| Churchill... 08:41 - Feb 14 with 9470 views | waynekerr55 |
John McDonnell hey! |  |
| |  |
| Churchill... on 09:47 - Feb 14 with 2443 views | Professor |
Many in Rhondda agree with him |  | | |
| Churchill... on 09:56 - Feb 14 with 2429 views | dickythorpe |
| Churchill... on 09:47 - Feb 14 by Professor |
Many in Rhondda agree with him |
There's people in Tredegar who bad mouth Aneurin Bevan!!! "Lazy" I've heard being said of him. |  | | |
| Churchill... on 10:08 - Feb 14 with 2416 views | Pegojack |
Everything as to be seen in the context of its time, but it is a matter of historical fact that Churchill as Home Secretary sent in outside police and troops to quell the miners' strike in Tonypandy in 1910.
Talking of seeing things in the context of its time, maybe the result of the post war general election is a reflection of what the people thought of the great war hero, the Tory party and the upper classes in general? [Post edited 14 Feb 2019 10:08]
|  | | |
| Churchill... on 11:10 - Feb 14 with 2370 views | sherpajacob |
Yes he was a, flawed individual. He was a, racist imperialist who was directly or indirectly responsible for the death of millions.
But ultimately when called upon, he stood up to the fascists and defeated Hitler and won the war.
So I say,,on balance;
All hail comrade Stalin! |  |
| |
| Churchill... on 11:13 - Feb 14 with 2367 views | Professor |
| Churchill... on 10:08 - Feb 14 by Pegojack |
Everything as to be seen in the context of its time, but it is a matter of historical fact that Churchill as Home Secretary sent in outside police and troops to quell the miners' strike in Tonypandy in 1910.
Talking of seeing things in the context of its time, maybe the result of the post war general election is a reflection of what the people thought of the great war hero, the Tory party and the upper classes in general? [Post edited 14 Feb 2019 10:08]
|
I suspect less to do with Churchill and more wanting change. The Attlee Government, along with Thatcher, was one that brought fundamental change to the UK. In the case of the 1945 Labour government in terms of the NHS, welfare and social care. The 1979 Tory government in changing us to a financial-sector based economy and a move away from public ownership and social society to one more based on the individual. I fear we are heading to the conclusion of this with a US style economy as we turn our back on the more inclusive Northern European approach. I would rather we went the way of Netherlands or Germany with a narrowing of the financial gap between rich and poor. Not going to happen though. | | | |
| Churchill... on 11:55 - Feb 14 with 2338 views | johnlangy |
| Churchill... on 11:13 - Feb 14 by Professor |
I suspect less to do with Churchill and more wanting change. The Attlee Government, along with Thatcher, was one that brought fundamental change to the UK. In the case of the 1945 Labour government in terms of the NHS, welfare and social care. The 1979 Tory government in changing us to a financial-sector based economy and a move away from public ownership and social society to one more based on the individual. I fear we are heading to the conclusion of this with a US style economy as we turn our back on the more inclusive Northern European approach. I would rather we went the way of Netherlands or Germany with a narrowing of the financial gap between rich and poor. Not going to happen though. |
This country (UK) has become a dreadfully unequal society.
I said well before the referendum that there'd a be a revolution in this country (without the bullets and barricades). Millions of the people who voted leave in the ref did so because they've been left behind financially, just ignored and that vote was just the start.
When we leave and they're still ignored, because they will be, things will get much worse. | | | |
| Churchill... on 12:03 - Feb 14 with 2319 views | Joe_bradshaw |
| Churchill... on 11:55 - Feb 14 by johnlangy |
This country (UK) has become a dreadfully unequal society.
I said well before the referendum that there'd a be a revolution in this country (without the bullets and barricades). Millions of the people who voted leave in the ref did so because they've been left behind financially, just ignored and that vote was just the start.
When we leave and they're still ignored, because they will be, things will get much worse. |
I think you’re right, they voted for change, any change at all.
The irony is that they were supporting the Tory posh boys who were at the forefront of the leave campaign and they were voting to make themselves even poorer when those people have their hands on the levers of power. |  |
| |
| Churchill... on 12:11 - Feb 14 with 2308 views | controversial_jack |
| Churchill... on 11:13 - Feb 14 by Professor |
I suspect less to do with Churchill and more wanting change. The Attlee Government, along with Thatcher, was one that brought fundamental change to the UK. In the case of the 1945 Labour government in terms of the NHS, welfare and social care. The 1979 Tory government in changing us to a financial-sector based economy and a move away from public ownership and social society to one more based on the individual. I fear we are heading to the conclusion of this with a US style economy as we turn our back on the more inclusive Northern European approach. I would rather we went the way of Netherlands or Germany with a narrowing of the financial gap between rich and poor. Not going to happen though. |
This country is still following a neo liberal agenda which has accentuated the economic inequalities we see today. The gap between rich and poor is at it's greatest ever - 1978 was the narrowest, this suggests to me trickle up and not trickle down.
It really started in the mid 70s, with Opec putting up the oil prices to punish the west for supporting Israel during the war with Israel.Higher costs to buy the oil meant inflation , which Thatcher when she later came to power blamed on the high welfare state spending. When the Americans convinced the Saudis to increase oil production, prices came down and so did inflation. Thatcher, naturally claimed the credit for doing so. This gave her the excuse to push through her disastrous neo liberal agenda, something we are still suffering from today. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Churchill... on 13:14 - Feb 14 with 2253 views | swanforthemoney |
I was not previously aware what Churchill did to send in Met police mounted unit and troops to Tonypandy in 1910 to combat miners who who were Striking against low wages being fixed by a cartel of owners. He was a member of the “liberal” party at the time !
Thanks John MacDonnell.
Open question whether Russia and allies could have won the Second war in Europe without our help under the flawed but magnificent motivational presence of Churchill. |  |
| I stand in the North Stand
|
| |
| Churchill... on 13:24 - Feb 14 with 2238 views | controversial_jack |
| Churchill... on 13:14 - Feb 14 by swanforthemoney |
I was not previously aware what Churchill did to send in Met police mounted unit and troops to Tonypandy in 1910 to combat miners who who were Striking against low wages being fixed by a cartel of owners. He was a member of the “liberal” party at the time !
Thanks John MacDonnell.
Open question whether Russia and allies could have won the Second war in Europe without our help under the flawed but magnificent motivational presence of Churchill. |
WW2 was more than just Europe.The Royal Navy and Canadian Navy kept the Atlantic ocean open, to troops and supplies, from the US, and Britain supplied Russia before the American lend lease was introduced. N Africa, the middle east, the Balkans. The greatest defeat the Japs suffered was in Burma at the hands of British and Indian troops. Britain kept the med and suez canal open. Operation overlord which was Montgomery's plan and not Eisenhower's. We bombed the crap out of German cities - which was supposed to break the Germans morale and stop their industry - which it didn't. This country probably contributed more to ww2 than any other country except Russia. | | | |
| Churchill... on 13:33 - Feb 14 with 2224 views | sherpajacob |
| Churchill... on 13:14 - Feb 14 by swanforthemoney |
I was not previously aware what Churchill did to send in Met police mounted unit and troops to Tonypandy in 1910 to combat miners who who were Striking against low wages being fixed by a cartel of owners. He was a member of the “liberal” party at the time !
Thanks John MacDonnell.
Open question whether Russia and allies could have won the Second war in Europe without our help under the flawed but magnificent motivational presence of Churchill. |
The Soviet union was already winning the war against Germany in 1944. Admittedly with material help from the USA, including lots of trucks. The siege of Leningrad was lifted in Jan 44 and Stalingrad was won in Jan 43.
80% of German casualties in ww2 were inflicted by the soviets.
It can reasonably be argued that the success of D Day ensured western Europe didn't fall under Soviet control as much as liberating it from fascism. This is one reason the USA prioritized Europe over their more natural theatre of war, the Pacific. [Post edited 14 Feb 2019 13:37]
| |
| |
| Churchill... on 13:51 - Feb 14 with 2187 views | Groo |
I agree with the comment about his actions were to do with his time.
Was he racist, yes he was as was, many were in that day and age, very much driven by his class.
The World was full of friction too, anarchy and revolution was a very real threat, communism on the rise.
Was he a nice man, nope, was he needed at the time, probably yes. |  |
| Groo does what Groo does best |
| |
| Churchill... on 14:04 - Feb 14 with 2171 views | controversial_jack |
| Churchill... on 13:33 - Feb 14 by sherpajacob |
The Soviet union was already winning the war against Germany in 1944. Admittedly with material help from the USA, including lots of trucks. The siege of Leningrad was lifted in Jan 44 and Stalingrad was won in Jan 43.
80% of German casualties in ww2 were inflicted by the soviets.
It can reasonably be argued that the success of D Day ensured western Europe didn't fall under Soviet control as much as liberating it from fascism. This is one reason the USA prioritized Europe over their more natural theatre of war, the Pacific. [Post edited 14 Feb 2019 13:37]
|
Russia didn't get any lend lease until after the battle of Stalingrad, until then it was getting supplies from the UK. Russia managed to produce vast amounts of it's own materials. US equipment certainly helped after this, but it wasn't game changing at all.
The US initially wanted to prioritize the Japs before the Germans, but apparently Churchill persuaded Roosevelt to prioritize Europe.
The Russians sacrificed a lot, for every allied casualty the Russians suffered 87, so they probably believed they had a right to some kind of control over the countries they liberated. | | | |
| Churchill... on 14:27 - Feb 14 with 2140 views | Professor |
| Churchill... on 13:14 - Feb 14 by swanforthemoney |
I was not previously aware what Churchill did to send in Met police mounted unit and troops to Tonypandy in 1910 to combat miners who who were Striking against low wages being fixed by a cartel of owners. He was a member of the “liberal” party at the time !
Thanks John MacDonnell.
Open question whether Russia and allies could have won the Second war in Europe without our help under the flawed but magnificent motivational presence of Churchill. |
Army as well as the Met and Bristol police. | | | |
| Churchill... on 14:59 - Feb 14 with 2110 views | WarwickHunt |
One thing we can all agree on - it's not exactly a vote-winner outside Rhondda and possibly areas of Islington.
Fûcking idiot. |  | | |
| Churchill... on 16:55 - Feb 14 with 2034 views | felixstowe_jack |
| Churchill... on 10:08 - Feb 14 by Pegojack |
Everything as to be seen in the context of its time, but it is a matter of historical fact that Churchill as Home Secretary sent in outside police and troops to quell the miners' strike in Tonypandy in 1910.
Talking of seeing things in the context of its time, maybe the result of the post war general election is a reflection of what the people thought of the great war hero, the Tory party and the upper classes in general? [Post edited 14 Feb 2019 10:08]
|
Yes and they elected him in 1950 after seeing how bad labour were when the ran the country. | |
| |
| Churchill... on 18:52 - Feb 14 with 1953 views | Pacemaker |
| Churchill... on 14:27 - Feb 14 by Professor |
Army as well as the Met and Bristol police. |
I am originally from the Rhondda and grew up with a view of Churchill and the Pandy riots, however the true events as described by historians and by reading details of the time are slightly different. The army and the actions of the army were of far less violent nature than that of both the striking miners and the police.
The reality is that as a result of the army restoring order the strike failed and as a result the owners were able to punish the strikers harshly. Those miners who were reemployed were forced to accept worse pay and conditions than those they had before the strikes.
Churchill was responsible for far more serious matters during the Boer war than he was in the Rhondda.
Whatever bad things he did at some stages of his life and career there is no doubt that his leadership during WW2 was that of a hero and the many hard decisions he made then have not been criticised in the same way, although I doubt the French were pleased when he ordered their Navy to be attacked and sunk after the fall of France. |  |
| Life is an adventure or nothing at all. |
| |
| Churchill... on 19:11 - Feb 14 with 1936 views | pikeypaul |
| Churchill... on 18:52 - Feb 14 by Pacemaker |
I am originally from the Rhondda and grew up with a view of Churchill and the Pandy riots, however the true events as described by historians and by reading details of the time are slightly different. The army and the actions of the army were of far less violent nature than that of both the striking miners and the police.
The reality is that as a result of the army restoring order the strike failed and as a result the owners were able to punish the strikers harshly. Those miners who were reemployed were forced to accept worse pay and conditions than those they had before the strikes.
Churchill was responsible for far more serious matters during the Boer war than he was in the Rhondda.
Whatever bad things he did at some stages of his life and career there is no doubt that his leadership during WW2 was that of a hero and the many hard decisions he made then have not been criticised in the same way, although I doubt the French were pleased when he ordered their Navy to be attacked and sunk after the fall of France. |
Great description of Mcdonnell by Sir Nicholas Soames,Churchills grandson.
" third-rate poundland Lenin" very funny and so true.
Let's be honest if the terrorist loving McDonnell and Corbyn were about in the post war days they would be the first to lay wreaths on the Nazi graves.
We have witnessed their support for the IRA and Hamas filth,so nothing should surprise us . |  |
| |
| Churchill... on 19:14 - Feb 14 with 1935 views | exiledclaseboy |
| Churchill... on 16:55 - Feb 14 by felixstowe_jack |
Yes and they elected him in 1950 after seeing how bad labour were when the ran the country. |
Labour won the 1950 election. Try again. |  |
| |
| Churchill... on 19:38 - Feb 14 with 1896 views | Lohengrin |
| Churchill... on 18:52 - Feb 14 by Pacemaker |
I am originally from the Rhondda and grew up with a view of Churchill and the Pandy riots, however the true events as described by historians and by reading details of the time are slightly different. The army and the actions of the army were of far less violent nature than that of both the striking miners and the police.
The reality is that as a result of the army restoring order the strike failed and as a result the owners were able to punish the strikers harshly. Those miners who were reemployed were forced to accept worse pay and conditions than those they had before the strikes.
Churchill was responsible for far more serious matters during the Boer war than he was in the Rhondda.
Whatever bad things he did at some stages of his life and career there is no doubt that his leadership during WW2 was that of a hero and the many hard decisions he made then have not been criticised in the same way, although I doubt the French were pleased when he ordered their Navy to be attacked and sunk after the fall of France. |
”Churchill was responsible for far more serious matters during the Boer war than he was in the Rhondda.”
Churchill’s escapades in the Boer War leap straight from the pages of a Boys’ Own adventure. What is it you find reproachable, Pace? |  |
| An idea isn't responsible for those who believe in it. |
| |
| Churchill... on 19:47 - Feb 14 with 1884 views | waynekerr55 |
| Churchill... on 14:59 - Feb 14 by WarwickHunt |
One thing we can all agree on - it's not exactly a vote-winner outside Rhondda and possibly areas of Islington.
Fûcking idiot. |
"Third rate, Poundland Lenin"
 | |
| |
| Churchill... on 19:50 - Feb 14 with 1876 views | Pacemaker |
| Churchill... on 19:38 - Feb 14 by Lohengrin |
”Churchill was responsible for far more serious matters during the Boer war than he was in the Rhondda.”
Churchill’s escapades in the Boer War leap straight from the pages of a Boys’ Own adventure. What is it you find reproachable, Pace? |
Writing for the Daily Mail!! | |
| Life is an adventure or nothing at all. |
| |
| Churchill... on 19:51 - Feb 14 with 1871 views | Lohengrin |
| Churchill... on 14:04 - Feb 14 by controversial_jack |
Russia didn't get any lend lease until after the battle of Stalingrad, until then it was getting supplies from the UK. Russia managed to produce vast amounts of it's own materials. US equipment certainly helped after this, but it wasn't game changing at all.
The US initially wanted to prioritize the Japs before the Germans, but apparently Churchill persuaded Roosevelt to prioritize Europe.
The Russians sacrificed a lot, for every allied casualty the Russians suffered 87, so they probably believed they had a right to some kind of control over the countries they liberated. |
”....they probably believed they had a right to some kind of control over the countries they liberated.”
Liberated!!!
If I were struck blind in the next five minutes I don’t think it would matter as I can safely say I’ve seen it feckin’ all now!! | |
| An idea isn't responsible for those who believe in it. |
| |
| Churchill... on 19:53 - Feb 14 with 1860 views | Lohengrin |
| Churchill... on 19:50 - Feb 14 by Pacemaker |
Writing for the Daily Mail!! |
 | |
| An idea isn't responsible for those who believe in it. |
| |
| Churchill... on 20:07 - Feb 14 with 1836 views | Pacemaker |
| Churchill... on 19:51 - Feb 14 by Lohengrin |
”....they probably believed they had a right to some kind of control over the countries they liberated.”
Liberated!!!
If I were struck blind in the next five minutes I don’t think it would matter as I can safely say I’ve seen it feckin’ all now!! |
Just read a book about the East German cyclist Dieter Wiedemann and his battle against the Stasi.
Don’t think he felt liberated.
Herbie Sykes writes about Dieter going back through the Stasi records generated from informants that he thought were his friends and neighbours, whilst at the same time taking on the state representative side filled with drugs. | |
| Life is an adventure or nothing at all. |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
