This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In
Hrolf The Ganger 30 Jan 17 12.51pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Joe Bloggs
During the war (ww2) I heard lots of anti Churchill remarks..the standard comment being every time Churchill opens his mouth we get bombed. He was a flawed individual but the right man for the job at that time. He was never popular with the left.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
jamiemartin721 Reading 30 Jan 17 5.49pm | |
---|---|
That's kind of my point. Churchill gets the credit and plaudits, whilst the people doing the work get nothing. You'd think the way people go on about politicians that they single handedly won the battle of bloody Britain, bully rammed Hirohito and personal split the atom over Hiroshima.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
jamiemartin721 Reading 30 Jan 17 5.50pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Hoof Hearted
Good to see Donald J Trump has reinstated his bust into the Oval Office after Obama had it removed during his tenancy. You have to be concerned when the words Trump, Bust and Oval Office are in the same sentence.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
jamiemartin721 Reading 30 Jan 17 5.56pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger
He was never popular with the left. War time politics is an odd, no one really wants to be reminded of the war after its all over. The UK has typically seen big shifts towards left and liberal ideas following major wars, and a ground swell of optimism and social change. Which traditionally aren't conservative or right wing in their appeal.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
davenotamonkey 30 Jan 17 6.00pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by jamiemartin721
You have to be concerned when the words Trump, Bust and Oval Office are in the same sentence. Close, but er.. no.. cigar.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
johnfirewall 30 Jan 17 7.26pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by serial thriller
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) Heard those exact anti-Churchill points on the same podcast which also praised Stalin. I'm sure they're accurate though and do put a new spin on things if you'd rather be speaking German.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Hrolf The Ganger 30 Jan 17 7.46pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by jamiemartin721
War time politics is an odd, no one really wants to be reminded of the war after its all over. The UK has typically seen big shifts towards left and liberal ideas following major wars, and a ground swell of optimism and social change. Which traditionally aren't conservative or right wing in their appeal. The idea that everyone pulled together during the war is a bit of romanticising. Churchill was not even that popular with many of the working class during the war, not just after.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Kermit8 Hevon 30 Jan 17 10.27pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger
The idea that everyone pulled together during the war is a bit of romanticising. Churchill was not even that popular with many of the working class during the war, not just after.
Big chest and massive boobs |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Jamesey Wandsworth 30 Jan 17 11.26pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by serial thriller
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) Dear me, I never even noticed that we'd killed millions of inferior races.
Nothing is fool-proof - fools are too ingenious |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
nickgusset Shizzlehurst 30 Jan 17 11.32pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by johnfirewall
Heard those exact anti-Churchill points on the same podcast which also praised Stalin. I'm sure they're accurate though and do put a new spin on things if you'd rather be speaking German. 1. What podcast is that then? Do you have a link? Why use the praised Stalin line? If you had any idea how factionalised the left is you'd know it's a trite comment that is indicitive of a lack of thiought or imagination. Do you realise how many of the left don't give a monkeys about Trotskyism, stalinism, marxism etc, they just want to see a society that gives everyone a chance and makes sure everyone is looked after. Not exactly revolutionary is it? Back to Churchill. Again no argument from me about his importance and role in defeating Germany, but nobody is perfect. It's right that his role in the Indian famine and seeming racism is not swept under the carpet. Edited by nickgusset (30 Jan 2017 11.36pm)
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
hedgehog50 Croydon 31 Jan 17 8.05am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by nickgusset
1. What podcast is that then? Do you have a link? Why use the praised Stalin line? If you had any idea how factionalised the left is you'd know it's a trite comment that is indicitive of a lack of thiought or imagination. Do you realise how many of the left don't give a monkeys about Trotskyism, stalinism, marxism etc, they just want to see a society that gives everyone a chance and makes sure everyone is looked after. Not exactly revolutionary is it? Back to Churchill. Again no argument from me about his importance and role in defeating Germany, but nobody is perfect. It's right that his role in the Indian famine and seeming racism is not swept under the carpet. Edited by nickgusset (30 Jan 2017 11.36pm) Attlee and Bevin were in government with Churchill at the time, how much responsibility should they be allocated? Should they have resigned?
We have now sunk to a depth at which the restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men. [Orwell] |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Hoof Hearted 31 Jan 17 9.36am | |
---|---|
WOOOOSHHHHHH! Sense of humour bypass!
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Registration is now on our new message board
To login with your existing username you will need to convert your account over to the new message board.
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2024 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.