- Joined
- 27 September 2006
- Messages
- 6,052
- Reaction score
- 6,153
Brits are accustomed to thinking of Neville Chamberlain as a silly old buffer waving a piece of paper But he was for much of his career an ambitious and rather arrogant Tory politician. He died at 71 in 1940 after being ill for some time.
Had Chamberlain been ten years younger and in better health he rather than Winston Churchill might still have been Prime Minister in 1940. It is often forgotten that Churchill inspired strong emotions as Johnson does today though for different reasons.
Chamberlain was no pacifist but he believed war could only be won by sound money and careful husbanding of resources. Like.many Englishmen of his generation he saw land warfare on the Continent as a hideous waste and believed a combination of blockade by the Royal Navy and defence of Britain by airpower would enable her to prevail against Germany.and Italy. Though he had little time for Roosevelt he knew that as in World War 1 the USA would have to be brought into the war.
I suspect that after the Fall of France in 1940 he and his Foreign Secretary, Lord Halifax, would have sought a temporary peace agreement with Hitler much as Britain had done with Napoleon and Louis XIV.
Chamberlain loathed and distrusted Stalin so Britain would not have assisted either Russia or Germany in their inevitable clash.
The RAF would have been built up as in our timeline. Chamberlain recognised its importance. The Royal Navy similarly.
The British Expeditionary Force in 1939 would have been smaller and less well equipped. Shockingly to our eyes instead of Dunkirk there would have been a truce and orderly withdrawal. Chamberlain and King George did not share Churchill's enthusiasm for France.
Chamberlain admired Mussolini even as he despised Hitler. Some accommodation with Italy might even have been possible to avoid war.
That of course leaves Japan. No amount of British naval power could have resisted the Japanese advance. But without war in Europe and North Africa the RAF would have been better placed to defend Singapore.
By 1941 Britain would have been fighting desperately to protect its Empire in Asia and the Pacific. But it would have been doing so alongside the USA.
It seems likely that Germany would not have been able to defeat Stalin's Soviet Union even without Western aid to Russia. Hitler did not understand economics or logistics and would still have meddled with his Commanders. But without a US and British invasion of Europe the war might have gone on for much longer.
Chamberlain would have had to retire in rhe late 40s and hand over to a successor. Although he might have kept Britain out of a Continental War the clash between Russia and Germany and the United States against Japan would still have seen the USA emerge as the leading world power in 1945.
By 1950 Britain would have had to accept second place behind the USA. Unlike Churchill Chamberlain and Halifax knew India would have to be given Dominion status. Being realists they would have still sent Earl.Mountbatten to Delhi.
Europe would have been a sorry place, ruled by two barbarous and futile regimes. Winston Churchill in his speech at Fulton in 1945 would denounce Chamberlain for letting the Dark Ages return to Europe.
But Britain's cities would have been spared the horrors of the Blitz and her soldiers in Asia the horrors of Japanese camps.
Had Chamberlain been ten years younger and in better health he rather than Winston Churchill might still have been Prime Minister in 1940. It is often forgotten that Churchill inspired strong emotions as Johnson does today though for different reasons.
Chamberlain was no pacifist but he believed war could only be won by sound money and careful husbanding of resources. Like.many Englishmen of his generation he saw land warfare on the Continent as a hideous waste and believed a combination of blockade by the Royal Navy and defence of Britain by airpower would enable her to prevail against Germany.and Italy. Though he had little time for Roosevelt he knew that as in World War 1 the USA would have to be brought into the war.
I suspect that after the Fall of France in 1940 he and his Foreign Secretary, Lord Halifax, would have sought a temporary peace agreement with Hitler much as Britain had done with Napoleon and Louis XIV.
Chamberlain loathed and distrusted Stalin so Britain would not have assisted either Russia or Germany in their inevitable clash.
The RAF would have been built up as in our timeline. Chamberlain recognised its importance. The Royal Navy similarly.
The British Expeditionary Force in 1939 would have been smaller and less well equipped. Shockingly to our eyes instead of Dunkirk there would have been a truce and orderly withdrawal. Chamberlain and King George did not share Churchill's enthusiasm for France.
Chamberlain admired Mussolini even as he despised Hitler. Some accommodation with Italy might even have been possible to avoid war.
That of course leaves Japan. No amount of British naval power could have resisted the Japanese advance. But without war in Europe and North Africa the RAF would have been better placed to defend Singapore.
By 1941 Britain would have been fighting desperately to protect its Empire in Asia and the Pacific. But it would have been doing so alongside the USA.
It seems likely that Germany would not have been able to defeat Stalin's Soviet Union even without Western aid to Russia. Hitler did not understand economics or logistics and would still have meddled with his Commanders. But without a US and British invasion of Europe the war might have gone on for much longer.
Chamberlain would have had to retire in rhe late 40s and hand over to a successor. Although he might have kept Britain out of a Continental War the clash between Russia and Germany and the United States against Japan would still have seen the USA emerge as the leading world power in 1945.
By 1950 Britain would have had to accept second place behind the USA. Unlike Churchill Chamberlain and Halifax knew India would have to be given Dominion status. Being realists they would have still sent Earl.Mountbatten to Delhi.
Europe would have been a sorry place, ruled by two barbarous and futile regimes. Winston Churchill in his speech at Fulton in 1945 would denounce Chamberlain for letting the Dark Ages return to Europe.
But Britain's cities would have been spared the horrors of the Blitz and her soldiers in Asia the horrors of Japanese camps.
