PDA

View Full Version : when it comes to history



wardd
09-25-2013, 03:18 PM
cruz is an idiot

chamberlain was pm in 1939

Peerie Maa
09-25-2013, 03:57 PM
So? SCOTUS says that Cruz can say that Chamberlain was PM in 1639 if he wants to.

wardd
09-25-2013, 04:02 PM
you'd had to followed cruzes remarks about chamberlain

ahp
09-25-2013, 04:11 PM
cruz is an idiot

chamberlain was pm in 1939

Chamberlain was hailed as a great statesman when he came back from negotiating with Hitler at Munich. He had done what the Brits thought he should have done.

Later when the British army was cornered at Dunkirk , Hitler gave the British Government five days to negotiate and have their army back, or else. Churchill argued for no negotiations, and Chamberlain sided with him. Lord Chesterfield, who regarded Churchill as a "half American mongrel", and perhaps was a Nazi sympathizer, wanted to negotiate. It has been said that Chamberlain learned (too late) that when you sat down at the table with Hitler, you were the meal.

wardd
09-25-2013, 05:18 PM
Chamberlain was hailed as a great statesman when he came back from negotiating with Hitler at Munich. He had done what the Brits thought he should have done.

Later when the British army was cornered at Dunkirk , Hitler gave the British Government five days to negotiate and have their army back, or else. Churchill argued for no negotiations, and Chamberlain sided with him. Lord Chesterfield, who regarded Churchill as a "half American mongrel", and perhaps was a Nazi sympathizer, wanted to negotiate. It has been said that Chamberlain learned (too late) that when you sat down at the table with Hitler, you were the meal.

so what could england have done in 1938?

Peerie Maa
09-25-2013, 05:25 PM
you'd had to followed cruzes remarks about chamberlain

I can't find any verbatim report, if I guess that Chamberlain was lumped into the group of leaders who resisted Nazism - would I be right?

Although some revile him for being suckered by Hitler, he did win us time to get organised. It could have been a lot worse.

skuthorp
09-25-2013, 05:36 PM
"Although some revile him for being suckered by Hitler, he did win us time to get organised. It could have been a lot worse."
And that is a true statement of the situation at the time. Of course if europe had acted when Germany annexed the Sudetenland or even done something about their rearmament then the course of history would have been different. But France was 'secure' behind the Maginot line and a significant number of the House of Lords had family connections to Germany and were Hitler sympathisers as was probably Edward 7.

wardd
09-25-2013, 05:41 PM
I can't find any verbatim report, if I guess that Chamberlain was lumped into the group of leaders who resisted Nazism - would I be right?

Although some revile him for being suckered by Hitler, he did win us time to get organised. It could have been a lot worse.

cruz accused nevill of caving and apeasement and in affect saying nevill wouldn't fight germany because it couldn't be done, which in 1938 it couldn't

in 1938 england had neither the means nor access to germany to wage war

wardd
09-25-2013, 05:44 PM
Let's see you speak for twenty some hours straight without flubbing up. You can't even complete a one line sentence.

flubbing isn't going on in non-factual detail how nevill flubbed it and i belive that remark was less than an hour into his speachifying


and i'm not trying to impress the country by speaking in the senate

skuthorp
09-25-2013, 05:47 PM
Re Britains war fighting capacity in 1938, an at risk of hijacking the thread.
http://www.raf.mod.uk/history/raftimeline_19301939.cfm

At the time Germany was testing modern aircraft and air warfare in Spain.

ahp
09-26-2013, 11:27 AM
In 1953 I was part of a European tour group. We had a German bus and driver. I did a lot of pub crawling with him, but unfortunately his English was not so good. He had been a Stuka pilot. He said he was afraid of the Spitfires.

Peerie Maa
09-30-2013, 06:17 AM
I can't find any verbatim report, if I guess that Chamberlain was lumped into the group of leaders who resisted Nazism - would I be right?

Although some revile him for being suckered by Hitler, he did win us time to get organised. It could have been a lot worse.


"Although some revile him for being suckered by Hitler, he did win us time to get organised. It could have been a lot worse."
And that is a true statement of the situation at the time. Of course if europe had acted when Germany annexed the Sudetenland or even done something about their rearmament then the course of history would have been different. But France was 'secure' behind the Maginot line and a significant number of the House of Lords had family connections to Germany and were Hitler sympathisers as was probably Edward 7.

The Beeb has finally noticed Cruz:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-24300094


During his 21-hour filibuster denouncing President Barack Obama's healthcare law, popularly known as Obamacare, last week, Ted Cruz, the conservative Republican senator for Texas, claimed that Neville Chamberlain had once told the British people, "Accept the Nazis. Yes, they'll dominate the continent of Europe but that's not our problem."

Crap of the first order.


In retrospect, the depressing reality is that there was probably no right answer to the crucial problems confronting British policy makers at the time. By the mid-1930s Britain was defending a vast and vulnerable empire encompassing a quarter of the world's territory and population, with the dismally depleted military resources of a third-rate power.
Worse still, since 1934 the Cabinet had grimly recognised that it was "beyond the resources of this country to make proper provision in peace for defence of the British Empire against three major powers in three different theatres of war". Furthermore, the threat posed separately by Japan, Germany and Italy was compounded by the conviction that war with any one of them would inevitably provoke opportunistic "mad dog" acts by the others.
As the leader of a militarily weak and overstretched empire, such fears were crucial in shaping Chamberlain's strategy, but this meant steering a course within the relatively narrow parameters defined by a complex inter-related web of geo-strategic, military, economic, financial, industrial, intelligence and electoral constraints.
Despite interminable scholarly debate, no consensus has emerged - particularly about the degree of choice enjoyed by policy makers in the face of such threats and constraints.
Yet notwithstanding Chamberlain's personal predilection for negotiation, what is beyond question is that he perceived himself to be a prisoner of forces largely beyond his control. As he noted stoically in January 1938, "In the absence of any powerful ally, and until our armaments are completed, we must adjust our foreign policy to our circumstances, and even bear with patience and good humour actions which we should like to treat in a very different fashion."
His pragmatic response to this conundrum was a "double policy" of rearmament at a pace the economy could sustain, while simultaneously seeking better relations with the dictators in the belief that only by redressing Germany's legitimate grievances would it be possible to remove the military threat - or failing that, to expose Hitler as an insatiable megalomaniac bent on world domination. As Chamberlain told Lord Halifax, his foreign secretary, the underlying strategy was to hope for the best while preparing for the worst.
When seen from this perspective, Chamberlain faced a brutally simple choice at Munich. Was Britain prepared to threaten Germany with war on behalf of a state which it certainly could not save and which would probably never be resurrected in its existing form? There was the absolute certainty that any attempt to do so would provoke a ruinous and probably un-winnable war which would slaughter millions, bring in Japan and Italy, destroy the British Empire, squander its wealth and undermine its position as a Great Power.

Chaimberlane died in 1940, the history of the time was written by his political opponents in 1940 and after the war.