2 edits
Originally posted by whodeyNo.
A better question would be, could England have won the war with Chamberlain at the helm?
Nor was Chamberlain able to remain at the helm for long once real war started.
And please, unless it's a deliberate can't-be-bothered-to-use-the-correct-name snub on your part, it's Britain or Great Britain or G.B. or United Kingdom or the U.K., not England.
Originally posted by FMFi cannot. i don't consider Neville could've prevented ww2. the most he could have done was show brutality and start the war sooner when hitler was not as prepared.
It's a pretty cliched "factoid"... if it weren't for Neville Chamberlain and his piece of paper in 1938, 55,000,000 lives could have been saved!
Hardly anybody in Europe says this or thinks it. But for some reason people in American public life use it all the time it to try to insult one another in a kind of hairy-chested, ahistorical, Hitler Card Up The Slee ...[text shortened]... Neville-Chamberlain-could-have-done and how exactly do you think it might have panned out?
the problem was the french and the British weren't prepared either.
the biggest fault i can find in Neville is that he was an optimist, he desperately wanted to believe Hitler could be reasoned with and a war can be avoided. an optimism exaggerated to a point of foolishness. but i have no doubt hitler was after a war.
Originally posted by FMFthat i agree, chamberlain was not a war minister.
No.
Nor was Chamberlain able to remain at the helm for long once real war started.
And please, unless it's a deliberate can't-be-bothered-to-use-the-correct-name snub on your part, it's Britain or Great Britain or G.B. or United Kingdom or the U.K., not England.
Originally posted by ZahlanziYeah, I guess you could blame Chamberlain for not recognizing the fact that Adolf Hitler was insane, but that's easily said in retrospect.
i cannot. i don't consider Neville could've prevented ww2. the most he could have done was show brutality and start the war sooner when hitler was not as prepared.
the problem was the french and the British weren't prepared either.
the biggest fault i can find in Neville is that he was an optimist, he desperately wanted to believe Hitler could be reas ...[text shortened]... n optimism exaggerated to a point of foolishness. but i have no doubt hitler was after a war.
[I]Originally posted by Zahlanzi[/i]
the most he could have done was show brutality and start the war sooner when hitler was not as prepared.[b]
I disagree with your saying: standing up to Hitler would have shown “brutality.” Better wording of your sentence would be: “the most he could have done was show spine and start the war sooner when Hitler was not as prepared." Saving tens of thousands lives.”
[b][I]Originally posted by Zahlanzi[/i]
but i have no doubt hitler was after a war.
Really? Do say? 😀
1 edit
Originally posted by MacSwainClearly this is what's at issue here and yours is the conventional view. But having looked into it a bit (you are one of RHP's history buffs after all), do you really think the British were in a position to "start" anything in October 1938?
“the most he could have done was show spine and start the war sooner when Hitler was not as prepared." Saving tens of thousands lives.”
1 edit
Originally posted by shavixmirThe only point to such a discussion is to generate material for an alternative history novel.
You can't really go back and change things though, so lessons should be learnt for future generations.
So, in my novel, I'd have Stalin hang back and prepare to take out the weakened victors of a small-scale WWII. 'And then we'd all be speaking Russian'.
1 edit
Originally posted by Bosse de NageOh yes...great fun..a friend has board game (Axis & Allies) that allows re-fighting WW II.
The only point to such a discussion is to generate material for an alternative history novel.
So, in my novel, I'd have Stalin hang back and prepare to take out the weakened victors of a small-scale WWII. 'And then we'd all be speaking Russian'.
I would have Hitler keep Stalin happy sharing un-earned spoils of Eastern Europe. Convince or bribe Japan to leave America alone and concentrate on Asia (taking China important in later years to have Russia bottled up between us...will deal with Japan later)
Mussolini would join all forces with Germany in northern Europe. With the other European countries that allied with Germany after Poland fell, victory over Brittain is no problem since ALL forces are available with none being wasted fighting Russia. Brittain would fall quickly and America would remain un-involved. Past this point America alone is no problem with Europe gone and unlikely they would fly to the aid of isolated, backward Russia, which would fall. Germany would have all the resources of Europe...no shortage of fuel, steel and other items. Next, make Japan happy by taking Australia, N.Z.. We would all be speaking German!
Thank God (if you have one) that Hilter was a class A idiot.
1 edit
Originally posted by MacSwainNo I am talking about the British Army and the Royal Air Force. Is it your understanding that they were ready and able to attack Germany in October 1938?
[b]Originally posted by FMF
“…do you really think the British were in a position to "start" anything in October 1938?”
Quite obviously, Neville, thought he was in lead position to prevent the “start” of anything and was quite successful at it.[/b]
1 edit
Originally posted by FMF
No I am talking about the British Army and the Royal Air Force. Is it your understanding that they were ready and able to attack Germany in October 1938?
And....what great strides were made during the intervening time, (which was most accurately called}, "The Phoney War", "Twilight War" (by Winston Churchill), der Sitzkrieg (in German - the sitting war), The Bore War and "la drôle de guerre" (the boring war) preceding the Battle of France in May 1940?