03-11-2011, 07:41 PM
"The British response to the Mau Mau uprising in Kenya in the 1950s was fierce, and largely kept from the public at home. Allegations of torture, mutilation and extrajudicial killing of Kenyans suspected of Mau Mau involvement led to a Scotland Yard investigation in 2003"
"During British rule in Middle East in the 1920s and 30s, in Iraq in particular, numerous war crimes were committed, including village burning and shooting of civilians.[2][citation needed] Winston Churchill was in favour of using new weapons "against recalcitrant Arabs as an experiment". Churchill also understood the tactical advantages of chemical weapons, arguing for use of poison gases on "uncivilised tribes"
I do not understand this squeamishness about the use of gas. We have definitely adopted the position at the Peace Conference of arguing in favour of the retention of gas as a permanent method of warfare. It is sheer affectation to lacerate a man with the poisonous fragment of a bursting shell and to boggle at making his eyes water by means of lachrymatory gas.
I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilised tribes. The moral effect should be so good that the loss of life should be reduced to a minimum. It is not necessary to use only the most deadly gasses: gasses can be used which cause great inconvenience and would spread a lively terror and yet would leave no serious permanent effects on most of those affected.
—Winston Churchill, May 1919, War Office
The poison gas was indeed used in southern Iraq by the British troops, "with excellent moral effect"."
"The most notorious British war crime during the First World War remains the Baralong Incidents. On August 19, 1915, the Q-Ship H.M.S. Baralong sank the U-Boat SM U-27 and then opened fire on the surviving German sailors in the water. Due to the large number of American witnesses, the actions of the Baralong's crew were widely reported in the neutral press. The crew of the Baralong were later awarded £185 prize bounty for sinking U-27."
Brits never have to worry about keeping POWs for too long. They just kill them...
"During British rule in Middle East in the 1920s and 30s, in Iraq in particular, numerous war crimes were committed, including village burning and shooting of civilians.[2][citation needed] Winston Churchill was in favour of using new weapons "against recalcitrant Arabs as an experiment". Churchill also understood the tactical advantages of chemical weapons, arguing for use of poison gases on "uncivilised tribes"
I do not understand this squeamishness about the use of gas. We have definitely adopted the position at the Peace Conference of arguing in favour of the retention of gas as a permanent method of warfare. It is sheer affectation to lacerate a man with the poisonous fragment of a bursting shell and to boggle at making his eyes water by means of lachrymatory gas.
I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilised tribes. The moral effect should be so good that the loss of life should be reduced to a minimum. It is not necessary to use only the most deadly gasses: gasses can be used which cause great inconvenience and would spread a lively terror and yet would leave no serious permanent effects on most of those affected.
—Winston Churchill, May 1919, War Office
The poison gas was indeed used in southern Iraq by the British troops, "with excellent moral effect"."
"The most notorious British war crime during the First World War remains the Baralong Incidents. On August 19, 1915, the Q-Ship H.M.S. Baralong sank the U-Boat SM U-27 and then opened fire on the surviving German sailors in the water. Due to the large number of American witnesses, the actions of the Baralong's crew were widely reported in the neutral press. The crew of the Baralong were later awarded £185 prize bounty for sinking U-27."
Brits never have to worry about keeping POWs for too long. They just kill them...