Why I hate America

[Rich]

He only took measures to start improving our defences because a guy called Winston was making a nuisance of himself.

 

[Rich]

Among anti-appeasers the name of Winston Churchill inevitably takes first place. Not least in the account given in the first volume of his own war memoirs, The Gathering Storm (1948), Churchill stands as the isolated prophet who consistently warned the government of the dangers posed by Nazi Germany and of the disaster to which the policy of appeasement would inevitably lead. The Churchillian argument suggested that faster British rearmament could have deterred the German dictator and that a readiness to make a stand at crucial moments could have halted Hitler's rake's progress before it was too late

Abcdefghijk

 

[ajetrumpet]

i wonder if the boss at work scolded him for being a democrat (or whatever)

 

[Brianwarnock]

i wonder if the boss at work scolded him for being a democrat (or whatever)

More probably he felt embarrased for not knowing whom the Winston was that Rich refered to.

Brian

 

[dan-cat]

He only took measures to start improving our defences because a guy called Winston was making a nuisance of himself.

So are you saying that Chamberlain's policy of appeasement was based on a genuine belief that war could be completely avoided with Germany as opposed to the stalling tactic that Brian was describing?

 

[Rabbie]

So are you saying that Chamberlain's policy of appeasement was based on a genuine belief that war could be completely avoided with Germany as opposed to the stalling tactic that Brian was describing?

I believe that Chamberlain's appeasement policy ws based on a genuine belief that war could be avoided. He did have the support of a large majority of the british population at the time. Memories of the horrors of the First World War were still fresh in peoples mind and there was also a feeling that Germany had been harshly treated by the Treaty of Versailles

 

[Rich]

More probably he felt embarrased for not knowing whom the Winston was that Rich refered to.

Brian

You're being a little unfair there Bri, he/she is after all, American

 

[Rich]

So are you saying that Chamberlain's policy of appeasement was based on a genuine belief that war could be completely avoided with Germany as opposed to the stalling tactic that Brian was describing?

No, where did I say it was?

 

[dan-cat]

No, where did I say it was?

You didn't. However I don't understand why Chamberlain needed coaxing into preparing for war by the likes of Churchill if he truly believed that war could not be avoided.

 

[Rich]

You didn't. However I don't understand why Chamberlain needed coaxing into preparing for war

Who said he did?

 

[Brianwarnock]

Currently post#41
and it only makes sense if the He refers to Chamberlain mentioned at length in post#40

He only took measures to start improving our defences because a guy called Winston was making a nuisance of himself.

 

[Rich]

The question centres on the use of the word "coaxed" Brian

 

[dan-cat]

The question centres on the use of the word "coaxed" Brian

Whatever word you want to describe Churchill's required involvement to set Chamberlain into preparation for war is fine with me.

I'd just like to know why such an involvement was required if Chamberlain knew war was inevitable.

Following from this, what was the point of appeasement if

a) He didn't think it would avoid war

or

b) He wasn't buying time to improve Britain's defenses.

 

[Rich]

Whatever word you want to describe Churchill's required involvement to set Chamberlain into preparation for war is fine with me.

I'd just like to know why such an involvement was required if Chamberlain knew war was inevitable.

Following from this, what was the point of appeasement if

a) He didn't think it would avoid war

or

b) He wasn't buying time to improve Britain's defenses.

Who said that "inolvement was required"?

 

[dan-cat]

Who said that "inolvement was required"?

You keep answering questions with questions which isn't very helpful.

From what you said:

He only took measures to start improving our defences because a guy called Winston was making a nuisance of himself.

I assumed from this that you were saying that improvement of defences would not have occured without Winston's involvement. If not, what is it that you were saying?

 

[Rich]

I assumed from this that you were saying that improvement of defences would not have occured without Winston's involvement. If not, what is it that you were saying?

We'll never "really" know, will we

 

[statsman]

The point I was trying to make earlier is that the current historical thinking about Chamberlain is that he knew war was coming.
Britian's defences had fallen to a very low state under the previous PM Stanley Baldwin. This is understandable as the world (and Britain) was going through the worst economic depression in history.
By using appeasement, Chamberlain hoped that war could be put off long enough for Britian to be at least somewhat prepared for it.

Churchill laid off Chamberlain with the exception of the sell out of the Czechs at Munich.

 

[dan-cat]

By using appeasement, Chamberlain hoped that war could be put off long enough for Britian to be at least somewhat prepared for it.

I understand this but how this reconciled with the idea that Chamberlain didn't want an active policy of improving defenses.

 

[statsman]

I understand this but how this reconciled with the idea that Chamberlain didn't want an active policy of improving defenses.

Dan:
If this is addressed to me, please refer to Post 40 in this topic.

If it's addressed to Rich, I would never dream of responding for him.

 

[Rich]

Dan:
If it's addressed to Rich, I would never dream of responding for him.

Because you're not equipped to do so?