@moonbus saidWW2 ended the British Empire .... not Gandhi.
Well for starters, Gandhi threw the British Empire out of its prize colony. That altered world history, both for Asia and the British Empire. India is the world’s most populous democracy. And the British Empire is no more.
But, if you discount Asia and the British Empire, I can see how you might think Gandhi was nobody very influential.
(Great respect for the man though ......)
@wolfgang59 saidAccording to the history books I've read, it wouldn't have been possible without him.
You'd be wrong though.
Nice thought.
@torunn saidChurchill was a great orator and leader.
According to the history books I've read, it wouldn't have been possible without him.
Maybe he prevented the invasion of UK.
But Russia with some help from US would ultimately have defeated Hitler.
Churchill saved Britain (perhaps) he did not win WW2.
@wolfgang59 saidI'll rephrase: He helped making it possible to win WWII.
Churchill was a great orator and leader.
Maybe he prevented the invasion of UK.
But Russia with some help from US would ultimately have defeated Hitler.
Churchill saved Britain (perhaps) he did not win WW2.
No single Person could win a war.
Churchill had his part as had Stalin (though we might consider him a villain) as had Roosevelt as had Japan (decision to attack Pearl Harbour and not Wladiwostok)...as had Hitler (some really dumb orders) as had the French Résistance (though probably far less then the French imagine).
Noteable lives, and I understand: people who live today:
* Pope Francis, the Dalai Lama
* Trump, Obama, Putin, Xi
* more scientist than I can enumerate
- Joined
- 18 Jan 07
- Moves
- 12477
@very-rusty saidI'm sorry to say you're probably right.
1. Jeff Bezos.
2.Bill Gates.
3. Warren Buffett.
- Joined
- 18 Jan 07
- Moves
- 12477
@wolfgang59 saidYou can leave the latecomers out of it. By the time the Yanks decided to be here, over-paid, over-horny and finallyover here, the Russians had all but won the war already. And yes, the English helped make it possible for them to do so, as did the Poles and many others. But not the two-year-ditherers.
But Russia with some help from US would ultimately have defeated Hitler.
Three main factors contributing the fall of Nazi Germany (imo):
1) Hitlers poor mental health which ultimately compromised his leadership and military decision-making processes.
2) The Russians in the North and the allied forces in the west, each respectively supported by freezing weather and the English Chanel, both of which helped to curtail the German advance.
3) The Japanese attack on Pearl Harbour which precipitated the US entry into the conflict and the underlining impact of the deployment of nuclear weaponry and their subsequent deterrent.
For Britain, Churchill’s vision of European liberty and his utter refusal to compromise with Hitler eventually galvanised Parliament, the country and its depleted armed forces into a fierce stance which encouraged Hitler to focus north ~ and we are grateful to the Russians for their bravery and unfathomable losses.
@divegeester saidBe grateful to the Russians? Are you on crack?
Three main factors contributing the fall of Nazi Germany (imo):
1) Hitlers poor mental health which ultimately compromised his leadership and military decision-making processes.
2) The Russians in the North and the allied forces in the west, each respectively supported by freezing weather and the English Chanel, both of which helped to curtail the German advance.
...[text shortened]... tler to focus north ~ and we are grateful to the Russians for their bravery and unfathomable losses.
Hitler and Stalin divided Poland amongst themselves, but the Allies only declared war on Germany and not the USSR like they should have.
Then with the peace treaty with Stalin, Hitler was able to throw all of his forces at Western Europe, and then only had the UK standing in his way.
By this time the Leftists in the UK were faced with annihilation, as Churchill had kept trying to warn them about instead of appeasing Hitler. So when it looked like all was lost, they decided to throw Churchill into power, but then when in power the Leftists kept pleading with him to make a deal with the little National Socialist for "peace". In other words, they wanted Churchill to orchestrate a surrender with the best possible terms for the UK. Luckily, though Churchill fought them and refused to surrender, even though it looked hopeless on the outside. It was also fortunate that Hitler did not want to fight his fellow Arian master race in the UK, so decided to turn his wrath on the inferior Slavs to the East instead
"...By this time the Leftists in the UK were faced with annihilation, as Churchill had kept trying to warn them about instead of appeasing Hitler. So when it looked like all was lost, they decided to throw Churchill into power, but then when in power the Leftists kept pleading with him to make a deal with the little National Socialist for "peace". In other words, they wanted Churchill to orchestrate a surrender with the best possible terms for the UK. Luckily, though Churchill fought them and refused to surrender, even though it looked hopeless on the outside..."
This is what I meant with saying that things could have been so much different had it not been for the determination and courage of Winston Churchill.
@torunn saidAnd today we see this with Iran who chant death to America and Israel everyday.
"...By this time the Leftists in the UK were faced with annihilation, as Churchill had kept trying to warn them about instead of appeasing Hitler. So when it looked like all was lost, they decided to throw Churchill into power, but then when in power the Leftists kept pleading with him to make a deal with the little National Socialist for "peace". In other words, they wanted C ...[text shortened]... have been so much different had it not been for the determination and courage of Winston Churchill.
Some things never change.
I reckon Trump is the closest thing we have today.
- Joined
- 18 Jan 07
- Moves
- 12477
@whodey saidYou do realise that appeasement was a right-wing policy, don't you? Chamberlain was a life-long Tory, Churchill was not.
By this time the Leftists in the UK were faced with annihilation, as Churchill had kept trying to warn them about instead of appeasing Hitler.
Meanwhile, in your own "defender of democracy", the right-wing preferred not so much appeasement of, as alliance with the Nazis. FDR was a Democrat (oh, the shame!), and he had to fight your beloved Republicans and Independents tooth and nail to be allowed to fight on the honourable side.
- Joined
- 18 Jan 07
- Moves
- 12477
@whodey saidTo Chamberlain?
I reckon Trump is the closest thing we have today.
Yes. Yes, he is. With Putin in the Eastwards role.