Churchill

[AnthonyGerrard]

Churchill - 50 years legacy.

Rightly remembered as a great leader/man? Oh yes yes yes , or Oh no no no?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-29701767

Two notable things missing from this list the gold standard and Gallipoli.


He did, it was pointed out to me, keep the spirits up of a nation at war in WWII. However by that measure so did Stalin and Hitler?

 

[dan-cat]

He did, it was pointed out to me, keep the spirits up of a nation at war in WWII. However by that measure so did Stalin and Hitler?

He was, I think, a little more astute than what is implied here. For example, he perceived the Munich Agreement for what it was without the benefit of hindsight.

A complex subject to be sure.

 

[Bladerunner]

He was, I think, a little more astute than what is implied here. For example, he perceived the Munich Agreement for what it was without the benefit of hindsight.

A complex subject to be sure.

It all comes down to the 'Isolationism' that was present at the time which included. your Prime Minister even though he was told by Mr. Churchill what was fixing to happen. We have almost that same situation now!

Just remember the results of all the Isolationism.... 250 Million DEAD!

Have a nice day?

Blade\

 

[AnthonyGerrard]

He was, I think, a little more astute than what is implied here. For example, he perceived the Munich Agreement for what it was without the benefit of hindsight.

A complex subject to be sure.

We have no hindsight of what would have happened without the agreement.

I see just as much bad judgement as good/ right as wrong. Does that make you a great man or leader?

Of course this can change in how each act/decision/view is weighed, to whether it actually was more positive than not.

 

[Brianwarnock]

Re: Churchill - 50 years legacy.

Rightly remembered as a great leader/man? Oh yes yes yes , or Oh no no no?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-29701767

Two notable things missing from this list the gold standard and Gallipoli.


He did, it was pointed out to me, keep the spirits up of a nation at war in WWII. However by that measure so did Stalin and Hitler?

Are you sure Stalin is not seen as a great leader in Russia ?
Hitler however was on the losing side.

On some of the comments in the link we have to be careful in judging the past by current standards.
As has been stated by dan , a complex subject.

Brian

 

[dan-cat]

We have no hindsight of what would have happened without the agreement.

At the risk of sounding facetious, would you prefer I base my views on what we don't know?

I see just as much bad judgement as good/ right as wrong. Does that make you a great man or leader?

Of course this can change in how each act/decision/view is weighed, to whether it actually was more positive than not.

My previous comment was an attempt to knock down the implication that he was simply a figurehead type character adapting speeches from Henry V to boost morale.

If your point is that he was a man with flaws who fell short of the heroic status foisted upon him, you'll get no argument from me.

 

[Bladerunner]

At the risk of sounding facetious, would you prefer I base my views on what we don't know?



My previous comment was an attempt to knock down the implication that he was simply a figurehead type character adapting speeches from Henry V to boost morale.

If your point is that he was a man with flaws who fell short of the heroic status foisted upon him, you'll get no argument from me.

Great leaders are judged by what they do in Extraordinary times. Stalin for example killed as many (if not more) of his own people than Hitler did. Churchill was at the right place at the right time. I know that history has changed over the years but what really happened back then was that he got your people together, bundled the strength they possessed and used it to help win a war against a brutal Killer, at the very least. I would dare say and probably be right in saying that if anyone of the major players on the Allied side of the war happened to fall out or disappear, the war would have been lost and we would be speaking German about right now. That is the ones that might have been born and alive today.

I don't really know the politics in the Churchill and the previous PM. I will leave that to you. Just remember this, Over time, History gets diluted. (i.e. Common core has school books that speaks of the great World War and how it was the hatred that caused us to use the Atomic Bomb on Japan). You might agree with it, but with the ferociousness the Japanese fighter fought on other islands, it was judged that to invade the island of Japan, many tens of thousands (if not 100 thousands) of our Soldiers would die needlessly. Yet once history is far enough in the past, it is rewritten and rewritten much like you claim the books of the bible were until very few remnants of the actual truth exist.

Forgive me in getting in between a family squabble (i.e. Frothingslosh and myself) but thought you might want to know how (and I attempt to speak in part for a few older vets that don't have this opportunity especially my father..........) the US people at that time felt about Mr. Churchill.

 

[AnthonyGerrard]

At the risk of sounding facetious, would you prefer I base my views on what we don't know?

Its important to consider what we don't know - as well as what we do?