all true, althouygh i am struck by how wide of the mark churchills assessment of the upcoming war is. he says they are much better off than ww1, whereas the truth turned out the opposite, i.e. dunkirk.
perhaps if he had a better idea of what was about to happen he could have taken the time to beef up his own forces.
one could argue the only thing that really saved england was japan attacking pearl harbor. without that they probably would have lost, or russia would have beat hitler alone and all europe be under russia.
for the record i also note that churchills major war objective, to free Poland, was not met. Poland ended up still incaptivity, just russia not russia and germany.
just another example, that when you get in a war you have no idea how it will turn out, none.
You must remember at this time Churchill was not PM. He was ‘merely’ First Sea Lord. Chamberlain was PM and probably reflected the mood of the electorate at the time.
And I agree that the US saved Europe’s bacon. Churchill said as much on 12/7/41.
http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/churchill/interactive/_html/wc0142_1.html
Winston S. Churchill. The Second World War, vol. 3
In Churchill’s history of The Second World War he wrote of his emotions upon hearing that Japan had attacked United States forces at Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941. Only “silly people, and there were many,” underestimated American strength. For him, the entry of the United States into the war meant that the ultimate outcome—favorable for his country—was now assured. Feeling “the greatest joy” that the attack had arrayed his mother’s country on the side of Britain, he “went to bed and slept the sleep of the saved and thankful.”
Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain's "major war objective" may have been to free Poland. When Churchill became Prime Minister, his "major war objective" was the complete and utter destruction of Nazi Germany.
What do you think? Did he achieve that?