Sunday Telegraph plays the Nazi card

In today's UK Sunday Telegraph, an article titled: 'US tactics condemned by British officers,' uses Nazi terminology to describe the US military's behavior in Iraq.

 

It's in an article written by Sean Rayment, the newspaper's defense correspondent, who quotes heavily from an unnamed senior British officer claiming that there is a growing sense of 'unease and frustration' among the British high command. We'll go into more detail about the report later.

 

The fact that the British press has been denigrating the US in Iraq for being gung—ho cowboys and trigger—happy crazies is nothing new. Practically every newspaper and media network in the UK has filled their pages with colorful stories about US military abuses in Iraq. The whole objective of these smear stories has been to favorably compare the British soldiers to those of the whacky dumb American GI Joes. Even the Hollinger—owned, reliably Conservative Telegraph is on this bandwagon.

 

The British media can't help themselves from reawaking the memories of the Vietnam War. It serves the same purpose: to paint all American soldiers as farm boys looking to shoot any 'gook' that comes near them.

 

The logic behind this thinking is that only the British know how to win 'hearts and minds,' and perhaps a British officer should be in charge of the whole operation in Iraq, because otherwise the Yanks will screw up the reconstruction process.

 

Almost none of these acutely anti—American articles have pointed out that the US forces in Iraq happen to be responsible for the toughest regions, in regard to the level of active Shiite, Sunni or Terrorist insurgency.

 

It would be misleading to characterize these newspaper reports as only originating from the liberal press. The London Times, and the Telegraph have all enthusiastically promoted this brand of anti—Americanism, because it allows them to superficially gloat about something they feel the British are better at than the Americans.

 

Perhaps it's a natural consequence of a Britain that is no longer a real power, and suffering from a severe lack of national confidence. The British make themselves feel more valuable and worthy as a nation if they can denigrate the Americans. It's an ancient instinct at play and while incredibly distasteful it appears to suit the morally superior mindset of much of the British population these days.

 

But this Sunday's Telegraph has gone one step further than the rest.

 

The officer, who agreed to the interview on the condition of anonymity, said that part of the problem was that American troops viewed Iraqis as untermenschen — the Nazi expression for "sub—humans.

 

Of course, there is no clarification as to whether the Americans have actually described the Iraqis as 'untermenschen' or whether this is just the officer's own characterization.

 

Are the US military actually using that same evocative terminology? The way the article is written it appears that it must be the case.

 

This supposed US attitude to the Iraqis is offered up again with:

 

They view them as untermenschen. They are not concerned about the Iraqi loss of life in the way the British are. Their attitude towards the Iraqis is tragic, it's awful.

 

So, the clear message here is that while the British are humanitarians at heart, the Americans are like Nazis and their attitude towards Iraqis is tragic and awful.

 

The writer of the piece, Sean Rayment, wants to really drive the point home with a definition of the Americans' Nazi attitude:

 

The phrase untermenschen — literally "under—people" — was brought to prominence by Adolf Hitler in his book Mein Kampf, published in 1925. He used the term to describe those he regarded as racially inferior: Jews, Slaves and gipsies.[sic]

 

So there we have it. According to the Sunday Telegraph and their 'anonymous' British officer, the Americans should be classed as either Nazis, or Nazi—like in their attitude to Iraqis.

 

Apart from the startling anti—Americanism from this newspaper, it's interesting that they fail to see the irony in that they are slandering Americans just as the Nazis did to the Jews.

 

Of course this article does its best to never clarify whether this is just the British officer's impression of the American attitude, or it is official US Military policy in Iraq to label all Iraqis as 'untermenschen'. It is very odd that the term is mentioned three times in separate paragraphs, and also kindly provides a detailed definition of the German word.

 

But all this brings up some interesting questions which should be addressed once this conflict in Iraq is over. Considering that these kind of ridiculous accusations are emanating from supposed allies of America; in future conflicts it may be in the best interests of the US to wage war without a Coalition.

 

Does the US really need these types of 'good time' friends, which seem overtly keen to rubbish and slander American forces who are dying at a greater rate than the Brits? And before some pompous Brit pipes up a typical comment about Americans causing their own deaths — the fact of the matter is that the US took control of all the rough patches in Iraq, while the Brits given jurisdiction for the relatively mild Basrah.

 

The US military has enough of a problem dealing with the problems in the world that no—one else wants to face. What they need like a hole in the head is the carping of moralizing Brits, slandering America and its soldiers with grotesque Nazi characterizations.

Michael Morris is our London Correspondent

In today's UK Sunday Telegraph, an article titled: 'US tactics condemned by British officers,' uses Nazi terminology to describe the US military's behavior in Iraq.

 

It's in an article written by Sean Rayment, the newspaper's defense correspondent, who quotes heavily from an unnamed senior British officer claiming that there is a growing sense of 'unease and frustration' among the British high command. We'll go into more detail about the report later.

 

The fact that the British press has been denigrating the US in Iraq for being gung—ho cowboys and trigger—happy crazies is nothing new. Practically every newspaper and media network in the UK has filled their pages with colorful stories about US military abuses in Iraq. The whole objective of these smear stories has been to favorably compare the British soldiers to those of the whacky dumb American GI Joes. Even the Hollinger—owned, reliably Conservative Telegraph is on this bandwagon.

 

The British media can't help themselves from reawaking the memories of the Vietnam War. It serves the same purpose: to paint all American soldiers as farm boys looking to shoot any 'gook' that comes near them.

 

The logic behind this thinking is that only the British know how to win 'hearts and minds,' and perhaps a British officer should be in charge of the whole operation in Iraq, because otherwise the Yanks will screw up the reconstruction process.

 

Almost none of these acutely anti—American articles have pointed out that the US forces in Iraq happen to be responsible for the toughest regions, in regard to the level of active Shiite, Sunni or Terrorist insurgency.

 

It would be misleading to characterize these newspaper reports as only originating from the liberal press. The London Times, and the Telegraph have all enthusiastically promoted this brand of anti—Americanism, because it allows them to superficially gloat about something they feel the British are better at than the Americans.

 

Perhaps it's a natural consequence of a Britain that is no longer a real power, and suffering from a severe lack of national confidence. The British make themselves feel more valuable and worthy as a nation if they can denigrate the Americans. It's an ancient instinct at play and while incredibly distasteful it appears to suit the morally superior mindset of much of the British population these days.

 

But this Sunday's Telegraph has gone one step further than the rest.

 

The officer, who agreed to the interview on the condition of anonymity, said that part of the problem was that American troops viewed Iraqis as untermenschen — the Nazi expression for "sub—humans.

 

Of course, there is no clarification as to whether the Americans have actually described the Iraqis as 'untermenschen' or whether this is just the officer's own characterization.

 

Are the US military actually using that same evocative terminology? The way the article is written it appears that it must be the case.

 

This supposed US attitude to the Iraqis is offered up again with:

 

They view them as untermenschen. They are not concerned about the Iraqi loss of life in the way the British are. Their attitude towards the Iraqis is tragic, it's awful.

 

So, the clear message here is that while the British are humanitarians at heart, the Americans are like Nazis and their attitude towards Iraqis is tragic and awful.

 

The writer of the piece, Sean Rayment, wants to really drive the point home with a definition of the Americans' Nazi attitude:

 

The phrase untermenschen — literally "under—people" — was brought to prominence by Adolf Hitler in his book Mein Kampf, published in 1925. He used the term to describe those he regarded as racially inferior: Jews, Slaves and gipsies.[sic]

 

So there we have it. According to the Sunday Telegraph and their 'anonymous' British officer, the Americans should be classed as either Nazis, or Nazi—like in their attitude to Iraqis.

 

Apart from the startling anti—Americanism from this newspaper, it's interesting that they fail to see the irony in that they are slandering Americans just as the Nazis did to the Jews.

 

Of course this article does its best to never clarify whether this is just the British officer's impression of the American attitude, or it is official US Military policy in Iraq to label all Iraqis as 'untermenschen'. It is very odd that the term is mentioned three times in separate paragraphs, and also kindly provides a detailed definition of the German word.

 

But all this brings up some interesting questions which should be addressed once this conflict in Iraq is over. Considering that these kind of ridiculous accusations are emanating from supposed allies of America; in future conflicts it may be in the best interests of the US to wage war without a Coalition.

 

Does the US really need these types of 'good time' friends, which seem overtly keen to rubbish and slander American forces who are dying at a greater rate than the Brits? And before some pompous Brit pipes up a typical comment about Americans causing their own deaths — the fact of the matter is that the US took control of all the rough patches in Iraq, while the Brits given jurisdiction for the relatively mild Basrah.

 

The US military has enough of a problem dealing with the problems in the world that no—one else wants to face. What they need like a hole in the head is the carping of moralizing Brits, slandering America and its soldiers with grotesque Nazi characterizations.

Michael Morris is our London Correspondent