Author Topic: Did President Wilson help murder Nicholas II?  (Read 55329 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline griffh

  • Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 536
  • I love YaBB 1G - SP1!
    • View Profile
Re: Did President Wilson help murder Nicholas II?
« Reply #90 on: September 02, 2006, 02:05:43 PM »
THE SECOND PERIOD:

The photo above includeds (Seated lt to rt)  William Boyce Thompson the American millionarie and Head of the Russian Red Cross Mission who contributes a million dollars to the Social Rev. Party; Lazarev, Social Revoutionist; Katherine Breshkovskaya, "Grandmother of the Russian Rev."  (Standing lt to rt)  N.V. Chaikovski; Frederick Corse, head of Russian office of NYC Life Insurance Co.; Victor Soskice, Kerensky's personal sectretary; and Raymond Robins.
 
This second period covers Apr. 1917-Nov. 1917, the period of the Provisional Governments short stay and the historic record states clearly that Wilsonian diplomacy was in complete sympathy with the fall of the Romanoff’s and the rise of the Provisional Government.  Wilsonian diplomacy outspoken support of the first Russian Revolution is clearly indicated by the fact that:

1.   America was the first government to recognize the Provisional Government.

2.   Wilson’ Declaration of War which included passages supporting the Russian Revolution.

3.   Wilson’s $340,000,000 line of credit to Kerensky’s government. 
   
There is also the independent American funding of the Social Revolutionary Party to the tune of $1,000,000 ($15,000,000 by today's standard) and this does not include Bullard's contributions as Sec. of the AFRP. 

This nine month period starts to address the challenging thing about Wilsonian diplomacy in Russia that is not unlike the challenge that the Soviet's would have to face years later.  The challenge is that Wilson could not control how his policy was administered by the men he had empowered.  Wilson's policy was, even during this nine month period, "radicalized" in a way that concerned him, i.e. by Thompson’s million dollar contribution to the Social Revolutionary Party.  At the same time, the historic record proves that Wilson’s concerns were not enough to make him back off his support of the first Revolution.   

THE THIRD PERIOD:

The photo is of Bolshevik troops protecting the Smolny Institute, headquarters of the Boshevik government.

This is the period of Dec. 1918-June 1918.  The overthrow of the Provisional government by the Bolsheviks is the most confusing and damaging period of all because of the mistakes Wilson made during these few short months.  We will see how Wilsonian diplomacy in these critical months will make Britain and France openly suspicious of Wilson’s government as pro-Bolshevik because of:

1.   The timing of Wilson’s statement, ‘the Russian people…call to us to say what it is    that we desire, in what, if in anything, our purpose and our spirit differ from theirs…”  in his “Fourteen Points” in Jan. 1918 two months after the Bolshevik take over.

2.   Wilson’s refusal to join in the other Allied Governments censuring of the Bolshevik’s early moves to negotiate a separate peace with Germany. 

3.   Chief of the American Military Mission’s involvement with the Soviets just before and during the peace negotiation and publication in Pravda of the Chief’ letter supporting the peace negotiations.

4.   Robbins and Gumberg’s close ties with the Soviets. 

It is during this period that Wilson’s diplomatic policy will cause the most confusion and lend support to the Bolshevik government whether it intended to or not.
« Last Edit: September 02, 2006, 02:34:26 PM by griffh »

Offline griffh

  • Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 536
  • I love YaBB 1G - SP1!
    • View Profile
Re: Did President Wilson help murder Nicholas II?
« Reply #91 on: September 02, 2006, 02:29:12 PM »
FOURTH PERIOD:     

The photo above shows the Wilson's in the company of George V, Queen Mary and their daughter in Dec. 1918, shortly before the Wilson's depart to the Paris Peace Conference.  The King already preplexed by the "Brave New World" he had so reluctantly become a part of would not allow Queen Mary to wear the new short skirts sported by Mrs. Wilson and his own daughter, Princess Mary. 
 
This period dates from July 1918-June 1919 and this is the period that includes:

1.   The recognition of the totalitarian nature of the Bolshevik government and the ruthless brutality of it Civil War.

2.   Recall of the his Ambassador

3.   The Armistice that ends the Great War.

4.   Formation of Wilson’s secret plans for intervention. 

5.   Wilson’s reorganization of the pre-war Europe at the Versailles Peace Conference in Paris.     

 So Bev, lets look at your statement:   

"In fact, the evidence supports the opposite hypothesis - that Wilson used his powers both ordinary and extraordinary to destroy socialism."

The only historic evidence that “Wilson used his powers both ordinary and extraordinary to destroy socialism” appears in July 1918-Nov 1919. 

Too little too late: Wilson’s later diplomacy policy to destroy socialism, or rather Marxist absolutism, can never vindicate or make up for the damage his earlier policy caused.  In effect Wilson ended up fighting himself.  British and French diplomacy was never as foolish or dangerous or as publicly contradictory as Wilson. 

I believe that Wilson’s diplomacy is actually the first example of pattern of American foreign policy to this day; a foreign policy that support political leaders who become its bitterest enemies.  If you invited, starting with Lenin, all the political leaders who have been bankrolled by the American government only to become America’s bitterest enemies, that would make one interesting dinner party!  I wonder what they would serve for the main course, not to mention dessert.   

« Last Edit: September 02, 2006, 02:37:17 PM by griffh »

Offline griffh

  • Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 536
  • I love YaBB 1G - SP1!
    • View Profile
Re: Did President Wilson help murder Nicholas II?
« Reply #92 on: September 02, 2006, 09:37:56 PM »
Hey Robert, sorry I got so muddled and attributed to Bev, your encouraging remarks to Alixz in support of her point of view.  The sad thing for Russia is that no one elected the Provisional Government to rule, and the Bolsheviks, being out voted, took over by violence.  So it is a much harder task to really know the what Russia really wanted.  The Grand Duke Michael was never given a chance to put himself before and elective body.  I wonder what would have happened if Witte had lived past 1915.  I know that I should not open the "What If" door because it leads no where.  And besides this is not the issue at hand.     

Oh I also wanted to add that the first photo is of the American Embassy that David Francis occupied in St. Petrograd in 1916.  Ambassador Mayre, who had departed in early 1916  had leased Princess Kleinmichaels Palace but I do not know who David Francis leased this Palace from.   

Offline griffh

  • Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 536
  • I love YaBB 1G - SP1!
    • View Profile
Re: Did President Wilson help murder Nicholas II?
« Reply #93 on: September 02, 2006, 10:01:36 PM »
Another quick note:  I forgot to describe the man standing on the left in the photo of the Americans and Soc. Rev. who is looking like an extremely tired Rasputin on a bad hair day.  Chaikovski is a leading member of Kerensky's government and served as Chairman of the Provisional Council.  Chaikovski will be an important underground player after the Bolshevik takeover, but that is getting ahead of our story.

Robert_Hall

  • Guest
Re: Did President Wilson help murder Nicholas II?
« Reply #94 on: September 02, 2006, 10:13:03 PM »
No problem Griffh.
 The Provisional Goverment assumed full power, GD MIchael never accepted it, therefore never "abdicated", as he never had anything to "abdicate" from". His document was as Grand Duke, NOT Emperor. This is so mis-interpreted as to have become  simple folklore for Romanov romanticists.
 As for the Bolsheviks,  yes, I would agree that they took power through violence.  Most radical power exchanges  go that way, do they not?  Not all perhaps, but usually one force does not easily give up to an opposing force without even a futile fight.
Personally,. after reading all the arguments herein, I think Wilson had minimal effect in the  dynamics of the Russian revolutions.  He cared not at all for the autocratic rule, probably  not much for  some obscure provisional agreement and  was cluless about socialism.
 The only reason to send those American troops was to protect capitalist AMERICAN interests. Once that was a lost cause, no further effort was expended.
They certainly were not sent to rescue a bunch of worthless Romanovs.

Offline griffh

  • Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 536
  • I love YaBB 1G - SP1!
    • View Profile
Re: Did President Wilson help murder Nicholas II?
« Reply #95 on: September 03, 2006, 07:32:36 AM »
Robert that is a very interesting point about the Grand Duke Michael.  I had always assumed that he became Emperor when his brother abdicated.  That is very interesting.  Gosh you know I saw a newsreel that was released just after the abdication of the Emperor.  It showed Grand Duke Michael and and Countess Brassova arriving at some public building in Petrograd.  When the Countess alighted from the Grand Duke's Rolls Royce, wearing a white sable coat and oversized muff dotted with fox tales I was taken aback.  She looked like an Empress and had that same stately glide as Queen Marie of Romania.  Of course the newsreel was using earlier footage as Countess Brassova was not with her husband during that momentous time.  I think she was in her home near Gatchina.

But anyway I will post the rest of the Americans in Russia and then start on the chronology.  I look forward to your response.     

Offline griffh

  • Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 536
  • I love YaBB 1G - SP1!
    • View Profile
Re: Did President Wilson help murder Nicholas II?
« Reply #96 on: September 03, 2006, 07:43:39 AM »
MR. GEORGE CREEL
Head of The Committee on Public Information—The Office of War Information, Washington

George Creel, a Midwestern newspaper editor, journalist and crusader of reform, was appointed to establish the Committee on Public Information—The Office of War Information, which he whipped up in record time between April and May in 1917 as a result of the first Revolution.  His outspoken nature and impatience with the Washington bureaucracy brought him into conflict with Lansing and the State Department.  After the Root commission return to the States with its recommendations for a major propaganda campaign in Russia Creel was directed to open up a million dollar CPI operation in Russia.

The most important function of the CPI and the reason for its operations in Russia was to stiffen the Provisional Government’s will to carry on the war by creating pro war propaganda that was intended to counter the anti war propaganda carried on by German agents and the Bolsheviks though it also functioned as a source for military intelligence and counter-espionage..   

Kennan describes the Committee’s activities as “…primarily set up as an agency for wartime propaganda and censorship, it had several other functions, and there were in a constant state of flux and change.  Its responsibility for censorship carried it deeply into the field of internal counter-espionage, and it evidently entered also, in ways still obscure, into the forward military and political intelligence field.”

Kennan quotes James R. Mock and Cedric Larson as stating that, “…At many of our diplomatic posts the military or naval attaché served as CPI representatives during emergency periods, and in some cases the CPI men did work which normally would have fallen to the lot of Military Intelligence…”

MR. EDGAR SISSON
Head of CPI in Petrograd

Mr. Sisson, a former city editor of the Chicago Tribune, former managing editor of Collier’s, and former editor of Cosmopolitan Magazine.  After his appointment Creel took Sisson to see Wilson who left Sisson with the impression the he “was going abroad as the personal representative of the President, endowed with latter’s very special confidence…and that he carried with him a goodly share of the President’s authority…” 
David Francis was never informed of Sisson’s status or importance and only told that Sisson was to represent Creel in the development of the CPI in Petrograd.  Sisson, with sinewy build bursting with energy and his flair for conspiracy and intrigue set the American colony on edge when he arrived in the Russian capital.


MR. ARTHUR BULLARD
Co-Founder of The Committee on Public Information—The Office of War Information, Washington
Replaces Sisson as Head of CPI, Petrograd

The widely read and respected novelist and traveler, Arthur Bullard was one of the men that had worked with Creel in the establishment of the CPI headquarters in Washington.  Though Bullard was never a member of the American Socialist Party he considered himself a socialist and held great antipathy to Nicholas II and his rule.  Bullard had extensive knowledge and sympathy for the Russian revolutionary movement and had been in Russia during the 1905 revolution.  Later he became Secretary of The American Friends of Russian Freedom.  During 1915-1916 Bullard served as a private European observer and had worked closely with Colonel House sending House detailed reports that House found intensely perceptive.  Bullard received no pay for his services and did his work on a purely voluntary basis.

After working with Creel on the formation of the CPI in Washington, Bullard left for Russia in June 1917.  Bullard went to Russia in the unofficial capacity as a correspondent but Bullard’s wife and Ernest Poole who accompanied Bullard felt he had been sent to Russia at the request of Wilson.  In his capacity as Secretary of the American Friends of Russian Freedom, Bullard’s first act when he arrived in Moscow was to distribute funds to the Social-Revolutionaries.  It was his reports about the declining war effort that had encouraged the American government, along with the Root Mission report, to create the million dollar CPI operation in Russia for the promotion of the war effort.  When the CPI opened in Petrograd in November 1917 Bullard was “drafted” as a subordinate to the Head of the CPI, Mr. Edgar Sisson.  Eventually Bullard would head the CPI when Sisson was recalled.  Throughout his time in Russia Bullard remained in close contact with Colonel House.  A brilliant man with modest habits, Bullard was hampered by his inability to achieve real fluency in Russian, his frail state of health, and his “violent aversion to the habits and atmosphere of governmental offices. 


Offline griffh

  • Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 536
  • I love YaBB 1G - SP1!
    • View Profile
Re: Did President Wilson help murder Nicholas II?
« Reply #97 on: September 03, 2006, 07:44:45 AM »
DR. FRANK G. BILLINGS
Head of the American Red Cross Commission, Petrograd

The American Red Cross Commission was organized in June of 1917 and arrived in Petrograd in on August 7, 1917.  The Commission was established as an armed forces establishment and each member of the commission received a military rank.  Dr. Billing, an eminent physician from Chicago was unaware that the true nature of the commission was primarily political with the object of bolstering Kerensky’s government and stimulating the war effort.  The impoverished Provisional Government had exhausted its meager resources entertaining the Root Mission and the American Advisory Commission of Railway Experts, so the American Red Cross Commission met with very little public recognition.  Most of the American colony assumed, just as Dr. Billing had, that the purpose of the Red Cross Commission was to answer a pressing need for doctors and nurses.  As Mr. George Gibbs, an engineer assigned to the Commission of Railway Experts pointed out, “…as a matter of fact there is a present a surplus of medical talent and nurses, native and foreign in the country and many half empty hospitals in the large cities.  They do need supplies, however, and the two carloads which the Commission brought will be very helpful.”

Mr. Cornielus Kelleher, Thompson’s private secretary summed up Dr. Billings disillusionment perfectly, stating that the kind Doctor had taken on the responsibilities to head the Red Cross Commission, “…thinking he was in charge of a scientific mission for the relief of Russia…He was in reality nothing but a mask—the Red Cross complexion of the mission was nothing but a mask.”   When Dr. Billings caught on that he had been exploited as a front for political activities about which he had not been informed and over which he had no control, sick and disappointed he resigned from the commission in mid-September 1917 and went home.

MR. WILLIAN BOYCE THOMPSON
American Red Cross Commission, Petrograd
Business Manager
Replaced Dr. Billing as Head of the American Red Cross Commission, Petrograd


Like Mr. Sisson, William Boyce Thompson was dispatched to Russia with the impression that he was “the President’s special political agent, endowed with functions similar to those normally borne by a full-fledged ambassador and overriding those of Mr. Francis in particular.”  Mr. Thompson held a high position in the New York financial world as a Cooper magnate, stock broker and financial promoter.  He had an amassed an enormous personal fortune and paid for the uniforms and other incidental expenses that involved the officials attached to the American Red Cross Commission.  Thompson had volunteered to cover the expenses because the Commission was not recognized by the Red Cross and therefore was not on their payroll and finally the Red Cross liquidated it all together. 

While the Commission lasted, Thompson initiated many of his own programs including the mass distribution to the Russian troops of Wilson’s War speeches translated into Russian.  At a luncheon for Kerensky and Tereshchenko that Ambassador Francis held, Thompson startled everyone including the Russians by stating that he was cabling New York “…offering to be of a syndicate of ten to purchase Russian bonds to the tune of one million rubles apiece.”  Kerensky put Thompson in touch with the “little grandmother of the Revolution,” Madame Breskovskaya who was opposed to the growing influence of the Bolshevicks with their anti-war propaganda.  Madame Breskovskaya with the leaders of the Social-Revolutionary party who still wanted to continue the war to a victorious end.  Thompson then withdrew a million dollars from his personal account with J.P. Morgan [$15,000,000 today’s standard] and began making enormous contributions to member of the Social-Revolutionary party whose influence he thought would be necessary for the restoration of the army’s military morale. 

Kennan states that “By the time Dr. Billings left, Thompson had become fabulous in the feverish society of revolutionary Petrograd.  His immense fortune, his colorful personality, his great muscular bulk, his ubiquitous half-smoked cigars, his spectacular mode of existence—including a suite in the Hotel d’Europe, a French limousine, a wolfhound, a readiness to collect antiques (forthcoming in unlimited quantities from upper-class Russians who read the handwriting on the wall)—all made him a dramatic and conspicuous object of local attention.  When he attended the opera, he was put in the imperial box and hailed ironically as “the American Czar.” 

Offline griffh

  • Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 536
  • I love YaBB 1G - SP1!
    • View Profile
Re: Did President Wilson help murder Nicholas II?
« Reply #98 on: September 03, 2006, 07:45:59 AM »
By the time of the Bolshevik seizure of power, the Provisional government considered Thompson as the “real” American ambassador.  Just as the first revolution had shocked and thrilled Thompson, the second Revolution had the same effect on him and overnight he impulsively and enthusiastically embraced the Bolsheviks.  However Thompson was aware that his enthusiastic financial support of the fallen government and the secret service organization that he had finance to combat the Bolsheviks had compromised him to the point that he felt is was necessary that he leave Russia immediately.  Ambassador Francis had no idea why the American Red Cross mission “had manifested surprising nervousness from the beginning of [the] revolution.”  Of course Francis was completely uniformed as to the activities of the mission and of Thompson in particular.  On his return to the United States, Kennan tells us the “Thompson was determined to win a high level of support for the Bolshevik regime as an instrument against the Germans, just as he had first conceived of using Kerensky.” 

Offline griffh

  • Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 536
  • I love YaBB 1G - SP1!
    • View Profile
Re: Did President Wilson help murder Nicholas II?
« Reply #99 on: September 03, 2006, 08:34:53 AM »
This is the final post of the men that comprised the American colony in Russia.  I have repeated the information about Gumberg from an earlier post because of his relationship with Robbins. 

MR. RAYMOND ROBINS
Replaced Mr. William Boyce Thompson as Head of the American Red Cross Commission, Petrograd

Raymond Robins was “a product of the American West.”  Born in the East, he was taken to the West as a young boy.  He worked as a miner in the Rocky Mountains and made his fortune in the Alaska Gold Rush.  Robins then made his way to Chicago where he became a “cross between a religious and political evangelist,” working to establish the settlement houses and taking on other liberal causes.  In 1908 he helped to win the tough battle with Nicholas’s government for the extradition of the two Russian Revolutionists,  Rudewitz and Pouren.  In 1912 Robins became one of the founders of the Teddy Roosevelt’s Progressive Party and in turn it will be Teddy Roosevelt who will recommend Robins to become part of the Red Cross Mission in 1917. 

Kennan writes that, “Robin’s contribution to the analysis of Soviet realities was generally received with suspicion and rejected at home, but it was not wholly devoid of interest…He believed in getting out and getting around, and this he did in no uncertain way…Unquestionably, he saw more of the Soviet leaders in the early months and years of their power that any other single American.  While this experience did not always lead to accurate judgments on his part, at least it enabled him to avoid a number of the erroneous impressions that fastened themselves onto the thinking of other foreigners…Robins, endeavored in 1919, to explain to the members of a subcommittee of the Senate Committee on the Judiciary how it was possible that an intense interest in the Soviet Union and respect for the formidable qualities of its leaders did not necessarily mean sympathy with its ideology or desire to see it succeed in its world revolutionary aspirations.

…Robins did not find it easy to adjust his personal relations to the American community in Russia, and probably had little interest in doing so.  Protected by his Red Cross status, he played a lone hand both socially and –for the most part—officially, leaving behind him with he departed in 1918 a long trail of resentments and suspicions among the members of the American official family…Robins was a characteristic figure of the liberal movement of the Middle West in the years before World War I…It was from this background that he derived his religious fervor and his faith in human progress; but it was also from this background the he derived the lack of roundness, of tolerance, and of patience with the sad necessities of man’s political existence which was to make his career as a figure in Russian-American relations so stormy, so episodic, and in the end so tragic.”

MR. ALEXANDER GUMBERG
Secretary and General Aide to Russell Robins, Head of the American Red Cross Commision, Petrograd
Alexander Gumberg had been born in Russia and had immigrated to NYC as a boy.  He moved in Russian-Socialist circles in NYC and became the managing editor of the Russian-Socialist newspaper, Novy Mir from 1914-1915.  He became acquainted with Trotsky through the pieces Trotsky published in the Novy Mir.  In the winter of 1917 (January 13-March 27) Trotsky lived on 162nd St. on the Upper eastside, in what he called “the working-class-district” NYC.  It was during these winter months, when Trotsky worked in the editorial offices of the Novy Mir that the two men became friends.  Just for the historically curious the offices of the newspaper were near Union Square. 

Alexander Gumberg was already in Russia when Wilson’s American Red Cross Commission arrived in Petrograd on August 7, 1917.  Having returned to Russia with his brother right after February Revolution, on his arrival, Gumberg obtained a Russian passport and consider himself to have duel citizenship.  His brother became a Bolshevik official, who adopted Communist craze for pseudonyms, re-christening himself, Comrade Zorin. 

Renewing his friendship with Trotsky’s, Alexander Gumberg immediately established intimate ties with Radek, Peters, and other high Bolshevik officials.  At the same time Gumberg worked as an aide for both the Root Commission and the American Advisory Commission of Railroad Experts, before his appointment as secretary and aide the Head of the American Red Cross Commission.       
         

Bev

  • Guest
Griffh
« Reply #100 on: September 03, 2006, 12:34:12 PM »
This is all very interesting.  You are not, however, offering any evidence.  You're offering suppositions based on the motivations of those few Americans in Russia at the time.  There were all sorts of characters moving around Europe, because some of them were members of the American progressive party or members of the American socialist democrats, that doesn't mean that they had sinister ulterior motives.  The fact that any of them mingled with the intelligentsia, the upper classes and/or members of the various revolutionary parties in Russia, doesn't in any way make Wilson complicit or contributary to the Tsar's death.  You mention Alex. Gumberg, but many historians think that he was a triple agent, spying for the allied powers, the U.S., the Bolshevists and the Germans. 

Something else I would like to mention is that you're not taking into consideration the reports the state department was receiving from those who were not participating in what one historian has dubbed "The Wall Street Friends of Russia mission."  Just because reports are passed along to the state department, it doesn't mean that Wilson or the state department were receiving and acting upon these reports as advice and American policy.  You also have not accounted for the German assistance both finaancial and politcally of the Bolshevik, which would be far more powerful than any kind of U.S. foreign intervention. 

I also think that what is missing in your hypothesis is the fact that politicans make comments that are for public consumption and private consumption - Wilson, praising the Russian revolution, doesn't mean that Wilson supported the Russian revolution or aided it, because his actions were exactly the opposite.  This is the most glaring error in Davis and Trani's arguments in proving this hyposthesis, they simply could not provide any evidence that convincingly supported their claim. 

I completely agree that the U.S. policy towards Russia at the time looks sinister and most of the time downright foolish, but that is hindsight.  (And let me say that I think the policy should have been one of absolute non-interference either for or against any party involved in Russian domestic arrangements.)  Another secondary cause that Davis and Trani and you have not taken into consideration is the history of American foreign policy up until 1918.  We had only two major competing foreign policy philosophies - Jeffersonian isolationism and Hamiltonian trade alliance engagement.  Until the TR republican/progressive era, the Monroe doctrine was the diefining foreign policy of the U.S.  Yes, I think your work here is very interesting and I enjoy it very much, but in my own personal opinion, you cannot prove your original claim that Wilson helped to murder the Tsar.  In my own reading and research, I  think that decision was made by Lenin as early as 1911, that when and if he siezed power, that the imperial family would have to be wiped out as completely as he was able to, in order to cut off any possibility of return to any kind of monarchial or Romanov rule.  Anything short of American military intervention in actually possessing or capturing the imperial family by the U.S. would have resulted in the same outcome.

Your turn...

Offline AGRBear

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 6611
  • The road to truth is the best one to travel.
    • View Profile
    • Romanov's  Russia
Re: Did President Wilson help murder Nicholas II?
« Reply #101 on: September 03, 2006, 06:47:23 PM »
No problem Griffh.
 The Provisional Goverment assumed full power, GD MIchael never accepted it, therefore never "abdicated", as he never had anything to "abdicate" from". His document was as Grand Duke, NOT Emperor. This is so mis-interpreted as to have become  simple folklore for Romanov romanticists.
 As for the Bolsheviks,  yes, I would agree that they took power through violence.  Most radical power exchanges  go that way, do they not?  Not all perhaps, but usually one force does not easily give up to an opposing force without even a futile fight.
Personally,. after reading all the arguments herein, I think Wilson had minimal effect in the  dynamics of the Russian revolutions.  He cared not at all for the autocratic rule, probably  not much for  some obscure provisional agreement and  was cluless about socialism.
 The only reason to send those American troops was to protect capitalist AMERICAN interests. Once that was a lost cause, no further effort was expended.
They certainly were not sent to rescue a bunch of worthless Romanovs.

I don't have much time this afternoon to reply to Robert Hall's quote but the moment Nicholas II abdicated,  Michael became Emperor/Tsar of All the Russias.  There wasn't a spilt second Russia was without a Emperor/Tsar due to the laws of Russia.

Michael Nicholasovich became Emperor Michael I and Tsar Michael II before the ex-Emperor/Tsar Nicholas II lefted his pen off the abdication document which named him sucessor instead of Alexei.

What occured was,  Emperor Michael was never crown due to the Revolution, Counter Revolution, Civil War and execution by the Bolsheviks.

Emperor Michael never abdicated.  He did send a letter to the Provisional Govt.  but  the letter was not an abdication, although it is often referred to having been his abdication.

Gotta run.

AGRBear
« Last Edit: September 03, 2006, 07:07:53 PM by AGRBear »
"What is true by lamplight is not always true by sunlight."

Joubert, Pensees, No. 152

Offline griffh

  • Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 536
  • I love YaBB 1G - SP1!
    • View Profile
Re: Griffh
« Reply #102 on: September 04, 2006, 01:44:22 AM »
Hey Bev I love what you said, "Your turn."  This is really fun.  You are absolutely right that I have not produced any proof as of yet and that is because I just finished laying out my foundation.  

As AGRBear so skillfully observed awhile ago, it will not be until I post the chonology of events that we can see if there is evidence to support my arguement.  I think that once start posting the chronology it will be so much easier to see the strength or weakness of my case.    

This is all very interesting.  You are not, however, offering any evidence.  You're offering suppositions based on the motivations of those few Americans in Russia at the time.  There were all sorts of characters moving around Europe, because some of them were members of the American progressive party or members of the American socialist democrats, that doesn't mean that they had sinister ulterior motives...You mention Alex. Gumberg, but many historians think that he was a triple agent, spying for the allied powers, the U.S., the Bolshevists and the Germans.

I think that while your observations are very sound and true, at the same time no other country drew the same kind of Americans to the their respective American diplomatic communities as were drawn to Russia.  You know I was almost sure that Gumberg was a triple agent and I think that it is here that we find a sinister element.  While saying that I think Gumberg had such tremendous influence over Robbins damaged American diplomacy and falsely bolstered the fledgling Bolshevik government.  Robbins, in turn, had tremendous influence over General Judson the Head of the Military Mission and Ambassador Francis' military aide.  Robbins wasn't the only one that had to face a Senate subcommittee investigation, General Judson also called before the Senate too.  
    
...you're not taking into consideration the reports the state department was receiving from those who were not participating in what one historian has dubbed "The Wall Street Friends of Russia mission."  Just because reports are passed along to the state department, it doesn't mean that Wilson or the state department were receiving and acting upon these reports as advice and American policy.
 

I think I did cover that point earlier but it got buried somewhere back in the thread.  The only source that Wilson and the State Dept. acted on was Colonel House who in turn relied on Mr. Bullard the Sec. of the American Friends of Russian People.  In fact it was Bullards reports to House that were inpart, responisble for the quick establishment of Head of The Committee on Public Information—The Office of War Information, Washington.  The trouble was really that Wilson and the State Dept didn't really appear to believe anyone but House.  And the only reason Bullard was listened to is because of his reports to House.  

I completely agree that the U.S. policy towards Russia at the time looks sinister and most of the time downright foolish, but that is hindsight.  (And let me say that I think the policy should have been one of absolute non-interference either for or against any party involved in Russian domestic arrangements.)  Another secondary cause that Davis and Trani and you have not taken into consideration is the history of American foreign policy up until 1918.  We had only two major competing foreign policy philosophies - Jeffersonian isolationism and Hamiltonian trade alliance engagement.  Until the TR republican/progressive era, the Monroe doctrine was the diefining foreign policy of the U.S.
 

Great point and you have really caught what I am really trying to prove which is the damage that was done because of such a foolish policy.  Great point about the contradictory nature of America's pre-1918 foriegn policy.

Yes, I think your work here is very interesting and I enjoy it very much, but in my own personal opinion, you cannot prove your original claim that Wilson helped to murder the Tsar.  In my own reading and research, I  think that decision was made by Lenin as early as 1911, that when and if he siezed power, that the imperial family would have to be wiped out as completely as he was able to, in order to cut off any possibility of return to any kind of monarchial or Romanov rule.  Anything short of American military intervention in actually possessing or capturing the imperial family by the U.S. would have resulted in the same outcome.
 

Very interesting about Lenin.  I believe it.  As for Wilson culpablity, let's learn if ignorance is as lethal as malice.  

Bev I did not address all your excellant points, especially the one about Germany....they are all so worthy of discussion, but somehow it is 2:30 in the morning and I am in need of rest.....Nighty night

Oh AGRBear, just a quick note to say how nice it is to hear from you.  Please share some of your great American history insights.  Hey do you think if Witte had lived, knowing his strong support of Michael, that Witte would have been had the power to establish Michael, and overcome the fear that seemed to grip Rodzianko and the others?  Well anyway  Nighty night....




Bev

  • Guest
Griffh
« Reply #103 on: September 04, 2006, 08:29:53 AM »
an acknowledgement that I read your post - you're moving the goalposts, not advancing the game.  No way can I buy the argument that House relied only on Bullard and Wilson relied only on House - that's not provable and I'm thinking it's demonstrably false.  More on that later...

did other foreign diplomatic services draw "characters" and other marginals to their services - absolutely, all foreign services were/are able to draw all sorts of fringe elements, rogues, the greedy, the stupid - the British service was rife with those characters, not just in Russia, but everywhere.  (Britain as the example, since they were the most powerful.)

In hindsight the U.S. policy looked sinister and foolish - at the time it may have been a perfectly reasonable position for the U.S. to take, especially since we didn't have the intelligence networks that the allied powers had.

It's still your turn, I'm just lodging a few objections in the meantime...

Offline Eddie_uk

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 2925
    • View Profile
Re: Did President Wilson help murder Nicholas II?
« Reply #104 on: September 04, 2006, 09:03:49 AM »

The photo above shows the Wilson's in the company of George V, Queen Mary and their daughter in Dec. 1918, shortly before the Wilson's depart to the Paris Peace Conference.  The King already preplexed by the "Brave New World" he had so reluctantly become a part of would not allow Queen Mary to wear the new short skirts sported by Mrs. Wilson and his own daughter, Princess Mary. 
 

Not to get of topic but, with a shorter skirt or not, Queen Mary still manages to look the best dressed there!! In my opinion :)
Grief is the price we pay for love.

FREE PALESTINE.