Jeezus!

They are a window into a world of fearful deference to authority, the primacy of procedure over morality, a world where, for the bankers, the most important thing is to keep the channels of international finance open, no matter what the human cost. A world, in other words, not entirely different to today.

The markets rule all. **** morales.
 
Cheers Grassy, a simple find, I duly admit :)

My knowledge in the area of who financed what is limited, so this analysis by Adam Lebor was worthy of attention. There's been discussions regarding the Irish Republic's role in the war but after reading this I personally believe it's understandable that the huge political decisions to be made were less clear-cut for some countries than was previously assumed as straightforward. The fact an intricate theory about world banking corruption during WW2 is now proven to be founded surely alerts us to the difficulty that leaders faced in decision making. These revelations would not mean a country such as the Republic of Irelands position was strategically or morally correct, and certainly do not prove anything concrete or substantial, but even as a historical novice bar a GCSE in history... this informs me that everything is not what it seems in major conflicts, and definitely not in banking. In many ways this is still the case.
 
Last edited:
The fact an intricate theory about world banking corruption during WW2 is now proven to be founded

I didn't see anything that said that?

Seemed to me more of a piece about neutrality with anti-banking tones. Does raise interesting questions about the place of neutrality during a time of general war for which Ireland and Switzerland take a lot of flak (more so than Sweden imo).

It also suggested that what happened in Nazi Germany would be perfectly possible in the UK/USA given the right conditions - "I was only obeying orders".
 
Back
Top