NEVILLE CHAMBERLAIN
- David Brown
- Member
- Posts: 792
- Joined: 20 Apr 2003, 01:46
- Location: Prescot on Merseyside in England.
NEVILLE CHAMBERLAIN
[Moved from the Polls section]
Neville Chamberlain has his place in world history, but was he a strong Prime Minister?
If you voted “YES”, then say why do you think he was a strong Prime Minister?
If you voted “NO”, then say why do you think he was not a strong Prime Minister?
Change history for a moment and assume: -
1. that Winston Churchill did not succeed Chamberlain as Prime Minister.
2. that Chamberlain remained in office as Prime Minister
3. that Chamberlain did not die in May 1940.
On the basis of how you voted, what impact do you think this would have had on the British war effort and the war in europe?
Neville Chamberlain has his place in world history, but was he a strong Prime Minister?
If you voted “YES”, then say why do you think he was a strong Prime Minister?
If you voted “NO”, then say why do you think he was not a strong Prime Minister?
Change history for a moment and assume: -
1. that Winston Churchill did not succeed Chamberlain as Prime Minister.
2. that Chamberlain remained in office as Prime Minister
3. that Chamberlain did not die in May 1940.
On the basis of how you voted, what impact do you think this would have had on the British war effort and the war in europe?
- Benoit Douville
- Member
- Posts: 3184
- Joined: 11 Mar 2002, 02:13
- Location: Montréal
- Lord Gort
- Member
- Posts: 2014
- Joined: 07 Apr 2002, 15:44
- Location: United Kingdom: The Land of Hope and Glory
You have to understand the context of the time. The men of the age all would have been acquaintde with at least one person who died in the great war and many fought in the trenches themselves.
They feared the loss of life and the economic depression was only just lifting away.
They thought Hitler and the Nazis were reasonable people with reasonable grievences over the way Germany had been treated during the last war.
However I voted that he was a weak man!
regards,
They feared the loss of life and the economic depression was only just lifting away.
They thought Hitler and the Nazis were reasonable people with reasonable grievences over the way Germany had been treated during the last war.
However I voted that he was a weak man!
regards,
- David Brown
- Member
- Posts: 792
- Joined: 20 Apr 2003, 01:46
- Location: Prescot on Merseyside in England.
Re: NEVILLE CHAMBERLAIN
But what do you all think about the second part of the polls question?
DaveDavid Brown wrote:
Change history for a moment and assume: -
1. that Winston Churchill did not succeed Chamberlain as Prime Minister.
2. that Chamberlain remained in office as Prime Minister
3. that Chamberlain did not die in May 1940.
On the basis of how you voted, what impact do you think this would have had on the British war effort and the war in europe?
- Lord Gort
- Member
- Posts: 2014
- Joined: 07 Apr 2002, 15:44
- Location: United Kingdom: The Land of Hope and Glory
The country would not have had the strong impression of leadership that Churchill exuded. He would have made peace with the rest of those sodding "prgamatists" who were not pragmatic enough to see that there werent storm clouds over europe in the late thrities, but that it was already bloody RAINING!
regards,
regards,
If Chamberlain had remained Prime Minister?
Britain might have started negotiations with Germany. From there, who knows what the consquenses might have been.
It has to be mentioned that Chamberlain resigned because of the German occupation of Norway. If he hadn´t resigned, isn´t it likely that he would have changed his policy towards Germany at this point?
Chamberlain has been labeled a weak man because he tried to negotiate with Hitler. But he was a man who believed in peace, and acted on his beliefs. On the other hand, I don´t believe he was the right man to lead a country at war.
I voted "unsure".
Best regards,
Yngwie J.
Britain might have started negotiations with Germany. From there, who knows what the consquenses might have been.
It has to be mentioned that Chamberlain resigned because of the German occupation of Norway. If he hadn´t resigned, isn´t it likely that he would have changed his policy towards Germany at this point?
Chamberlain has been labeled a weak man because he tried to negotiate with Hitler. But he was a man who believed in peace, and acted on his beliefs. On the other hand, I don´t believe he was the right man to lead a country at war.
I voted "unsure".
Best regards,
Yngwie J.
-
- Member
- Posts: 540
- Joined: 15 Mar 2003, 23:58
- Location: Sonoma County, California
I have not yet voted, but I would like to ask everyone who mentioned the appeasement as the reason Chamberlain was a weak PM. What would you have done in his place? I agree that some of his statements regarding the appeasement were stupid, like "peace for a time", but when hasn't a leader tried to turn something like that into a propaganda victory.
James
James
- David Brown
- Member
- Posts: 792
- Joined: 20 Apr 2003, 01:46
- Location: Prescot on Merseyside in England.
NEVILLE CHAMBERLAIN
Hello GreyfinnGreyfinn wrote:...if I would not banned...i will say what I think about this "man"...
Regards
Greyfinn
So send it to me in a PM. I really do want to know what people think about the subject. It is opinion and views I am interested in, nothing else.
Take Care
Dave
- karltrowitz
- Member
- Posts: 296
- Joined: 12 Jan 2003, 08:35
- Location: Prudhoe,UK
-
- Member
- Posts: 915
- Joined: 28 Feb 2003, 21:40
- Location: Europe
What If:Yngwie J. wrote:If Chamberlain had remained Prime Minister?
Britain might have started negotiations with Germany. From there, who knows what the consquenses might have been.
It has to be mentioned that Chamberlain resigned because of the German occupation of Norway. If he hadn´t resigned, isn´t it likely that he would have changed his policy towards Germany at this point?
Chamberlain has been labeled a weak man because he tried to negotiate with Hitler. But he was a man who believed in peace, and acted on his beliefs. On the other hand, I don´t believe he was the right man to lead a country at war.
I voted "unsure".
Chamberlain negotiated with Hitler after the invasion of Norway, and he could be convinced not just to make peace, but ally Britain with Germany? was he still going to be weak?
~The Witch King of Angmar
- Psycho Mike
- Member
- Posts: 3243
- Joined: 15 Sep 2002, 14:18
- Location: United States
- col. klink
- Member
- Posts: 735
- Joined: 28 Aug 2002, 06:46
- Location: chicago,il. usa
neville chamberlin
Before Stalin signed the pact with Hitler Japan and the USSR had a series of skirmishes in the East for over a year. So there was also a possibility of the USSR going to war with Japan when the pact was negotiated. As far as I know Britain was not facing the possibility of an invasion or war with another power at the time of Munich. By excluding USSR from the Munich talks England and France where trying to push Hitler east and maybe into a confrontation with USSR. Chamberlin may have been weak but he wasn't entirley stupid. He gambled and although he secured a bit of time to prepare he lost. I find it funny how this conservative PM is thought of in the US as a liberal appeaser.