The inability to become aroused over any of the choices for president put forth by either party in the 2008 election year.
Why do we have such a bad crop of politicians here and over there? Was Churchill a one off?
Friday, 8 February 2008
Electile Dysfunction:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Churchill was not that great a politician. His war time record is patchy at best and he constantly interfered with the running of the war. Despite his limited army service he thought he knew better than all his generlas and during his stays at the Admiralty he was a menace.
To the Dardanelles catastrophe one can add the escape of the Goeben to his First War failures and ion the Second there was Norway, North Africa, Greece and Crete as well as the sinking of Prince of Wales and Repulse for which he bares most responsibility.
He was out of touch with technology and took advice mostly from cronies, stayed on too long after the war and should have been retired during it.
He was of course the greatest Englishman who ever lived. How do we know? Because he wrote that he was.
His record does not stand up to close examination. On rearmament Chamberlain has a better record. During the 1920's under a government with Churchill as a senior member we totally disarmed and owed our defeat in France in 1940 directly to that government's policies.
Forty three years after his demise, and the minnows are still biting at his ankles. Hey anonymous, you'd have been better off just stating that he wasn't your cup of tea, instead of trying to imply that the reason the second world war became necessary was entirely down to Winston's failings. I think you've been listening to too many revisionist professors, there again, I guess it pays to suck up to them as it's an easy way to get a passing grade.
Post a Comment