Even Public Schools are crap at history

[????]

...oh dear

[mockney piers]

A bit of a weird thing to come out with, certainly wont play well with the Daily Mail readership, plus a bit arse licky isn't it. Another lapdog in the making?

Still, apart from the year, he's not actually wrong is he.

[RosieH]

Hahaha, oleaginous smarm-cretin.

Priceless.

[legalbeagle]

You're right Mockney. Facts aside, he was spot on.

[????]

At the end of 1940 we were alone against the Nazis,the US looked a million miles away from joining the war, their material support for us was still pretty low and politically difficult to get, we had no armed land army. We could have come to a compromise with the Germans in 1940 - indeed very many thought we should have - kept our empire and not financially bankrupted ourselves. Instead we chose not to...it was almost certainly our finest hour...and you'd hope a Prime Minister would have some kind of understanding even if he's visiting a country where the 2nd World War is often dated 1941-45.

[Brendan]

Well at least you lost the empire so something good came out of it.

[????]

That's my point Brendan.....amongst others

[????]

...that (maybe for once) we did the right thing morally at considerable risk and the yanks input was immaterial

[Jah Lush]

How could he get that so wrong? Fecking arse licking poodle! It was indeed our finest hour and something we should all be very proud of.

[Brendan]

True. Contrary to its previously military history Britain did actually take the moral high ground in WW2 (except at the end of the war when it came to bombing German civilians).

The Americans were more cynical. They played politics and won. Their help was still necessary though.

[????]

Yup, of course it was, but in 1940 it was very far from guaranteed.

[*Bob*]

Britain went to war the Germany because we were unfortunate enough to have a historical alliance with Poland.

Morals, doing the right thing (in any sense you imply), 'fighting evil' etc had absolutely nothing to do with it.

There were plenty of finest hours, but you can't backdate to wherever you please.

[????]

er...we didn't have a historical alliance with poland *Bob*. We'd guaranteed we'd sopport them agains German aggression less than a year before in 1939 after the germans invaded Czechslovakia. And support them we did however innefectually. By the end of 1940 we could have made peace.

A Belgium alliance in 1830 sparked the 1914 war but no such thing existed with Poland.

[EDKiwi]

Brendan Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> True. Contrary to its previously military history

> Britain did actually take the moral high ground in

> WW2 (except at the end of the war when it came to

> bombing German civilians).

>

Well at least they didn't nuke them I guess.

It does piss me off a bit how the americans like to go on about how they came to the rescue and saved the UK, if it wasn't for Pearl Harbour they probably would have quite happily sat on the side lines saying 'It ain't our fight'.

[*Bob*]

A network of historical obligation, alliance and allegiance led to the Polish ultimatum - whether there was a formal treaty of not is neither here nor there - it amounts to the same thing.

[taper]

bob seeger and Woodie Guthrie were virulently against the US entering the war, I was somewhat disappointed to learn. But then I don't suppose it was a particularly easy call back in 39-40

[????]

Er, no, Contined German aggression and the breaking of the Munich agreement by Germany meant that Britain and France said in 1939 that they would absolutely stand up to any German aggression against Poland...but I get the sense you're not going to agree with facts here.

[mockney piers]

Agreed re poland quids, a line had been crossed that we knew we finally had to stand up to.

I don't think losing empire was a moral decision but a consequence of bankruptcy and the emergence of strong self determination movements from colonies who had sacrificed greatly for the mother country.

We actually spent most of the war trying to protect our strategic interests first and foremost, defeating Germany was secondary to that. The French record was thrice as shameful, we even had to fight them in 1942!

It was of course the Russians what won it, and the Americans who kept western Europe liberal and democratic, we quite simply could not have opened up a second front (well third really, but Italy was just a meatgrinder, and we'd never have got past the alps, Italy and Austria lost well over a million men in the first war scrapping over that 1 to 1 scale map of Blackadder fame).

That's not to belittle our contribution and huge sacrifice in anyway (as an aside mind, Brendan's right, the scale of civilian bombings were to put it mildly morally questionable), but the reality is we were most definitely the junior partners.

[*Bob*]

Well you're talking facts now, instead of 'morals', so we're on the same page.

Countries like (especially) Britain are not in the habit of going to war over 'morals'. That's how we cacked on the rest of the world so successfully and got our empire in the first place.

[????]

No ones disputing that Mockney, I think most peopel with a grasp of history are aware. But it's not just a mistake on a year, 1940 can be argued to be our finest hour and thus was crass and pretty stupid mistake for a British PM to make.

[mockney piers]

And EDKiwi, Pearl Harbour opened a war with Japan. Germany's declaration of war was stupid but would not have guaranteed that the US took part in a European war. With the largest ethnic grouping in the US being German, plus many others like the Irish with little sympathy for Britain, war with Germany was always a hard sell, but something Roosevelt was long comitted to trying to get the US to do for long term strategic interests. He was a wise one that fella, much cleverer than Truman who made a bit of a pigs ear of everything.

[EDKiwi]

At least he didn't go on and say something like 'Oh there was a bit of a scrap in the skies of England I think, nothing major though'.

[taper]

I think Truman was under-rated. Much maligned because of Hiroshima/Nagasaki I suppose. But he called that right.

[EDKiwi]

mockney piers Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> And EDKiwi, Pearl Harbour opened a war with Japan.

> Germany's declaration of war was stupid but would

> not have guaranteed that the US took part in a

> European war. With the largest ethnic grouping in

> the US being German, plus many others like the

> Irish with little sympathy for Britain, war with

> Germany was always a hard sell, but something

> Roosevelt was long comitted to trying to get the

> US to do for long term strategic interests. He was

> a wise one that fella, much cleverer than Truman

> who made a bit of a pigs ear of everything.

Very true, and I guess if the US hadn't gone after Japan I'd be speaking Japanese and making sushi....although I do like sushi.

[DJKillaQueen]

Cameron I think is a rabbit caught in the headlights - his weaknesses not just on the international stage but at the dispatch box are becoming increasingly apparent.

As for WWII...we have to remember what the mindset of the time was. WWI was still in near living memory. There was no telling where Germany would stop (imagine the same scenario today - there's no way the international community would tolerate that level of invasion). Hindsight is a wonderful thing. I personally don't think any peace agreement with Hitler would have lasted. The Germans reneged on every agreement they made, be it Russia, France, Italy the moment their priorites changed. Many neutral countries were swallowed up too. We'll never know for sure of course. Churchill and others also knew that if Britain were to fall, that would be it. As for our Empire, it had well and truly already declined long before 1939.

Were we a junior partner? No, because our influence in the planning and execution of the fight back was an equal partnership and our scarifice greater. Yes the provision of manpower and resources was the greater part American, but our contribution in key things, from 'the Battle of Britain' and early Radar, to cracking the enigma and special ops were just as crucial to defending Britian as the manpower and resources provided for D-Day ....if indeed such things can be measured.

Something that can be measured though are losses. We suffered more. 400,000 british soldiers died during WWII compared to 300,000 Americans. We also lost 60,000 civilians. So nothing junior in those figures I think.