Pop Quiz: Are You Churchill? or Are You Chamberlain?

9/26/15

[Be Careful]

Your kids and grandkids deserve to know if you are a frog in the water or not. They will not remember your words, but they will have to live out your decisions. Who are you: Churchill or Chamberlain?

[lakecumberlandvet]

Being cognizant of history, I’m Churchill.

[WilliamIII]

are you Reagan or (W) Bush?

[TruthWillWin]

Is there supposed to be a link to a quiz?

[CharlesOConnell]

Churchill, Hitler, and "The Unnecessary War": How Britain Lost Its Empire and the West Lost the World Paperback – July 28, 2009 by Patrick J. Buchanan

Taking his swing at the origins of World War II, conservative pundit Buchanan incorporates the subject into his warnings, expressed in several populist jeremiads (State of Emergency, 2006), of the decline of the West. Certainly World War I, with which Buchanan begins, was a catastrophe for Western civilization whose ramifications continue to be felt. Buchanan’s interpretation generally holds that British and American participation in both WWI and WWII was avoidable if British leaders had recognized that Germany was no threat to the vital interests of the British Empire. Banking his thesis on such supposed benevolence from Wilhelm II and Adolf Hitler, Buchanan criticizes various British policies of the 1920s and 1930s (who doesn’t?), and argues collaterally with Hitler’s statements disclaiming fundamental conflicts with Britain. The weakness in Buchanan’s line of thinking, of course, is that by 1939, Hitler’s international word was worthless; yet Buchanan hinges his case on what might have happened had Britain let Hitler go after Poland in 1939 as it had Czechoslovakia. Speculating a better future had the West permitted Nazi Germany a free hand in Eastern Europe, Buchanan cites the historical costs of Britain and France having at last drawn the line against aggression. Convinced? Controversial as is his wont, Buchanan reminds his large readership that the immediate ignition of WWII can still be disputed. --Gilbert Taylor

[sparklite2]

I (we) am Jabba the Hutt.
Sorry, kids and grandkids,
for spending your money
before you even earned it,
on myself to pay for things
I didn’t use, didn’t want,
but just couldn’t say no.
Burp.

[Be Careful]

A simple yes or no.....to your children.....with or without the snark......will tell them all they need to know about you or others.....

[88keys]

Well, I am NOT Buchanan, for sure...

That is just a weird idea! Isolationist...there's no doubt it would have been fine if Hitler were allowed to take over Europe? He did not threaten Britain or the US until we got involved?

Yeah, makes perfect sense...NOT!

Guess that would put me in the Churchill camp, lol

[Menehune56]

Is this a poll we’re supposed to FReep? Need a link.

[wjcsux]

Buchanan goes off the rails very frequently.

[Impy]

Archibald Primrose?

[cripplecreek]

Coolidge with more foresight.

[Fiji Hill]

I'm certainly not a Chamberlain, but I'm not sure I'm a Churchill. For all his great accomplishments, Churchill did agree with FDR to hand Poland over to Stalin and signed off on Operation Keelhaul, arguably the Allies' worst atrocity of the war. I'm more of a hardliner like Konrad Adenauer.

[driftless2]

I'm reading a three volume history of Churchill (by William Manchester) now and almost finished with the last volume. The part detailing the appeasing of Hitler five years before the war is especially dispirting. Churchill had started noticing the Nazis in the late twenties and stepped up his anti-Nazi orations when Hitler took power. He was proved right on every prediction about Hitler's moves including persecution of the Jews.

He was resolutely ignored by Chamberlain who intensely disliked Churchill. Even after Hitler attacked Poland, Chamberlain naively thought he could make a deal with Hitler. He only realized his foolishness shortly before he gave up party leadership and the P.M. to Churchill.

After the May 1940 debacle when Hitler's armies crushed the Allied forces in France, Hitler was sure England was finished. After France gave in he was absolutely sure Britain would sue for peace. He didn't know Churchill. Churchill would rather have died with a smoking pistol in his hand rather than surrender. And Churchill did carry a revolver around.

Shortly before he committed suicide Hitler told one of his flunkies that while he still liked the English people in general, Churchill was the only one didn't like.

[CharlesOConnell]

Free sci-fi book, Murray Leinster, "The Leader"

The Leader's last words in the book: "I am Prime Minister Winston".

[Daffynition]

RU thin-skinned?

[PotatoHeadMick]

With the single exception of correctly predicting and warning against the rise of the Nazis in his political career Churchill was wrong about every single major issue of British foreign and domestic policy.

He was wrong on India on Ireland on the abdication on the Gold Standard, during the First World War he was wrong on the importance of winning on the western front and defeating the Germans in France (although in fairness he was wrong on that for the right reasons).

So with such a track record it is fairly understandable for him to be ignored when he finally got it right.

During the Second World War as First Lord of the Admiralty he oversaw one of the single most calamitous failures of the Royal Navy’s history when the Germans sailed up through the North Sea, a British lake, and seized Norway. He only escaped blame for that because of his previous record of calling for rearmament and because of the disaster that immediately took place in France.

Throughout the Second World War he oversaw catastrophic errors that ultimately saw the British Empire dissolved and what remained of British wealth and territory handed over lock, stock and barrel to the US.

So no doubt we can all beat our chests about how we are Churchills roaring out our defiance to the world but in many ways he was a disaster for Britain and I am one of his admirers by the way, but I prefer my heroes warts and all, not plaster saints.

[88keys]

Interesting points you make, and tend to agree...

It's helpful to have the 20/20 hindsight, of course! and there's times when a little roaring might do some good?!

Ha!

[PotatoHeadMick]

As he said himself the British people were the lions he merely gave them the roar and fundamentally, and not in any way wishing to denigrate him, Churchill’s greatness stems from his rallying an unsure and still semi-appeasing British people in the dark days of 1940, holding the fort as it were until Russia and the US got involved.

He rallied the British people with a couple of simply magnificent and sublime speeches that to this day can make the hairs stand on the back of your neck as you think about the context in which they were made and the effect they had on the world.

However, to be perfectly honest once the threat of invasion had passed any of half a dozen resolute men in the British cabinet could have taken over as wartime prime minister and done equally as well, indeed perhaps even better.