How Important Was Churchill During WW2?

General Urko

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 24, 2012
Messages
15,674
I was just watching 'Darkest Hour' and I doubt it's an accurate portrayal of the scheming and plotting by Neville and Halifax against him, actually AFAIK, Halifax refused the off of the premiership before it was offered to Winston and as he was in The Lords, it would have been not possible any way!

But it did set me wondering about how important this hitherto failure was to the outcome of WW2. Could any other non appeaser done as well? Or did he in fact bumble and prolong the war?

Mind you, he said in this drama, he had never ridden a bus or been on the metro or even boiled an egg in his life, so even more so Than our own Leo, he didn't live an ordinary experience!
 


sic transit

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 30, 2008
Messages
25,392
He did represent that never say die, bulldog attitude and delivered some fine strong words, which is what was needed psychologically for Britain.
 

Nebuchadnezzar

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 15, 2011
Messages
10,873
I was just watching 'Darkest Hour' and I doubt it's an accurate portrayal of the scheming and plotting by Neville and Halifax against him, actually AFAIK, Halifax refused the off of the premiership before it was offered to Winston and as he was in The Lords, it would have been not possible any way!

But it did set me wondering about how important this hitherto failure was to the outcome of WW2. Could any other non appeaser done as well? Or did he in fact bumble and prolong the war?

Mind you, he said in this drama, he had never ridden a bus or been on the metro or even boiled an egg in his life, so even more so Than our own Leo, he didn't live an ordinary experience!
AFAIK being a Lord rather than an MP did not preclude Halifax from the premiership.
 

Congalltee

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 10, 2009
Messages
6,124
No where as important as the Russians who inflicted 6 German casualties to every one the Brits/US caused.
 

parentheses

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
13,966
As far as I know, he was not popular in the Tory party even after he became PM.

Mahority opinion was pro-appeasement
 

Nebuchadnezzar

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 15, 2011
Messages
10,873
And in answer to the OP....Critical.

Without Churchill.....

Peace with Germany 1940.

Germany consolidates and concentrates on her army and air power.

Barbarossa without any distractions in May 1941.

No lendlease support for USSR from the UK or USA.

Oulook 1942 onwards ? Very bleak I would say.
 

Polybius

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 8, 2015
Messages
4,413
No where as important as the Russians who inflicted 6 German casualties to every one the Brits/US caused.
Britain's only real vital contribution to the war was the Battle of Britain and keeping Britain open as a base for Americans to arrive in Europe. Other than than they were mostly fannying about in North Africa or dropping bombs on German cities.
 

Drogheda445

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 13, 2012
Messages
6,449
While Halifax might have been more open to peace he was certainly not going to grant concessions to the Nazis without the British public calling for his head. At best you would have had a Treaty of Amiens, Napoleonic style peace which would have lasted for a few years at most, but a resumption of war was inevitable. Of course in such a timeframe the Nazis would have had far greater opportunity to focus on their planned invasion of Soviet Russia and given the circumstances could well have been successful.

Churchill was important at this juncture for insisting that Britain continue to prosecute the war, which created a helpful and inconclusive distraction for the Germans for several months and also helped to gain the sympathy of Americans through their suffering that mightn't have been there had someone other than Churchill negotiated peace terms.
 

Nebuchadnezzar

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 15, 2011
Messages
10,873
Britain's only real vital contribution to the war was the Battle of Britain and keeping Britain open as a base for Americans to arrive in Europe. Other than than they were mostly fannying about in North Africa or dropping bombs on German cities.
An extremely simplistic assessment.
 

General Urko

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 24, 2012
Messages
15,674

Drogheda445

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 13, 2012
Messages
6,449
As far as I know, he was not popular in the Tory party even after he became PM.

Mahority opinion was pro-appeasement
By the time that Churchill came to power they certainly weren't pro appeasement, that had died a death in early 1939. There would almost certainly have been uproar if the government were to even accept peace terms with the Germans, never mind grant them territorial concessions (the latter would have been absolutely unthinkable given the British position).
 

General Urko

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 24, 2012
Messages
15,674
As far as I know, he was not popular in the Tory party even after he became PM.

Mahority opinion was pro-appeasement
Churchill had pissed a lot of Tories off because he had been with The Liberals for a period and was probably not seen as a true Tory, despite his background!
 

parentheses

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
13,966
By the time that Churchill came to power they certainly weren't pro appeasement, that had died a death in early 1939. There would almost certainly have been uproar if the government were to even accept peace terms with the Germans, never mind grant them territorial concessions (the latter would have been absolutely unthinkable given the British position).
In the middle of 1940 they did consider a peace deal with the Germans.
 

The Field Marshal

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 27, 2009
Messages
43,645
I was just watching 'Darkest Hour' and I doubt it's an accurate portrayal of the scheming and plotting by Neville and Halifax against him, actually AFAIK, Halifax refused the off of the premiership before it was offered to Winston and as he was in The Lords, it would have been not possible any way!

But it did set me wondering about how important this hitherto failure was to the outcome of WW2. Could any other non appeaser done as well? Or did he in fact bumble and prolong the war?

Mind you, he said in this drama, he had never ridden a bus or been on the metro or even boiled an egg in his life, so even more so Than our own Leo, he didn't live an ordinary experience!
I have never liked either Hitler, Churchill, Stalin or Roosveldt .
So asking how important was Churchill to WW2 is the same as asking how important were the other three named above.

What you really need to ask is amongst the four above who was the baddest bollix.
My own view in terms of sheer evil in ascending order is
Roosveldt
Churchill
Stalin
Hitler
 

Drogheda445

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 13, 2012
Messages
6,449
In the middle of 1940 they did consider a peace deal with the Germans.
There may have been talk of it, but you asserted that majority opinion (in government, never mind the public) was for peace/appeasement when it patently wasn't, at least at that point in time.
 

parentheses

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
13,966
There may have been talk of it, but you asserted that majority opinion (in government, never mind the public) was for peace/appeasement when it patently wasn't, at least at that point in time.
Arguably a majority of the Tory party were pro-appeasement. On the other hand the Labbour party were anti appeasement
 

RasherHash

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 16, 2013
Messages
24,519
I was just watching 'Darkest Hour' and I doubt it's an accurate portrayal of the scheming and plotting by Neville and Halifax against him, actually AFAIK, Halifax refused the off of the premiership before it was offered to Winston and as he was in The Lords, it would have been not possible any way!

But it did set me wondering about how important this hitherto failure was to the outcome of WW2. Could any other non appeaser done as well? Or did he in fact bumble and prolong the war?

Mind you, he said in this drama, he had never ridden a bus or been on the metro or even boiled an egg in his life, so even more so Than our own Leo, he didn't live an ordinary experience!
He's part of that horrific murder machine called, 'the royal family', so he was born with a silver spoon and was entitled to spend his life telling the working class to go out by the million a die for 'glory'...or some sh1t.

He loved killing wogs and fuzzy wuzzies and particularly liked great new innovations like poison gas, which could be used to wipe out entire villages of the vile beasts.
 

General Urko

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 24, 2012
Messages
15,674
I have never liked either Hitler, Churchill, Stalin or Roosveldt .
So asking how important was Churchill to WW2 is the same as asking how important were the other three named above.

What you really need to ask is amongst the four above who was the baddest bollix.
My own view in terms of sheer evil in ascending order is
Roosveldt
Churchill
Stalin
Hitler
Re 'The Baddest Bollix' - the vast majority of folk would have Roosevelt and Churchill in the haypenny place relative to the other 2 who would only be matched in modern history by Mao!
 

RasherHash

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 16, 2013
Messages
24,519
Re 'The Baddest Bollix' - the vast majority of folk would have Roosevelt and Churchill in the haypenny place relative to the other 2 who would only be matched in modern history by Mao!
I'd say most of that ordering is down to Allied propaganda. The winner writes the history.
 


New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top