reason that nobody knew what was likely to happen next day, or even what had happened since the last news was published. “Anyway,’ ventured still another, “I think Chamberlain made a fatal mistake in not getting possession of Norwegian flying fields before the Germans did. He ought to be thrown out of office.” “Is that your considered opinion?” asked an interested listener. “Yes, it is,” was the reply. “Then I don’t think it is worth the breath you have used in expressing it. I will tell you why, by asking you another question. “Why are the Allies fighting?” “Because Germany invaded Poland.” “Exactly. She invaded Poland against the wishes of the Poles. If we had invaded Norway against the wishes of the Norwegians would we have had any excuse for going to war with. Germany, who had only done what you say we should have done? Therefore, of what value is your criticism of Mr Chamberlain, who, you may be sure, acted only as he was advised by the military and naval ccmmanders-in-chief.

“\I7HAT you say is all right in its T way,” retorted the opener of the discussion, “but if a community were threatened by a wild animal or a madman, would you suggest that pursuers should wait until he killed somebody, or kill him before he, was able to do any killing?” This opened a new train of thought, and many suggestions as to the line allied strategy should follow, bat when closing time came there was general admission that nobody had advanced an idea which could not be knocked over. But why should not we all have our little moment of enjoyment? It is certainly needed while our soldiers, sailers and airmen try to preserve for us the liberty to criticise how and when and where we wish.