ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » History, Literature, and the Arts
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags war crime charges , winston churchill , World War II history

Reply
Old 30th November 2017, 06:09 AM   #681
HansMustermann
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 14,151
To be honest, I never thought that the British are particularly guilty of marketing themselves. The whole self-deprecating British sense of humour doesn't really lend itself to some 'rah rah rah, we're number one' kind of marketing. If anything, the British tend to over-acknowledge everyone else, well, at least when you compare them to the USA or especially France.

I mean, even during WW1, the Americans made Pershing just about a national hero -- in spite of being just marginally less incompetent than the likes of the three stooges that were Potiorek, Cadorna and von Hötzendorf -- while in the UK PM David Lloyd George is crediting America almost on every other page of his memoirs, while not giving much credit to Haig and the other British generals. (And mind you, "not giving much credit" is grossly understating it, even by the standards of the British fine art of understatement.)


If anything, after WW2, I find it was France that pissed off everyone else by repeatedly and conspicuously forgetting to mention ANY help from the rest of the world. I mean, when the Allies let Petain enter Paris first after the Germans retreated, his speech said literally that Paris liberated herself, with the help of... the rest of France. No mention of the American and British armies that had gotten him there, the British and American fleets that made the landing possible, etc

In case anyone didn't know when and WHY the whole "the French surrender" meme got started. Yeah, surrendering is understandable there, but when you pretend to have then won the war singlehandedly, you're kinda just begging to have the piss taken out of you.
__________________
Which part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand?

Last edited by HansMustermann; 30th November 2017 at 06:11 AM.
HansMustermann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2017, 07:28 AM   #682
fuelair
Suspended
 
fuelair's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 57,679
Interestingly, there are six or so banned (now) people posting in just the first two pages.....
fuelair is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2017, 09:14 AM   #683
Henri McPhee
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,931
Originally Posted by HansMustermann View Post
If anything, after WW2, I find it was France that pissed off everyone else by repeatedly and conspicuously forgetting to mention ANY help from the rest of the world. I mean, when the Allies let Petain enter Paris first after the Germans retreated, his speech said literally that Paris liberated herself, with the help of... the rest of France. No mention of the American and British armies that had gotten him there, the British and American fleets that made the landing possible, etc
I thought it was de Gaulle who entered Paris first in the Second World War in 1944 with the Free French troops. I may be wrong about that. General Juin was a good French General at that time.

Petain was in danger of being executed as a collaborator, like Laval, but he was eventually exiled to an island off France as a so-called First World War hero. I agree this is not on topic with regard to Churchill as an accused war criminal.

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 30th November 2017 at 09:18 AM.
Henri McPhee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2017, 09:33 AM   #684
HansMustermann
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 14,151
Ugh, brain-fart on my part. Yeah, de Gaule, obviously.
__________________
Which part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand?
HansMustermann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st December 2017, 05:30 PM   #685
fuelair
Suspended
 
fuelair's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 57,679
Hate to do this, but it wasn't de Gaule either, Hans had it - de Gaulle!!!
fuelair is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st December 2017, 07:14 PM   #686
HansMustermann
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 14,151
Nah, I didn't have it. I do have this problem -- and I'm sure I bored everyone with mentioning it a couple of times a year -- where pretty much a random word comes out instead of what I was trying to say. I end up proof-reading and correcting a lot of messages to get rid of that. Just the other week I wrote "away and beyond the call of duty" instead of above and beyond, for example.

Ah well...
__________________
Which part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand?
HansMustermann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd December 2017, 01:18 PM   #687
fuelair
Suspended
 
fuelair's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 57,679
Originally Posted by HansMustermann View Post
Nah, I didn't have it. I do have this problem -- and I'm sure I bored everyone with mentioning it a couple of times a year -- where pretty much a random word comes out instead of what I was trying to say. I end up proof-reading and correcting a lot of messages to get rid of that. Just the other week I wrote "away and beyond the call of duty" instead of above and beyond, for example.

Ah well...
I like the last one!!!!!!
fuelair is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th December 2017, 07:31 AM   #688
Henri McPhee
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,931
There is an interesting article on the internet about the French General Juin during the second world war which proves Churchill did not win the war on his own. Neither does it prove Churchill was a war criminal:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alphonse_Juin
Henri McPhee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th December 2017, 07:58 AM   #689
Tolls
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,172
What are you on about now?
Tolls is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th December 2017, 08:05 AM   #690
Henri McPhee
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,931
This thread is about Winston Churchill supposedly being a war criminal and winning the Second World War by writing books and having films made about him. I am just suggesting that is not the pure unadulterated historical truth you plonker
Henri McPhee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th December 2017, 08:25 AM   #691
Tolls
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,172
As I said before, no one, not even Winston himself, thinks he won the war on his own.
I have no idea where you get that idea from?

And what posting the biog of a French general has to do with it.
Tolls is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th December 2017, 08:55 AM   #692
Roboramma
Penultimate Amazing
 
Roboramma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 11,021
Wait, this is a thread debunking the idea that Winston Churchill was Superman?

Who ever thought Churchill won the war on his own? That doesn't even make sense.
__________________
"... when people thought the Earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the Earth was spherical they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the Earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the Earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together."
Isaac Asimov
Roboramma is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th December 2017, 09:08 AM   #693
Henri McPhee
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,931
Churchill once said that Chamberlain had a choice between war and dishonour and he chose dishonour. That's bullcrap.
Henri McPhee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th December 2017, 09:36 AM   #694
Tolls
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,172
OK.
Winston said lots of nonsense things ("soft underbelly" anyone?).
Tolls is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th December 2017, 03:06 PM   #695
Hubert Cumberdale
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,072
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
This thread is about Winston Churchill supposedly being a war criminal and winning the Second World War by writing books and having films made about him. I am just suggesting that is not the pure unadulterated historical truth you plonker

Absolutely, Winston Churchill did win the war all by himself and he did it by writing books and having films made about him.

That is how the war was really won.

All of this Stalingrad nonsense is just butthurt tankies.
Hubert Cumberdale is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th December 2017, 08:14 PM   #696
Giz
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 8,252
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
Churchill once said that Chamberlain had a choice between war and dishonour and he chose dishonour. That's bullcrap.
"You were given the choice between war and dishonor. You chose dishonor and you will have war. That's bullcrap”

Churchill was quite the wordsmith.
Giz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th December 2017, 03:22 AM   #697
Henri McPhee
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,931
I don't think Churchill was a war criminal but these recent films about him are not the pure unadulterated truth.
Henri McPhee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th December 2017, 04:44 AM   #698
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 18,732
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
I don't think Churchill was a war criminal but these recent films about him are not the pure unadulterated truth.
That's not contentious.

There is a reason why people dismiss "the Hollywood treatment of history"
__________________
OECD healthcare spending
Expenditure on healthcare
http://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/health-data.htm
link is 2015 data (2013 Data below):
UK 8.5% of GDP of which 83.3% is public expenditure - 7.1% of GDP is public spending
US 16.4% of GDP of which 48.2% is public expenditure - 7.9% of GDP is public spending
jimbob is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th December 2017, 06:03 AM   #699
BobTheCoward
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 13,894
Originally Posted by jimbob View Post
That's not contentious.

There is a reason why people dismiss "the Hollywood treatment of history"
I don't see why people do that. Works of art are not there to treat history a specific way. There isn't anything to dismiss. It can be viewed as it's own thing.
BobTheCoward is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th December 2017, 10:06 AM   #700
Henri McPhee
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,931
What about FACTS and the historical truth then? Fiction is not reality.
Henri McPhee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th December 2017, 09:07 PM   #701
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 18,732
Originally Posted by BobTheCoward View Post
I don't see why people do that. Works of art are not there to treat history a specific way. There isn't anything to dismiss. It can be viewed as it's own thing.
You are correct, however the, "based on a true story" stichk has been known to blur the line, as have deliberate propaganda efforts.
__________________
OECD healthcare spending
Expenditure on healthcare
http://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/health-data.htm
link is 2015 data (2013 Data below):
UK 8.5% of GDP of which 83.3% is public expenditure - 7.1% of GDP is public spending
US 16.4% of GDP of which 48.2% is public expenditure - 7.9% of GDP is public spending
jimbob is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th December 2017, 01:46 AM   #702
Filippo Lippi
Master Poster
 
Filippo Lippi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 2,886
At least Mondial had a Christmas break now he has someone bumping threads for him
__________________
"You may not know anything about the issue but I bet you reckon something.
So why not tell us what you reckon? Let us enjoy the full majesty of your uninformed, ad hoc reckon..."
David Mitchell
Filippo Lippi is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st December 2017, 06:07 AM   #703
Mondial
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 344
The latest movie about Winston Churchill has Gary Oldman in the lead role -
www.youtube.com/watch?v=LtJ60u7SUSw
It looks like a propaganda effort to try and polish up his badly tarnished image as more and more people discover what a criminal he really was -
https://crimesofbritain.com/2016/09/...ton-churchill/
https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=27&t=10510
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2017/11...-david-irving/
Mondial is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st December 2017, 09:25 AM   #704
kookbreaker
Evil Fokker
 
kookbreaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 11,643
Awww, the little neo-nazi crowd is upset that their whataboutisms aren't taking.
__________________
www.spectrum-scientifics.com <- My store of science toys, instruments and general fun!

Thanks for helping me win Best Toys in Philly Voter in 2011,2012, and 2014! We won' be discussing the disappointment that was 2013.
kookbreaker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th January 2018, 09:56 AM   #705
Henri McPhee
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,931
There doesn't seem to be any mention of Churchill as a war criminal in this latest film about him, where an actor has won some kind of Oscar. There is some silly line in the film where Churchill tells Chamberlain you can't talk to a tiger, which Chamberlain was well aware about.
Henri McPhee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th January 2018, 07:21 AM   #706
Parsman
Muse
 
Parsman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Bonnie Scotland
Posts: 550
Originally Posted by Mondial View Post
The latest movie about Winston Churchill has Gary Oldman in the lead role -
www.youtube.com/watch?v=LtJ60u7SUSw
It looks like a propaganda effort to try and polish up his badly tarnished image as more and more people discover what a criminal he really was -
https://crimesofbritain.com/2016/09/...ton-churchill/
https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=27&t=10510
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2017/11...-david-irving/
Hang on, I don't want to click any of those links since I refuse to increase traffic to alt-right or neo-Nazi websites (seems to be your go to thing) but are you really linking to something about David Irving and expecting anyone to give it the time of day? The Lipstadt trial proved he was at best a very poor historian, at worse a fabricator of stories to give succour to the Nazis and to the person of Hitler in particular. If even one of your sources use his name in a contest about understanding history, you have already lost.
__________________
I was not; I have been; I am not; I am content - Epicurus

When you're dead you don't know that you're dead, all the pain is felt by others....................the same thing happens when you're stupid.

Last edited by Parsman; 26th January 2018 at 07:21 AM. Reason: Spelling
Parsman is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th January 2018, 02:47 PM   #707
dudalb
Suspended
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 41,025
Originally Posted by kookbreaker View Post
Awww, the little neo-nazi crowd is upset that their whataboutisms aren't taking.
"The Darkest Hour" has quite a bit to criticize as far as historical accuracy goes,
but not for the reasons the Neo Nazis are giving.....

Oldman is brilliant,but other then that it's a pretty medicore film...

Last edited by dudalb; 29th January 2018 at 02:53 PM.
dudalb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th January 2018, 02:49 PM   #708
dudalb
Suspended
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 41,025
Originally Posted by Giz View Post
"You were given the choice between war and dishonor. You chose dishonor and you will have war. That's bullcrap”

Churchill was quite the wordsmith.
And interesting how McPhee misquoted Churchill....

And Churchill was right in this instance....
dudalb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th January 2018, 11:23 PM   #709
Henri McPhee
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,931
This is what Churchill is supposed to have said to Chamberlain from the internet:

Quote:
“You were given the choice between war and dishonour. You chose dishonour, and you will have war.' - To Neville Chamberlain”

― Winston S. Churchill
There was a documentary from 2011 on the BBC yesterday by Andrew Marr called the Making of Britain, which mentioned Chamberlain and Churchill and that Churchill would have intervened in the Spanish civil war. With what? It mentioned that Baldwin described Churchill as lacking in wisdom and judgment, which I don't think applied to Chamberlain. It also mentioned that Baldwin was mainly concerned at the time with the Duke of Windsor being pro-German. Churchill took the political credit for Spitfires and radar, and our Secret Service. Chamberlain was well aware that war was inevitable.
Henri McPhee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th March 2018, 06:40 AM   #710
Mondial
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 344
Gary Oldman has won the best actor Academy Award for his portrayal of Winston Churchill in Darkest Hour. Too bad its nothing but a propaganda film and a whitewash -
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2018/01...-darkest-hour/
https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=26&t=8241
https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=8172
Mondial is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th March 2018, 07:23 AM   #711
Hans
Philosopher
 
Hans's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 7,591
Originally Posted by Mondial View Post
Gary Oldman has won the best actor Academy Award for his portrayal of Winston Churchill in Darkest Hour. Too bad its nothing but a propaganda film and a whitewash -
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2018/01...-darkest-hour/
https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=26&t=8241
https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=8172
Oh no our Neo-Nazi doesn't like good press for those who ended the Third Reich and caused his God Hitler to kill himself.

Sorry Mondial but as has been discussed with you many times - and you always run off - but posting links to a Nazi site like codoh is an immediate self debunk.

Thanks for yet another seagull posting.......
Hans is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th March 2018, 07:23 AM   #712
fagin
Philosopher
 
fagin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: As far away from casebro as possible.
Posts: 6,191
Originally Posted by Mondial View Post
Gary Oldman has won the best actor Academy Award for his portrayal of Winston Churchill in Darkest Hour. Too bad its nothing but a propaganda film and a whitewash -
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2018/01...-darkest-hour/
https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=26&t=8241
https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=8172
Well I'm convinced. Nice unbiased sites.
__________________
There is no secret ingredient - Kung Fu Panda
fagin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th March 2018, 08:24 AM   #713
Pacal
Muse
 
Pacal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Toronto
Posts: 950
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
Churchill once said that Chamberlain had a choice between war and dishonour and he chose dishonour. That's bullcrap.
So just how would you describe betraying the Czechs and turning them over to the tender mercies of the Nazis? Both France and Britain during the Munich crisis forced the Czechs to accept the settlement. Why? Because Chamberlain accepted Hitler's total lie that he, Hitler, had no more territorial ambitions in Europe and that in order to preserve peace it was worth while to sacrifice Czechoslovakia, an action that can hardly be described has in any sense honorable. When Hitler marched into Prague in 1939, an action predicted by people like Churchill but denied by people like Chamberlain, it caused quite the stir in Britain and France among people who felt, rightly, that they had been lied too by Hitler. It was felt accurately that Hitler had shown his hand that he had wide ranging ambitions of conquest. All of which was accurate and claimed by people like Churchill for years but denied by people like Chamberlain.

Munich is not so much a warning about appeasement has a warning about the dangers of not facing unpleasant truths.
Pacal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th March 2018, 08:47 AM   #714
Pacal
Muse
 
Pacal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Toronto
Posts: 950
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
This is what Churchill is supposed to have said to Chamberlain from the internet:

There was a documentary from 2011 on the BBC yesterday by Andrew Marr called the Making of Britain, which mentioned Chamberlain and Churchill and that Churchill would have intervened in the Spanish civil war. With what? It mentioned that Baldwin described Churchill as lacking in wisdom and judgment, which I don't think applied to Chamberlain. It also mentioned that Baldwin was mainly concerned at the time with the Duke of Windsor being pro-German. Churchill took the political credit for Spitfires and radar, and our Secret Service. Chamberlain was well aware that war was inevitable.
You are aware that Britain was part of multi-national force that patrolled Spanish waters during the Spanish civil war, How is that for intervening. Britain could have supplied massive amounts of munitions, specialists etc. to the Spanish Republicans. In short the same sort of assistance that Italy and Germany supplied to the Nationalists. (The Italians even supplied large numbers of Italian "volunteers" for the Nationalists. The Germans supplied Some "volunteers" also. I could also talk about the considerable support the Soviet Union gave the Republicans.) Britain could easily have done the same.

Has for Baldwin's description of Churchill; given that Churchill was in this case right about the ambitious designs of the Nazi regime and accurately predicted what would happen after Munich I would modify the stuff about Churchill's lack of judgement.

As for not applying to Chamberlain. Very funny. The evidence is overwhelming that Chamberlain took seriously Hitler's promises at Munich, not just in public, but in private. That was definitely showing a lack of judgement / wisdom. Like so many in Britain Chamberlain was shaken by Hitler's occupation of Prague and liquidation of the Czech state in March of 1939. Chamberlain was forced by an irate public opinion to adopt, publically, a harder stance, while in private still talking about doing some sort of appeasement. Chamberlain of course ignored the guarantee given the rump Czech state after Munich with petty fogging trivialities. Further Chamberlain had no problem turning over the Czech gold reserves held in the Bank of England to the Nazis after the occupation of Prague.

Finally Chamberlain was forced to declare war in Sept. 1939 by a revolt of his cabinet when he tried to find a petty fogging triviality to avoid declaring war. There is no evidence the Chamberlain, certainly before Munich, thought war was inevitable and even after he thought some sort of appeasement might work and sought to avoid going to war.
Pacal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th March 2018, 09:46 AM   #715
Henri McPhee
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,931
Originally Posted by Pacal View Post
When Hitler marched into Prague in 1939, an action predicted by people like Churchill but denied by people like Chamberlain, it caused quite the stir in Britain and France among people who felt, rightly, that they had been lied too by Hitler. It was felt accurately that Hitler had shown his hand that he had wide ranging ambitions of conquest. All of which was accurate and claimed by people like Churchill for years but denied by people like Chamberlain.

Munich is not so much a warning about appeasement has a warning about the dangers of not facing unpleasant truths.
That's not strictly true. Chamberlain was no fool. He was responsible for British rearmament, for which Churchill took the political credit. You don't seem to appreciate that some politicians are cunning. The British public and House of Commons did not want to go to war over the Sudetanland because they had never heard of it. That's why Chamberlain waved his piece of paper with his signature, and Hitler's signature on it. It was beyond their understanding. As I have said before it makes me laugh to read that pro-Nazi people now accuse Chamberlain of starting the war.

Chamberlain let Hitler break the Munich agreement and brought the British Empire, and I suppose France, on to his side at the same time. Your opinions are too simplistic. Chamberlain never denied Hitler would march into Prague. It's just that he was busy strengthening the air force and military equipment at the time. Chamberlain was a realist. There is some waffle and background to all this at this website:

https://historicallysuitable.wordpre...sement-policy/

Quote:
Yet, Guilty Men forget that Chamberlain was doing more than just being a supporter of armament. In fact, in 1936, he introduced an extensive 4-year plan for rearmament. Chamberlain was criticized by many who wanted to abolish national armaments and oppose national defense, notably by leader Clement Attlee for spending nearly all the budget on “the instruments of death” and that it was a “war budget” where “all available resources are to be devoted to armaments” (The Times, 1936, pg. 16).

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 20th March 2018 at 09:51 AM.
Henri McPhee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th March 2018, 10:38 AM   #716
Garrison
Illuminator
 
Garrison's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,368
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
That's not strictly true.
Actually it's exactly true.

Quote:
Chamberlain was no fool.
Which only serves to make his actions at Munich more reprehensible.


Quote:
He was responsible for British rearmament.
It's been demonstrated that he had to be pressured into doing so, so you can award no credit for that.

Quote:
for which Churchill took the political credit.
Prove the claim or retract it.


Quote:
You don't seem to appreciate that some politicians are cunning.
Another falsehood. Everyone else understands it all to well, just as they understand that Chamberlain was utterly lacking in that department.


Quote:
The British public and House of Commons did not want to go to war over the Sudetanland because they had never heard of it.
Which is no reason at all for the man running the country to aid our potential enemies as he did at Munich.

Quote:
That's why Chamberlain waved his piece of paper with his signature, and Hitler's signature on it.
No, the evidence is that he genuinely thought he had achieved peace, it wasn't until after the occupation of Prague that he was forced to eal with reality.

Quote:
It was beyond their understanding. As I have said before it makes me laugh to read that pro-Nazi people now accuse Chamberlain of starting the war.
And as others have stated there's nothing funny about you quoting holocaust denial sites, or your inability to learn that they have been at it for decades despite having it repeatedly explained to you.

Quote:
Chamberlain let Hitler break the Munich agreement and brought the British Empire, and I suppose France, on to his side at the same time.
Errant nonsense, if you have proof Chamberlain expected Hitler to break the agreement present it or retract the claim. As for the rest as others have pointed out the facts show Germany benefited far more from Munich than Britain did.

Quote:
Your opinions are too simplistic.
Henri, you are the one who refuses to do any proper research, please stop insulting those who actually have some knowledge on the subject.


Quote:
Chamberlain never denied Hitler would march into Prague.
Meaningless claim, he certainly seems to have believed that he had settled Hitler's territorial ambitions at Munich.

Quote:
It's just that he was busy strengthening the air force and military equipment at the time.
Except the record shows he did so only with the greatest reluctance and again that Germany gained far more military capability in the post Munich period than Britain did.

Quote:
Chamberlain was a realist.
Prove the claim or retract it. The evidence of his public and private discussions suggest the exact opposite.

Quote:
There is some waffle and background to all this at this website.
And it's no surprise it contains this quote that flatly contradicts your claims that Chamberlain was aware Hitler would violate the Munich agreement:

Quote:
In essence, Chamberlain truly believed that negotiating with Germany was necessary if one seeks to avoid war and open a new era of peaceful co-existence.
Are you ever going to quote a link that actually supports your claims, you know, besides the ones dedicated to Holocaust denial?
__________________
So I've started a blog about my writing. Check it out at: http://fourth-planet-problem.blogspot.com/
And my first book is on Amazon: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B077W322FX

Last edited by Garrison; 20th March 2018 at 10:40 AM.
Garrison is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th March 2018, 02:09 PM   #717
Pacal
Muse
 
Pacal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Toronto
Posts: 950
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
That's not strictly true. Chamberlain was no fool. He was responsible for British rearmament, for which Churchill took the political credit. You don't seem to appreciate that some politicians are cunning. The British public and House of Commons did not want to go to war over the Sudetanland because they had never heard of it. That's why Chamberlain waved his piece of paper with his signature, and Hitler's signature on it. It was beyond their understanding. As I have said before it makes me laugh to read that pro-Nazi people now accuse Chamberlain of starting the war.

Chamberlain let Hitler break the Munich agreement and brought the British Empire, and I suppose France, on to his side at the same time. Your opinions are too simplistic. Chamberlain never denied Hitler would march into Prague. It's just that he was busy strengthening the air force and military equipment at the time. Chamberlain was a realist. There is some waffle and background to all this at this website:

https://historicallysuitable.wordpre...sement-policy/
Very funny. Hitler for one described Chamberlain and the others at Munich has "little worms". Chamberlain was not responsible for British rearmament. The steps and decisions were made before he became Prime Minister. Further the additional steps he took after Prague (March 1939), he did with great reluctance forced to by public opinion and his Cabinet. A little late in the game. As for being cunning; the bottom line is that Chamberlain both in public and in private repeatedly after Munich claimed he had achieved lasting peace. There is no evidence that he expected Hitler to break the Munich agreement at all and massive evidence that Chamberlain was shocked, mortified by the occupation of Prague in March 1939.

As for not going to war over the Sudetanland. What is your point? All that indicates is that a lot of people in Britain didn't want a war and like Chamberlain would not face reality. Although I do not find it very appealing that so many like Chamberlain were willing to throw a fellow democracy to the wolf of a vicious, brutal dictatorship, whose plans for the Czechs were bluntly genocidal. (All of which could easily be gleaned from works like Mein Kampf) And as for beyond their understanding. That is stuff and nonsense. Given the change in British attitudes brought on by Prague March 1939 the crisis of October 1938 was not in the slightest "beyond their understanding".

Chamberlain didn't let Hitler break the Munich agreement. Hitler did that entirely on his own to the mortification of Chamberlain who did not expect it. Chamberlain did of course choose to not honour his guarantee to the rump post Munich Czech state and to allow Hitler to get the Czech gold reserves held by the Bank of England. Thus strengthening the Nazi state.

To repeat Chamberlain publically and privately stated after Munich that Hitler would honour his agreement at Munich and attacked those who stated that Hitler had further ambitions.
Pacal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th March 2018, 02:28 PM   #718
Steve
Illuminator
 
Steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 3,938
Originally Posted by Mondial View Post
Gary Oldman has won the best actor Academy Award for his portrayal of Winston Churchill in Darkest Hour. Too bad its nothing but a propaganda film and a whitewash -
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2018/01...-darkest-hour/
https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=26&t=8241
https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=8172
He won the award for his acting, not for the content of the film. The two are not connected.
__________________
Caption from and old New Yorker cartoon - Why am I shouting? Because I'm wrong!"
Steve is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th March 2018, 03:08 PM   #719
ddt
Mafia Penguin
 
ddt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 19,576
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
That's not strictly true. Chamberlain was no fool. He was responsible for British rearmament, for which Churchill took the political credit. You don't seem to appreciate that some politicians are cunning. The British public and House of Commons did not want to go to war over the Sudetanland because they had never heard of it. That's why Chamberlain waved his piece of paper with his signature, and Hitler's signature on it. It was beyond their understanding.
I can only presume you use that word in the same sense as Baldrick from Blackadder.
__________________
"I think it is very beautiful for the poor to accept their lot, to share it with the passion of Christ. I think the world is being much helped by the suffering of the poor people." - "Saint" Teresa, the lying thieving Albanian dwarf

"I think accuracy is important" - Vixen
ddt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th March 2018, 03:16 PM   #720
ddt
Mafia Penguin
 
ddt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 19,576
Originally Posted by Pacal View Post
As for not applying to Chamberlain. Very funny. The evidence is overwhelming that Chamberlain took seriously Hitler's promises at Munich, not just in public, but in private. That was definitely showing a lack of judgement / wisdom. Like so many in Britain Chamberlain was shaken by Hitler's occupation of Prague and liquidation of the Czech state in March of 1939. Chamberlain was forced by an irate public opinion to adopt, publically, a harder stance, while in private still talking about doing some sort of appeasement. Chamberlain of course ignored the guarantee given the rump Czech state after Munich with petty fogging trivialities. Further Chamberlain had no problem turning over the Czech gold reserves held in the Bank of England to the Nazis after the occupation of Prague.
This is the part I really don't understand. Chamberlain's naivité at Munich is one thing. That he didn't pursue military action in March 1939 is also understandable. But why hand over the gold? How would Hitler have collected it if Britain refused to give it to them?
__________________
"I think it is very beautiful for the poor to accept their lot, to share it with the passion of Christ. I think the world is being much helped by the suffering of the poor people." - "Saint" Teresa, the lying thieving Albanian dwarf

"I think accuracy is important" - Vixen
ddt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » History, Literature, and the Arts

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:33 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.