Online magazine posted BF's game screenshot

[Frenchy56]

5 hours ago, Freyberg said:

As to the question of whether Churchill was a competent military strategist, well he was and he wasn't.

The invasion of Greece was a disaster, except... ...that it and the revolution Yugoslavia delayed the start of Barbarossa by just long enough to prevent Germany from winning in 1941.

The invasion of Italy, likewise, was a pointless, bloody adventure except... the collapse of Mussolini's government came at just the right time to break Hitler's nerve in the Battle of Kursk.

For a lousy strategist, he had an uncanny ability to choose strategies that had unpredictably beneficial outcomes.

The Dardanelles campaign. Heh.

[Frenchy56]

[snip]

Edited August 15, 2019 by Frenchy56
double post

[Michael Emrys]

19 hours ago, Warts 'n' all said:

I was just suggesting why he would have had a tank named after him.

I thought the tank was named after Marlborough, Winston's glorious ancestor.

Michael

[Michael Emrys]

3 minutes ago, Frenchy56 said:

The Dardanelles campaign. Heh.

Actually, I don't feel that the Dardanelles was Churchill's fault. As I understand it, the original plan was brilliant and would have worked. But it was a case of "too many cooks spoil the broth." You might check William Manchester's biography, the second volume.

Michael

[danfrodo]

20 minutes ago, Erwin said:

Are there any historical characters who used to be thought of as heroes or brilliant who have not now fallen from their pedestals thru revisionism?  Monty seems to be reviled today as too slow and cautious even tho' his main task was to minimize British casualties as Britain had lost so many in WW1.  Are Patton, Lincoln and Washington today similarly recognized as being "lucky" altho' inept?   Am genuinely curious.  

I wouldn't really knock montgomery for his caution.  I'd knock him for his insane ego, Ike was shocked at how self-centered he was.  And his obsession w getting control of the western front command in Sept 44 led him to throw together Market-Garden with not nearly enough thought & preparation, leading to a terrible disaster.  He should've been using those forces to get Antwerp open ASAP. 

Washington was not a good military general overall.  but he was smart about one thing: if he kept the army alive he kept the revolution alive.  and that mattered more than any one battle.  I really like Washington. 

FreyBerg:  Kursk was lost to the germans because of the British?  Was they even a reasonable chance Germans could win at Kursk?  I am not sure, I am still looking for a really good operational level  book on Kursk.  Know any?

[Sequoia]

You don't like Glantz's book on Kursk? 

[Warts 'n' all]

1 hour ago, Michael Emrys said:

I thought the tank was named after Marlborough, Winston's glorious ancestor.

Michael

You could well be right, but as head of the M.O.D. he would have had final say in the matter, even if he didn't dream up the name. He did joke to Smuts that it was named after him because it was "no bloody good". 

[Warts 'n' all]

1 hour ago, danfrodo said:

I'd knock him for his insane ego, 

As Paddy said to him, "That's the problem with you bloody Anglicans, you think you know everything. Why not have a drink with me and Mr Jorrocks, it might loosen you up a bit".

[Warts 'n' all]

1 hour ago, danfrodo said:

He should've been using those forces to get Antwerp open ASAP.

Perhaps his commanding officer should have ordered him to clear the Scheldt on September 5th,  and given him and the Canadians the tools to do the job. But, who knows he might have been having too much fun singing "I wish I could shimmy like my driver Kay".

[danfrodo]

1 hour ago, Sequoia said:

You don't like Glantz's book on Kursk? 

oh, I didn't know he had that because I always get kindle books these days.  I read several of his other books.  Looks like I'll be going paperback on this one.  Thanks for the tip, Sequoia.

[danfrodo]

22 minutes ago, Warts 'n' all said:

Perhaps his commanding officer should have ordered him to clear the Scheldt on September 5th,  and given him and the Canadians the tools to do the job. But, who knows he might have been having too much fun singing "I wish I could shimmy like my driver Kay".

Ike was down, bedridden with a blown knee, probably on pain killers at that time & didn't exercise proper restraint or guidance.  Despite the solace he was, hopefully, receiving from Kay.  Monty was so exhausting and painful to work with, I can see Ike not having the energy to stop him at that time.  Yes, Ike's fault.  But I still buy into Antony Beevor's assessment of Monty's motives in shoving forward such a reckless operation (Monty's ego overriding military judgement).

[Kevin2k]

Churchill is not (just) a person, how can a person by himself start out with these adventures in early life, do WW1 and WW2 like that, and still come up with new adventures: https://winstonchurchill.org  ? Well, even if a person could do such things, it would not be him.

As to Kursk. My thought after reading about it was; Attack anywhere, but for gods sake not there.

Edit;  What I was reading about Kursk were the usual Osprey Publishing 'Campaign' books. https://ospreypublishing.com/catalogsearch/result/?q=kursk

Edited August 15, 2019 by Kevin2k

[MOS:96B2P]

13 minutes ago, Kevin2k said:

As to Kursk. My thought after reading about it was; Attack anywhere, but for gods sake not there.

+1.  This. 

[ncc1701e]

50 minutes ago, Kevin2k said:

As to Kursk. My thought after reading about it was; Attack anywhere, but for gods sake not there.

Or stay on the defensive.

[Freyberg]

3 hours ago, danfrodo said:

FreyBerg:  Kursk was lost to the germans because of the British?  Was they even a reasonable chance Germans could win at Kursk?  I am not sure, I am still looking for a really good operational level  book on Kursk.  Know any?

I don't know if the Germans ever stood a chance at Kursk - I somehow doubt it. But I'm not smart enough to win at hypotheticals even about things I know a lot about.

However all war has a strong element of the psychological and I believe Churchill understood Hitler psychologically. He also had the street fighter's intuition that, when you don't have the opportunity to shoot them in the heart, you can always bite them on the ear...

[ncc1701e]

On 8/6/2019 at 10:29 PM, Sgt.Squarehead said:

But now we have to nag you to expand it some more. 

Apparently wars in the middle east (& wider region) can go on rather longer than initially predicted. 

+1. May I lobby for some Frenchies in CMSF2? Or, if the family is definitely over, consider them for CMSF3.

[sburke]

3 hours ago, Michael Emrys said:

Actually, I don't feel that the Dardanelles was Churchill's fault. As I understand it, the original plan was brilliant and would have worked. But it was a case of "too many cooks spoil the broth." You might check William Manchester's biography, the second volume.

Michael

The other thinking at the time was to go for Alexandretta.  And no I doubt the original Dardanelles plan was brilliant.  The reason the Alexandretta landing was vetoed was France and their concern that any action where they didn't have control risked their losing the opportunity to seize that portion of the Ottoman empire after the war.

Anderson, Scott. Lawrence in Arabia: War, Deceit, Imperial Folly and the Making of the Modern Middle East

https://www.amazon.com/Lawrence-Arabia-Deceit-Imperial-Notable-ebook/dp/B00BH0VSPI/ref=sr_1_1?crid=1TGONGD6FTZ7D&keywords=lawrence+in+arabia&qid=1565894170&s=books&sprefix=lawrence%2Caps%2C206&sr=1-1

[MikeyD]

Churchill's greatest utility during the war was that he was half American. He had an American mother who was admittedly a pretty poor excuse for a mother but at least she was better than little Winston's father who died raving from syphilis. He was also an accomplished journalist. Britain needed a charismatic propagandist with strong American ties in No.10 Downing St. more than they needed a tactical genius. Neville Chamberlain had made the correct move in avoiding direct confrontation with Germany before Britain had build up sufficient military strength but he was as charismatic as a wooden log and paid the price for it in history's opinion of him.

Edited August 15, 2019 by MikeyD

[Sgt.Squarehead]

5 hours ago, Wicky said:

Mountbatten for the disasterous Dieppe Raid...

Not so sure about that:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dieppe_Raid#"Enigma_pinch"_theory

[Kevin2k]

14 minutes ago, MikeyD said:

Churchill's greatest utility during the war was that he was half American. He had an American mother who was admittedly a pretty poor excuse for a mother but at least she was better than little Winston's father who died raving from syphilis. He was also an accomplished journalist. Britain needed a charismatic propagandist with strong American ties in No.10 Downing St. more than they needed a tactical genius. Neville Chamberlain had made the correct move in avoiding direct confrontation with Germany before Britain had build up sufficient military strength but he was as charismatic as a wooden long and paid the price for it in history's opinion of him.

That is at least a level of background check. Small detail to add to that: "his family were among the highest levels of the British aristocracy,and thus he was born into the country's governing elite" (wikipedia).

Also the bold part begs a question; who decides what britain needed?

 

 

 

[A Canadian Cat]

34 minutes ago, Kevin2k said:

who decides what britain needed?

Well Britain is a democracy so the people do.

[sburke]

20 minutes ago, IanL said:

Well Britain is a democracy so the people do.

Now that is funny......

Edited August 15, 2019 by sburke

[Warts 'n' all]

1 hour ago, MikeyD said:

 Neville Chamberlain had made the correct move in avoiding direct confrontation with Germany before Britain had build up sufficient military strength.

He sold the only democracy in central Europe down the river. Allowed Mad Addy to walk in without having to fight through it's defences. And gave him all their tanks, which he then used to invade Poland, France et al. 

Edited August 15, 2019 by Warts 'n' all

[danfrodo]

I wonder what realistic choices Neville had (not being apologist for him). 

I am reading Michael Korda's Wings of Eagles about battle of britain.  SHows how, despite Neville's other failings, he did a good job of funding Dowding's air defense needs (fighters/pilots, radar, control organizations)

[Warts 'n' all]

6 minutes ago, danfrodo said:

I wonder what realistic choices Neville had

He, and his brother Austin had the same choice that their father's ex girlfriend Sylvia Pankhurst had.