Churchill was a prick

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Page 11 of 22 < 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 >

Stirlingsays Online 31 May 13 6.45pm
Quote johnno42000 at 31 May 2013 6.37pm Quote Cucking Funt at 31 May 2013 6.10pm Quote johnno42000 at 31 May 2013 6.03pm Quote kevpofcpfc at 31 May 2013 4.48pm The persistence of Churchill in the battle for North Africa was pivotal, he alone persuaded the yanks that this was the place to deploy. The masterclass appointment of Mountbatten and the following kicking of the Africa Korps paved the way for the fall of Italy. To balance things it should also be pointed out his involvement with failure's such as the Dardanelles campaign in the First World War, The Dieppe Raid and the Norway invasion. I still think he was a very good Second World War leader but very far from perfect. He called Hitler for the dangerous f*cker he was when it was very unfashionable to do so. Fair point but he also admired Mussolini, probably as he was anti-communist, so 50% right wasn't too bad. Edited by johnno42000 (31 May 2013 6.37pm) Firstly, where do you get Churchill admired Mussolini from? Secondly to put that on an equal footing of the warnings over Hitler and the urging for action before he stuck is absurd. 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays Online

31 May 13 6.45pm

Quote johnno42000 at 31 May 2013 6.37pm

Quote Cucking Funt at 31 May 2013 6.10pm

Quote johnno42000 at 31 May 2013 6.03pm

Quote kevpofcpfc at 31 May 2013 4.48pm

The persistence of Churchill in the battle for North Africa was pivotal, he alone persuaded the yanks that this was the place to deploy. The masterclass appointment of Mountbatten and the following kicking of the Africa Korps paved the way for the fall of Italy.

To balance things it should also be pointed out his involvement with failure's such as the Dardanelles campaign in the First World War, The Dieppe Raid and the Norway invasion.

I still think he was a very good Second World War leader but very far from perfect.

He called Hitler for the dangerous f*cker he was when it was very unfashionable to do so.

Fair point but he also admired Mussolini, probably as he was anti-communist, so 50% right wasn't too bad.

Edited by johnno42000 (31 May 2013 6.37pm)

Firstly, where do you get Churchill admired Mussolini from?

Secondly to put that on an equal footing of the warnings over Hitler and the urging for action before he stuck is absurd.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert a moderator to this post

Cucking Funt Clapham on the Back 31 May 13 6.49pm
Quote Stirlingsays at 31 May 2013 6.45pm Quote johnno42000 at 31 May 2013 6.37pm Quote Cucking Funt at 31 May 2013 6.10pm Quote johnno42000 at 31 May 2013 6.03pm Quote kevpofcpfc at 31 May 2013 4.48pm The persistence of Churchill in the battle for North Africa was pivotal, he alone persuaded the yanks that this was the place to deploy. The masterclass appointment of Mountbatten and the following kicking of the Africa Korps paved the way for the fall of Italy. To balance things it should also be pointed out his involvement with failure's such as the Dardanelles campaign in the First World War, The Dieppe Raid and the Norway invasion. I still think he was a very good Second World War leader but very far from perfect. He called Hitler for the dangerous fcker he was when it was very unfashionable to do so. Fair point but he also admired Mussolini, probably as he was anti-communist, so 50% right wasn't too bad. Edited by johnno42000 (31 May 2013 6.37pm) Firstly, where do you get Churchill admired Mussolini from? Secondly to put that on an equal footing of the warnings over Hitler and the urging for action before he stuck is absurd. I've never heard of him admiring 'The Bullfrog of the Pontine Marshes' as he once referred to him. Quite the opposite. Wife beating may be socially acceptable in Sheffield, but it is a different matter in Cheltenham*
Alert a moderator to this post

Cucking Funt

Clapham on the Back 31 May 13 6.49pm

Quote Stirlingsays at 31 May 2013 6.45pm

Quote johnno42000 at 31 May 2013 6.37pm

Quote Cucking Funt at 31 May 2013 6.10pm

Quote johnno42000 at 31 May 2013 6.03pm

Quote kevpofcpfc at 31 May 2013 4.48pm

To balance things it should also be pointed out his involvement with failure's such as the Dardanelles campaign in the First World War, The Dieppe Raid and the Norway invasion.

I still think he was a very good Second World War leader but very far from perfect.

He called Hitler for the dangerous f*cker he was when it was very unfashionable to do so.

Fair point but he also admired Mussolini, probably as he was anti-communist, so 50% right wasn't too bad.

Edited by johnno42000 (31 May 2013 6.37pm)

Firstly, where do you get Churchill admired Mussolini from?

Secondly to put that on an equal footing of the warnings over Hitler and the urging for action before he stuck is absurd.

I've never heard of him admiring 'The Bullfrog of the Pontine Marshes' as he once referred to him. Quite the opposite.

Wife beating may be socially acceptable in Sheffield, but it is a different matter in Cheltenham

Alert a moderator to this post

blind eagle Covington.Tennessee 31 May 13 6.50pm
Quote serial thriller at 22 May 2013 8.18pm Had quite an intense with a mate of mine today about one of the great celebrated figures of this nation's political history. I think I may have brought this up on here before but I've always held the view that Churchill is viewed as a great leader because he won. Had he lost, I believe a lot of questionable stuff the British did would have come out, but instead it's wiped under the carpet and we continue to moan about those nasty Germans with their concentration camps (an idea they knicked off us) and anti-Semitism (which was thriving in Britain in the 30s). The clearest example of this for me is the Bengal Famine. Churchill, fearful that the Japs might invade northern India, decided rather than evacuate the natives, he would just stop sending them food and shelter (in the middle of a famine) leading to millions of deaths, some claim on a similar scale as the number of Jews killed in concentration camps. When asked about this, Churchill blamed them for 'breeding like rabbits'. He also supported a Bill to sterilise the mentally disabled (I'm not making this up! [Link] a form of, err, eugenics. So let's look at the evidence: a mass-murderer, who supported racial purification, but won a lot of people over because he was a good public speaker and adopted the role as figurehead of a nation. Now who does that remind me of... Anyone willing to defend him? Edited by serial thriller (22 May 2013 8.18pm) If Churchill had lost you probably would not be around today and if per chance you did survive you would be speaking german and running a concentration camp . Don't be a prick all your life and remember, lttle man all prick and big man big prick. Are you five feet two in your shoes?
Alert a moderator to this post

blind eagle

Covington.Tennessee 31 May 13 6.50pm

Quote serial thriller at 22 May 2013 8.18pm

Had quite an intense with a mate of mine today about one of the great celebrated figures of this nation's political history.

I think I may have brought this up on here before but I've always held the view that Churchill is viewed as a great leader because he won. Had he lost, I believe a lot of questionable stuff the British did would have come out, but instead it's wiped under the carpet and we continue to moan about those nasty Germans with their concentration camps (an idea they knicked off us) and anti-Semitism (which was thriving in Britain in the 30s).

The clearest example of this for me is the Bengal Famine. Churchill, fearful that the Japs might invade northern India, decided rather than evacuate the natives, he would just stop sending them food and shelter (in the middle of a famine) leading to millions of deaths, some claim on a similar scale as the number of Jews killed in concentration camps. When asked about this, Churchill blamed them for 'breeding like rabbits'.

He also supported a Bill to sterilise the mentally disabled (I'm not making this up! [Link] a form of, err, eugenics.

So let's look at the evidence: a mass-murderer, who supported racial purification, but won a lot of people over because he was a good public speaker and adopted the role as figurehead of a nation.

Now who does that remind me of...

Anyone willing to defend him?

Edited by serial thriller (22 May 2013 8.18pm)

If Churchill had lost you probably would not be around today and if per chance you did survive you would be speaking german and running a concentration camp . Don't be a prick all your life and remember, lttle man all prick and big man big prick. Are you five feet two in your shoes?

Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays Online 31 May 13 6.52pm
Quote johnno42000 at 31 May 2013 6.03pm Quote kevpofcpfc at 31 May 2013 4.48pm The persistence of Churchill in the battle for North Africa was pivotal, he alone persuaded the yanks that this was the place to deploy. The masterclass appointment of Mountbatten and the following kicking of the Africa Korps paved the way for the fall of Italy. To balance things it should also be pointed out his involvement with failure's such as the Dardanelles campaign in the First World War, The Dieppe Raid and the Norway invasion. I still think he was a very good Second World War leader but very far from perfect. Who is claiming that Churchill was a good general? It's well established that Churchill wasn't good at the details of military strategy. His strength was in being a political leader and at being ultimately very good at picking or sacking generals. No one praises Churchill for being a kind of modern Alexander. 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays Online

31 May 13 6.52pm

Quote johnno42000 at 31 May 2013 6.03pm

Quote kevpofcpfc at 31 May 2013 4.48pm

To balance things it should also be pointed out his involvement with failure's such as the Dardanelles campaign in the First World War, The Dieppe Raid and the Norway invasion.

I still think he was a very good Second World War leader but very far from perfect.

Who is claiming that Churchill was a good general?

It's well established that Churchill wasn't good at the details of military strategy. His strength was in being a political leader and at being ultimately very good at picking or sacking generals.

No one praises Churchill for being a kind of modern Alexander.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert a moderator to this post

johnno42000 31 May 13 6.52pm
Quote Stirlingsays at 31 May 2013 6.45pm Quote johnno42000 at 31 May 2013 6.37pm Quote Cucking Funt at 31 May 2013 6.10pm Quote johnno42000 at 31 May 2013 6.03pm Quote kevpofcpfc at 31 May 2013 4.48pm The persistence of Churchill in the battle for North Africa was pivotal, he alone persuaded the yanks that this was the place to deploy. The masterclass appointment of Mountbatten and the following kicking of the Africa Korps paved the way for the fall of Italy. To balance things it should also be pointed out his involvement with failure's such as the Dardanelles campaign in the First World War, The Dieppe Raid and the Norway invasion. I still think he was a very good Second World War leader but very far from perfect. He called Hitler for the dangerous f*cker he was when it was very unfashionable to do so. Fair point but he also admired Mussolini, probably as he was anti-communist, so 50% right wasn't too bad. Edited by johnno42000 (31 May 2013 6.37pm) Firstly, where do you get Churchill admired Mussolini from? Secondly to put that on an equal footing of the warnings over Hitler and the urging for action before he stuck is absurd. [Link] [Link] [Link] 'Lies to the masses as are like fly's to mollasses...they want more and more and more'
Alert a moderator to this post

johnno42000

31 May 13 6.52pm

Quote Stirlingsays at 31 May 2013 6.45pm

Quote johnno42000 at 31 May 2013 6.37pm

Quote Cucking Funt at 31 May 2013 6.10pm

Quote johnno42000 at 31 May 2013 6.03pm

Quote kevpofcpfc at 31 May 2013 4.48pm

To balance things it should also be pointed out his involvement with failure's such as the Dardanelles campaign in the First World War, The Dieppe Raid and the Norway invasion.

I still think he was a very good Second World War leader but very far from perfect.

He called Hitler for the dangerous f*cker he was when it was very unfashionable to do so.

Fair point but he also admired Mussolini, probably as he was anti-communist, so 50% right wasn't too bad.

Edited by johnno42000 (31 May 2013 6.37pm)

Firstly, where do you get Churchill admired Mussolini from?

Secondly to put that on an equal footing of the warnings over Hitler and the urging for action before he stuck is absurd.

[Link]

'Lies to the masses as are like fly's to mollasses...they want more and more and more'

Alert a moderator to this post

Cucking Funt Clapham on the Back 31 May 13 6.57pm
Quote johnno42000 at 31 May 2013 6.52pm Quote Stirlingsays at 31 May 2013 6.45pm Quote johnno42000 at 31 May 2013 6.37pm Quote Cucking Funt at 31 May 2013 6.10pm Quote johnno42000 at 31 May 2013 6.03pm Quote kevpofcpfc at 31 May 2013 4.48pm The persistence of Churchill in the battle for North Africa was pivotal, he alone persuaded the yanks that this was the place to deploy. The masterclass appointment of Mountbatten and the following kicking of the Africa Korps paved the way for the fall of Italy. To balance things it should also be pointed out his involvement with failure's such as the Dardanelles campaign in the First World War, The Dieppe Raid and the Norway invasion. I still think he was a very good Second World War leader but very far from perfect. He called Hitler for the dangerous fcker he was when it was very unfashionable to do so. Fair point but he also admired Mussolini, probably as he was anti-communist, so 50% right wasn't too bad. Edited by johnno42000 (31 May 2013 6.37pm) Firstly, where do you get Churchill admired Mussolini from? Secondly to put that on an equal footing of the warnings over Hitler and the urging for action before he stuck is absurd. [Link] [Link] [Link] Hardly authoritative. No respected historian has ever even suggested that Churchill might have admired Il Duce. There is, moreover, plenty in his own writings that show that he had little or no time for him. Wife beating may be socially acceptable in Sheffield, but it is a different matter in Cheltenham*
Alert a moderator to this post

Cucking Funt

Clapham on the Back 31 May 13 6.57pm

Quote johnno42000 at 31 May 2013 6.52pm

Quote Stirlingsays at 31 May 2013 6.45pm

Quote johnno42000 at 31 May 2013 6.37pm

Quote Cucking Funt at 31 May 2013 6.10pm

Quote johnno42000 at 31 May 2013 6.03pm

Quote kevpofcpfc at 31 May 2013 4.48pm

To balance things it should also be pointed out his involvement with failure's such as the Dardanelles campaign in the First World War, The Dieppe Raid and the Norway invasion.

I still think he was a very good Second World War leader but very far from perfect.

He called Hitler for the dangerous f*cker he was when it was very unfashionable to do so.

Fair point but he also admired Mussolini, probably as he was anti-communist, so 50% right wasn't too bad.

Edited by johnno42000 (31 May 2013 6.37pm)

Firstly, where do you get Churchill admired Mussolini from?

Secondly to put that on an equal footing of the warnings over Hitler and the urging for action before he stuck is absurd.

[Link]

Hardly authoritative. No respected historian has ever even suggested that Churchill might have admired Il Duce. There is, moreover, plenty in his own writings that show that he had little or no time for him.

Wife beating may be socially acceptable in Sheffield, but it is a different matter in Cheltenham

Alert a moderator to this post

johnno42000 31 May 13 6.58pm
Quote Stirlingsays at 31 May 2013 6.52pm Quote johnno42000 at 31 May 2013 6.03pm Quote kevpofcpfc at 31 May 2013 4.48pm The persistence of Churchill in the battle for North Africa was pivotal, he alone persuaded the yanks that this was the place to deploy. The masterclass appointment of Mountbatten and the following kicking of the Africa Korps paved the way for the fall of Italy. To balance things it should also be pointed out his involvement with failure's such as the Dardanelles campaign in the First World War, The Dieppe Raid and the Norway invasion. I still think he was a very good Second World War leader but very far from perfect. Who is claiming that Churchill was a good general? It's well established that Churchill wasn't good at the details of military strategy. His strength was in being a political leader and at being ultimately very good at picking or sacking generals. No one praises Churchill for being a kind of modern Alexander. He politically was involved in the military involvements I quoted. It seems very one sided to mention the one's he was involved in, that went very well, and not mention the others that went badly. Edited by johnno42000 (31 May 2013 6.59pm) 'Lies to the masses as are like fly's to mollasses...they want more and more and more'
Alert a moderator to this post

johnno42000

31 May 13 6.58pm

Quote Stirlingsays at 31 May 2013 6.52pm

Quote johnno42000 at 31 May 2013 6.03pm

Quote kevpofcpfc at 31 May 2013 4.48pm

To balance things it should also be pointed out his involvement with failure's such as the Dardanelles campaign in the First World War, The Dieppe Raid and the Norway invasion.

I still think he was a very good Second World War leader but very far from perfect.

Who is claiming that Churchill was a good general?

It's well established that Churchill wasn't good at the details of military strategy. His strength was in being a political leader and at being ultimately very good at picking or sacking generals.

No one praises Churchill for being a kind of modern Alexander.

He politically was involved in the military involvements I quoted. It seems very one sided to mention the one's he was involved in, that went very well, and not mention the others that went badly.

Edited by johnno42000 (31 May 2013 6.59pm)

'Lies to the masses as are like fly's to mollasses...they want more and more and more'

Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays Online 31 May 13 7.13pm
Quote johnno42000 at 31 May 2013 6.52pm Quote Stirlingsays at 31 May 2013 6.45pm Quote johnno42000 at 31 May 2013 6.37pm Quote Cucking Funt at 31 May 2013 6.10pm Quote johnno42000 at 31 May 2013 6.03pm Quote kevpofcpfc at 31 May 2013 4.48pm The persistence of Churchill in the battle for North Africa was pivotal, he alone persuaded the yanks that this was the place to deploy. The masterclass appointment of Mountbatten and the following kicking of the Africa Korps paved the way for the fall of Italy. To balance things it should also be pointed out his involvement with failure's such as the Dardanelles campaign in the First World War, The Dieppe Raid and the Norway invasion. I still think he was a very good Second World War leader but very far from perfect. He called Hitler for the dangerous f*cker he was when it was very unfashionable to do so. Fair point but he also admired Mussolini, probably as he was anti-communist, so 50% right wasn't too bad. Edited by johnno42000 (31 May 2013 6.37pm) Firstly, where do you get Churchill admired Mussolini from? Secondly to put that on an equal footing of the warnings over Hitler and the urging for action before he stuck is absurd. [Link] [Link] [Link] Hilarious. To refer to a sentence Churchill said in 1927 to butter up a new leader to be indicative of Churchill's attitude towards Mussolini is ridiculous. Mussolini in 1927 was a Fascist but at that time the word hadn't anything like as bad a reputation as it has today. Still, he was an unpleasant bully and criminal but not entirely different from most of Southern Europe at the time......Indeed there was no racial aspect to Mussolini's fascism until siding with Hitler. It's as silly as saying the same of people on the left who liked Blair when he first emerged as an MP advocating CND policies. Would it be sensible to say that they 'admired Blair' as a question mark against them? Indeed the main thrust behind the WW2 books you are linking to seems to be also ridiculous.....This idea that making peace with Hitler would have been a good idea....So we give him Poland....Make peace, he takes France and ......Turns away from us and takes Russia....Who are fighting on their own...Just as Hitler wanted. Then what? He stops? Those books are appeasement fantasies. God save us from their cosy and riskless revisionism. Edited by Stirlingsays (31 May 2013 7.38pm) 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays Online

31 May 13 7.13pm

Quote johnno42000 at 31 May 2013 6.52pm

Quote Stirlingsays at 31 May 2013 6.45pm

Quote johnno42000 at 31 May 2013 6.37pm

Quote Cucking Funt at 31 May 2013 6.10pm

Quote johnno42000 at 31 May 2013 6.03pm

Quote kevpofcpfc at 31 May 2013 4.48pm

To balance things it should also be pointed out his involvement with failure's such as the Dardanelles campaign in the First World War, The Dieppe Raid and the Norway invasion.

I still think he was a very good Second World War leader but very far from perfect.

He called Hitler for the dangerous f*cker he was when it was very unfashionable to do so.

Fair point but he also admired Mussolini, probably as he was anti-communist, so 50% right wasn't too bad.

Edited by johnno42000 (31 May 2013 6.37pm)

Firstly, where do you get Churchill admired Mussolini from?

Secondly to put that on an equal footing of the warnings over Hitler and the urging for action before he stuck is absurd.

[Link]

Hilarious.

To refer to a sentence Churchill said in 1927 to butter up a new leader to be indicative of Churchill's attitude towards Mussolini is ridiculous.

Mussolini in 1927 was a Fascist but at that time the word hadn't anything like as bad a reputation as it has today. Still, he was an unpleasant bully and criminal but not entirely different from most of Southern Europe at the time......Indeed there was no racial aspect to Mussolini's fascism until siding with Hitler.

It's as silly as saying the same of people on the left who liked Blair when he first emerged as an MP advocating CND policies.

Would it be sensible to say that they 'admired Blair' as a question mark against them?

Indeed the main thrust behind the WW2 books you are linking to seems to be also ridiculous.....This idea that making peace with Hitler would have been a good idea....So we give him Poland....Make peace, he takes France and ......Turns away from us and takes Russia....Who are fighting on their own...Just as Hitler wanted. Then what? He stops?

Those books are appeasement fantasies. God save us from their cosy and riskless revisionism.

Edited by Stirlingsays (31 May 2013 7.38pm)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays Online 31 May 13 7.21pm
Quote johnno42000 at 31 May 2013 6.58pm He politically was involved in the military involvements I quoted. It seems very one sided to mention the one's he was involved in, that went very well, and not mention the others that went badly. Edited by johnno42000 (31 May 2013 6.59pm) My point is that here you are pushing against an open door. No one with knowledge about Churchill, including Churchill published conclusions himself says that he always got it right. Churchill had a very long political career. How many commanders or leaders in history held commands for anything as long as he and had no defeats. Caesar lived long but even he was defeated twice....And politically he was disastrous. Edited by Stirlingsays (31 May 2013 7.23pm) 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays Online

31 May 13 7.21pm

Quote johnno42000 at 31 May 2013 6.58pm

He politically was involved in the military involvements I quoted. It seems very one sided to mention the one's he was involved in, that went very well, and not mention the others that went badly.

Edited by johnno42000 (31 May 2013 6.59pm)

My point is that here you are pushing against an open door.

No one with knowledge about Churchill, including Churchill published conclusions himself says that he always got it right.

Churchill had a very long political career.
How many commanders or leaders in history held commands for anything as long as he and had no defeats.

Caesar lived long but even he was defeated twice....And politically he was disastrous.

Edited by Stirlingsays (31 May 2013 7.23pm)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert a moderator to this post

johnno42000 31 May 13 7.28pm
Quote Stirlingsays at 31 May 2013 7.21pm Quote johnno42000 at 31 May 2013 6.58pm He politically was involved in the military involvements I quoted. It seems very one sided to mention the one's he was involved in, that went very well, and not mention the others that went badly. Edited by johnno42000 (31 May 2013 6.59pm) My point is that here you are pushing against an open door. No one with knowledge about Churchill, including Churchill published conclusions himself says that he always got it right. Churchill had a very long political career. How many commanders or leaders in history held commands for anything as long as he and had no defeats. Caesar lived long but even he was defeated twice....And politically he was disastrous. Edited by Stirlingsays (31 May 2013 7.23pm) My point is that people keep posting the good things about him and ignore the bad. It's almost if they had rose tinted specs. I have never ignored his importance during the Second World War, and wouldn't dream of doing so, however, there are things he did badly, and certain people seem to conveniently ignore these and that, IMO, is wrong. Edited by johnno42000 (31 May 2013 7.33pm) 'Lies to the masses as are like fly's to mollasses...they want more and more and more'
Alert a moderator to this post

johnno42000

31 May 13 7.28pm

Quote Stirlingsays at 31 May 2013 7.21pm

Quote johnno42000 at 31 May 2013 6.58pm

He politically was involved in the military involvements I quoted. It seems very one sided to mention the one's he was involved in, that went very well, and not mention the others that went badly.

Edited by johnno42000 (31 May 2013 6.59pm)

My point is that here you are pushing against an open door.

No one with knowledge about Churchill, including Churchill published conclusions himself says that he always got it right.

Churchill had a very long political career.
How many commanders or leaders in history held commands for anything as long as he and had no defeats.

Caesar lived long but even he was defeated twice....And politically he was disastrous.

Edited by Stirlingsays (31 May 2013 7.23pm)

My point is that people keep posting the good things about him and ignore the bad. It's almost if they had rose tinted specs.

I have never ignored his importance during the Second World War, and wouldn't dream of doing so, however, there are things he did badly, and certain people seem to conveniently ignore these and that, IMO, is wrong.

Edited by johnno42000 (31 May 2013 7.33pm)

'Lies to the masses as are like fly's to mollasses...they want more and more and more'

Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays Online 31 May 13 7.35pm
Quote johnno42000 at 31 May 2013 7.28pm Quote Stirlingsays at 31 May 2013 7.21pm Quote johnno42000 at 31 May 2013 6.58pm He politically was involved in the military involvements I quoted. It seems very one sided to mention the one's he was involved in, that went very well, and not mention the others that went badly. Edited by johnno42000 (31 May 2013 6.59pm) My point is that here you are pushing against an open door. No one with knowledge about Churchill, including Churchill published conclusions himself says that he always got it right. Churchill had a very long political career. How many commanders or leaders in history held commands for anything as long as he and had no defeats. Caesar lived long but even he was defeated twice....And politically he was disastrous. Edited by Stirlingsays (31 May 2013 7.23pm) My point is that people keep posting the good things about him and ignore the bad. It's almost if they had rose tinted specs. I have never ignored his importance during the Second World War, and wouldn't dream of doing so, however, there are things he did badly and certain people seem to conveniently ignore these and that, IMO, is wrong. The balance is heavily weighted towards the positive. Churchill is rightly regarded as the greatest Britain so naturally people will post supporting him. I doubt many people are ignoring Churchill's mistakes but rather don't know about them. 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays Online

31 May 13 7.35pm

Quote johnno42000 at 31 May 2013 7.28pm

Quote Stirlingsays at 31 May 2013 7.21pm

Quote johnno42000 at 31 May 2013 6.58pm

He politically was involved in the military involvements I quoted. It seems very one sided to mention the one's he was involved in, that went very well, and not mention the others that went badly.

Edited by johnno42000 (31 May 2013 6.59pm)

My point is that here you are pushing against an open door.

No one with knowledge about Churchill, including Churchill published conclusions himself says that he always got it right.

Churchill had a very long political career.
How many commanders or leaders in history held commands for anything as long as he and had no defeats.

Caesar lived long but even he was defeated twice....And politically he was disastrous.

Edited by Stirlingsays (31 May 2013 7.23pm)

My point is that people keep posting the good things about him and ignore the bad. It's almost if they had rose tinted specs.

I have never ignored his importance during the Second World War, and wouldn't dream of doing so, however, there are things he did badly and certain people seem to conveniently ignore these and that, IMO, is wrong.

The balance is heavily weighted towards the positive.

Churchill is rightly regarded as the greatest Britain so naturally people will post supporting him.

I doubt many people are ignoring Churchill's mistakes but rather don't know about them.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert a moderator to this post

Bert the Head Epsom 31 May 13 11.15pm
Quote eaglesmad at 24 May 2013 12.00am After recent events this is total disrespect to the armed forces and civilians that lost there lives during WW2, OP u are a absolute Prick for starting this thread, I find it offensive to say the least, I am a ex serviceman and lost friends fighting for this country it was our job we choose to do it to defend OUR country, and arseholes like you make me sick, you don't like it here f*** off your no better than a terrorist in my view, Churchill did what had to be done to stop a madman if he hadn't you would be speaking German and being told how to live your life and have no freedom of choice, I'm sure your grandparents or even parents are really proud of you. Arsehole You were presumably defending free speech, though mate. So why the offence? You should be pleased you've defended it so well its still thriving. Thanks...though not sure I really felt under attack from Iraq or Afganistan. But Hey thanks again.
Alert a moderator to this post

Bert the Head

Epsom 31 May 13 11.15pm

Quote eaglesmad at 24 May 2013 12.00am

After recent events this is total disrespect to the armed forces and civilians that lost there lives during WW2, OP u are a absolute Prick for starting this thread, I find it offensive to say the least, I am a ex serviceman and lost friends fighting for this country it was our job we choose to do it to defend OUR country, and arseholes like you make me sick, you don't like it here f*** off your no better than a terrorist in my view, Churchill did what had to be done to stop a madman if he hadn't you would be speaking German and being told how to live your life and have no freedom of choice, I'm sure your grandparents or even parents are really proud of you. Arsehole

You were presumably defending free speech, though mate. So why the offence? You should be pleased you've defended it so well its still thriving. Thanks...though not sure I really felt under attack from Iraq or Afganistan. But Hey thanks again.

Alert a moderator to this post

Page 11 of 22 < 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Crystal Palace FC Supporters' Website - The Holmesdale Online

Churchill was a prick

Site Map

Sponsors