Talk:Atlantic Charter

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Atlantic Charter article.
Article policies
MILHIST This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.

The article states that Hitler adopted the Final Solution in retaliation for the US/UK Atlantic Chatrter - whats the evidence for this claim???


Contents

[edit] Atlantic Charter

I see you still report that the "Atlantic Charter" was signed on Aug. 14, 1941. Signing implies affixing your signature to paper to attest to something. I'm fond of fountain pens. Churchill used Conway Stewart fountain pens. So, what color ink did Churchill use to sign the "Charter"? What brand of pen did FDR use? Parker? Sheaffer? This was a momentous occasion, was it not? He wouldn't have used a Papermate. Didn't exist. Funny thing is that you won't find the original document with their original signatures on it because none exist. But you say it was signed. Okay. What does the Office of War Information do in 1943? You should know. You show an example in your references. Do a search under "OWI No. 50" and you'll find a propaganda poster printed by the OWI in 1943. 1943. Since this was such a momentous occasion, what was the earliest date that Roosevelt actually used the term "Atlantic Charter"? You say it was signed Aug. 14, 1941. Roosevelt must have made mention of the signing of such an important document. Do you think he mentioned it in his report to Congress? September 1941? How about October 1941? Not until November 1941?? But it was so important! Well, how about Churchill? When did Churchill first use the term "Atlantic Charter"? Better yet, what was the very first recorded instance of the the term "Atlantic Charter" being used in public? During the "Atlantic Conference" that was officially known as "Operation Riviera"? No one used the term "Atlantic Charter" before the London Daily Herald, a Socialist Newspaper, on or about August 19, 1941. Prior to that the thing was referred to as the "Joint Statement" or "Joint Declaration" because that's what it was: It was a press release issued on Aug. 14, 1941 at 9:00 am EST in Washington, DC. Oh yes. Churchill first used the term "Atlantic Charter" on August 24th during the world-wide broadcast of his report to Parliment.So how did "history" get it wrong? You'll have to credit FDR with that. He tried to pull a fast one on Churchill. FDR knew it wasn't signed and he knew Churchill wouldn't agree to break up the Great British Empire. The truth never stopped FDR. We have copies of his original coded radio-telegram telling Stephen Early exactly what to say in the press release. FDR uses the term "signed" and he uses Churchill's name. During a press conference on December 19, 1944 FDR admits that "Nobody ever signed the Atlantic Charter."

I was just looking for a source document. The Avalon Project doesn't have any source documents.

Again, I have to wonder at how many millions of history books exist that claim that the Atlantic Charter was signed off Newfoundland on Aug. 14, 1941 or Aug. 12, 1941. Americans use the 14 date and the British tend to use the 12 date. No, there weren't two signings. That's another story, but FDR and Churchill were thousands of miles apart on Aug. 14, 1941 on different ships.

If you still think there really was a signed "Atlantic Charter", please contact the U.S. National Library of Congress and ask for the location of the archival document. Then try the same thing with the Churchill Society in England. Keep looking. Keep asking. You'll learn something about how "history" becomes history.

Frank Branzuela Anchorage, Alaska

Frank, thanks for the fascinating info. I removed an Aug 21, 2004 edit that had added the signing bit back in, but you know, you are able to edit the article yourself. You seem quite knowledgable about this matter. older≠wiser 22:41, Nov 26, 2004 (UTC)Y

[edit] Destruction of Tyranny

Point six reads: "after the final destruction of the Nazi tyranny"; the word tyranny was specifically chosen over regime, government, state or other terms. It essentially says that the Nazi regime could survive, commisurate with Point three of the charter, provided the Nazi regime withdrew from its occuppied territorries. Nowhere is there a call for the "destruction of the Nazi regime". Shouldn't some mention be made of this? That Churchill & Roosevelt essentially were willing to allow the Nazi regime to survive, provided it withdrew to within its own borders. Nobs 02:12, 22 Apr 2005

[edit] Final Solution?

I am not sure how correct it is by saying the Atlantic Charter caused the final solution, ehich is what is being implied. Indeed Hitler saw the AC as evidence of collusion between USA and Britain but did this lead to him agreeing to the Final Solution? Some even argue that Hitler knew little about the mass killings of Jews.

The mass killing of Jews had already started at the time of the Atlantic Charter, and no serious historian links it to the Atlantic Charter, so I have removed this abominable attempt at blaming the "Final Solution" on Churchill and Roosevelt.--193.175.194.60 13:51, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
Wrong!  I'm watching a documentary (The Atlantic Charter - The End of Colonialism) that says the A.C. changed Hitler's mind - before, he was going to wait for the end of the war to implement the Final Solution.

68.183.223.103 (talk) 23:45, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism

Below the image galary is the word: "hhhhhhhhhhhiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii" I'm assuming this is vandalism and so I tried to delete it, but I couldn't find it in the edit part for the image gallery section. I'm not wikiliterate, so its probably my fault for not seeing it. (By the way, this is computer at a high school where all the ip addresses are shared. I don't know who to contact, but someone needs to let an admin know to block the edits coming from this school. I've noticed my school is one that often vandalises Wikipedia). --204.57.106.93 17:09, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Looks like someone fixed it while I was typing my annonyingly long message, so never mind. (But still, someone please block this IP adress. --204.57.106.93 17:10, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Two proposals

That it's made explicit that the USA hadn't entered WWII at the time of the charter and that the various governments mentioned that adopted the charter were governments in exile.--Mongreilf 16:17, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Atlantic_Charter#Aftermath

What does one MP's disagreement with Allied policy for a postwar Germany have to do with the "aftermath" of this charter? And how is this rhetorical point of view encyclopaedic? Should this article contain mention of each instance where the charter has been invoked to support or oppose a policy? Kablammo 19:14, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

I totally agree with you. In my opinion the whole paragraph in its current form should be removed until somebody writes a neutral account of the aftermath, e.g. the connection to the creation of the United Nations or the "constitutional reality" of the charter. The anecdotal and higly selective version of this paragraph is not encyclopaedic. --Baikonur (talk) 11:09, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Inter-Allied Meeting in London on September 24, 1941

There was a common declaration of Poland, Czechoslovakia and Hungary specifying their dissents to the charta. 77.131.91.102 (talk) 22:38, 31 December 2007 (UTC)