Author: Tetman Callis
“Experience at the end of World War II demonstrated that it is much more difficult to order the affairs of liberated nations than of defeated ones. This is because it is undesirable, if not impossible, to arbitrate their affairs with the same ruthlessness. If Washington’s twenty-first-century neoconservatives had possessed a less muddled understanding of the experience of 1944-45, had studied more closely Allied difficulties managing liberated territories in the Roosevelt-Churchill era, they might have inflicted less grief upon the world in our own times by their blunders in Iraq and Afghanistan.” – Max Hastings, Winston’s War
“British and American intelligence possessed enough information by late 1944, from Ultra and escaped Auschwitz prisoners, to deduce that something uniquely terrible was being done to the Jews in Nazi-occupied Europe, if the right conclusions had been drawn from the evidence. . . . [G]iven the known limitations of precision bombing even where good target intelligence was available, the case for specific action against the Nazi death machine seemed overborne by the overarching argument for hastening military victory to end the sufferings of all Europe’s oppressed people. The airmen could be sure that any bombing of the camps would kill many prisoners. It is the privilege of posterity to recognize that this would have been a price worth paying. In the full tilt of war, to borrow Churchill’s phrase from a different context, it is possible to understand why the British and Americans failed to act with the energy and commitment which hindsight shows to have been appropriate. Temperate historians of the period recognise a real doubt about whether any plausible air force action would substantially have impeded the operations of the Nazi death machine.” – Max Hastings, Winston’s War
“Some illusions persist that the wartime Allies missed opportunities to promote the cause of ‘good Germans’ who opposed Hitler, rejecting approaches from such men as Adam von Trott. Yet the British seemed right, first, to assume that any dalliance of this kind must leak, fuelling Soviet paranoia about a negotiated peace and, second, in believing that the anti-Hitler faction was both weak and flawed. Michael Howard has written: ‘We know that such “right-minded people” did exist; but the remarkable thing is that . . . there should have been so few of them, and that their influence should have been so slight.’ Howard notes that most of the July 1944 bomb plotters were right-wing nationalists, who cherished grotesquely extravagant ambitions for their country’s postwar polity. The principal objective of most of those who joined the conspiracy against Hitler, as the Foreign Office perceived at the time, was to enlist Anglo-American aid against the Russians. It is easy to understand why postwar Germans sought to canonise the July bomb plotters. But it would have represented folly for Churchill’s government to dally with them, and there is no cause for historians to concede them exaggerated respect. A large majority of the July 20 conspirators turned against Hitler not because he was indescribably wicked, but because they perceived that he was leading Germany to defeat.” – Max Hastings, Winston’s War (ellipsis in original)
“Clarity is not the prize in writing, nor is it always the principal mark of a good style. There are occasions when obscurity serves a literary yearning, if not a literary purpose, and there are writers whose mien is more overcast than clear. But since writing is communication, clarity can only be a virtue. And although there is no substitute for merit in writing, clarity comes closest to being one.” – William Strunk Jr. and E. B. White, The Elements of Style
“Do not be tempted by a twenty-dollar word when there’s a ten-center handy, ready and able.” – William Strunk Jr. and E. B. White, The Elements of Style
“Adverbs are easy to build. Take an adjective or a participle, add -ly, and behold! you have an adverb. But you’d probably be better off without it.” – William Strunk Jr. and E. B. White, The Elements of Style
“The adjective hasn’t been built that can pull a weak or inaccurate noun out of a tight place.” – William Strunk Jr. and E. B. White, The Elements of Style
“Writing is, for most, laborious and slow. The mind travels faster than the pen; consequently, writing becomes a question of learning to make occasional wing shots, bringing down the bird of thought as it flashes by.” – William Strunk Jr. and E. B. White, The Elements of Style
“Young writers often suppose that style is a garnish for the meat of prose, a sauce by which a dull dish is made palatable. Style has no such separate entity; it is nondetachable, unfilterable.” – William Strunk Jr. and E. B. White, The Elements of Style
“Who can confidently say what ignites a certain combination of words, causing them to explode in the mind? Who knows why certain notes in music are capable of stirring the listener deeply, though the same notes slightly rearranged are impotent? These are high mysteries . . . . There is no satisfactory explanation of style, no infallible guide to good writing, no assurance that a person who thinks clearly will be able to write clearly, no key that unlocks the door.” – William Strunk Jr. and E. B. White, The Elements of Style
“Life is a lot like boxing. You’ve got to do your roadwork, and when you get knocked down, you’ve got to get back up.” – Sugar Ray Leonard
“In formal writing, the future tense requires shall for the first person, will for the second and third. The formula to express the speaker’s belief regarding his future action or state is I shall; I will expresses his determination or his consent. A swimmer in distress cries, “I shall drown; no one will save me!” A suicide puts it the other way: “I will drown; no one shall save me!” In relaxed speech, however, the words shall and will are seldom used precisely; our ear guides us or fails to guide us, as the case may be, and we are quite likely to drown when we want to survive and survive when we want to drown.” – William Strunk Jr. and E. B. White, The Elements of Style (emphases in original)
“For many years after 1945, the democracies found it gratifying to perceive the Second World War in Europe as a struggle for survival between themselves and Nazi tyranny. Yet the military outcome of the contest was overwhelmingly decided by the forces of Soviet tyranny, rather than by Anglo-American armies.” – Max Hastings, Winston’s War
“I believe in aristocracy, though—if that is the right word, and if a democrat may use it. Not an aristocracy of power, based upon rank and influence, but an aristocracy of the sensitive, the considerate and the plucky. Its members are to be found in all nations and classes, and all through the ages, and there is a secret understanding between them when they meet. They represent the true human tradition, the one permanent victory of our queer race over cruelty and chaos. Thousands of them perish in obscurity, a few are great names. They are sensitive for others as well as for themselves, they are considerate without being fussy, their pluck is not swankiness but the power to endure, and they can take a joke.” – E. M. Forster, Two Cheers for Democracy
“I returned, and saw under the sun, that the race is not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, neither yet bread to the wise, nor yet riches to men of understanding, nor yet favour to men of skill; but time and chance happeneth to them all.” – Ecclesiastes 9:11
“Clear leadership, violent action, rigid decision one way or the other, form the only path not only of victory, but of safety and even of mercy. The State cannot afford division or hesitation at the executive centre.” – Winston Churchill, The World Crisis, Vol. 2
“Men should always be difficult. I can’t bear men who come and dine with you when you want them.” – Benjamin Disraeli (Max Hastings, Winston’s War)
“No great country was ever saved by good men, because good men will not go to the lengths that may be necessary.” – Horace Walpole, 4th Earl of Orford, “Letter to the Countess of Ossory”
“Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities, but the influence of the religion paralyzes the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world.” – Winston Churchill, The River War
“Learning is a precious thing and knowing one’s mind is even more so.” – Virgil Thomson, Taste in Music
“For practical living, man needs to be free in his thought and responsible in his actions. But in dealing with art, responsibility of thought, which makes for slowness of judgment, and freedom of action, which makes for flexibility of taste, constitute the mechanics of vigor.” – Virgil Thomson, Taste in Music
“Today is only one day in all the days that will ever be. But what will happen in all the other days that ever come can depend on what you do today.” – Ernest Hemingway, For Whom the Bell Tolls
“Wait until you’re hurt before you start to cry. Wait until the fight before you get angry.” – Ernest Hemingway, For Whom the Bell Tolls
“No animal has more liberty than the cat; but it buries the mess it makes. The cat is the best anarchist.” – Ernest Hemingway, For Whom the Bell Tolls
“How can the world be made better if there are no children of us who fight against the fascists?” – Ernest Hemingway, For Whom the Bell Tolls
“An officer’s use of deadly force is reasonable under the Fourth Amendment if the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others. In determining whether an officer’s use of deadly force is objectively reasonable, a court must determine what was reasonable under the circumstances, considering the totality of the circumstances, including the severity of crime at issue, whether the suspect posed an immediate threat to the safety of the officers or others, and whether the suspect resisted arrest or attempted to evade arrest by flight. It is unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment for police officer to seize an unarmed, nondangerous suspect by shooting him dead, or to use a choke hold to restrain an individual when he or she poses no harm. It is also unreasonable for an officer to use deadly force on a suspect walking towards the police if the suspect’s hands are at his or her sides. Although the initial use of force may be reasonable, the continued use of deadly force in attempting to arrest a suspect may become unreasonable when such force is no longer necessary. An officer must warn a suspect that he or she might shoot, if feasible under the circumstances. The officer may be criminally responsible or civilly liable if the officer uses more force than is necessary to effect the arrest.” – Michele Hughes and Eric C. Surette, American Jurisprudence, Second Edition
“In combat there must be discipline. For many things are not as they appear. Discipline must come from trust and confidence.” – Ernest Hemingway, For Whom the Bell Tolls
“A common criticism of legal writing is that those in the legal profession are enamored of redundancy. They cannot merely say null. They must say null and void and of no legal force or effect. Is all this needed? If something is null, isn’t it void? If it is void, can it have legal effect? The reason legal writing is so prone to word doubling (and tripling) lies in the history of our language. English has its roots in Latin and French as well as in the language of the Celts and the Anglo-Saxons. Often word pairings were used to ensure that readers would understand phrases regardless of their background or station in life. Thus, the French word peace joined with the Latin word quiet. These redundant doublings have persisted long after any need for them. Their use today is often the result of habit rather than necessity.” – Deborah E. Bouchoux, Aspen Handbook for Legal Writers (emphases in original)
“There is no one who cannot be hurt.” – Ernest Hemingway, For Whom the Bell Tolls
“Your nationality and your politics did not show when you were dead.” – Ernest Hemingway, For Whom the Bell Tolls