Clearly we all want to hear about the current re-writing of history by certain ahistorical pundits who want to make Churchill a war monger and H!tler just a troubled guy.
I would like to know what he thinks are the ways we can protect ourselves and our societies from walking down the path of totalitarianism. Are there ways he approaches topics that helps him keep himself even-keeled?
What would've happened to the course of the war if the Japanese had not attacked Pearl Harbor, and Hitler didn't almost immediately declared war on the US, due to the Tripartite pact Germany had signed with Japan?
I would like to ask James on sources and directions whete the general public could get a more complete picture of what was going on during that "most popular last war" the West keeps fighting still...
I had the "fortune" to grow up in what is now Croatia, our and fellow western oriented Slavs education (post communism) was far more broad...
Hitler isn't the main villain, just one in a series.
A while back, I specifically asked AI for non-aligned geopolitical commentators. I became incredibly frustrated with polarised and propagandistic commentators who present a monopolar position. Kishore Mahbubani was the answer. He blames the West for both Ukraine and Gaza, whilst also acknowledging that the West clearly wasn't the only actor. On Ukraine, he blames the naivety of European politicians. Qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum. Geopolitics isn't a nice little club in which gentleman can work together to build a better world, but rather a brutal and nasty business in which both the weak and the ill-prepared get punished. On Gaza, he blames America. He believes that America had the power to impose a two-state solution on Israel decades ago. He's probably right, although it might have required America funding a Maginot Line for Israel.
I'm guessing the Iraq War had you shouting at the TV screen. The only thing worse than a strongman is the results of his removal.
The only way there is peace in Palestine is by precisely what Israel intends to do, complete domination, and for at least two generations so the islamist savagaes get bred out by people which haven't been indoctrinated like the muslims and druze in Israel itself
Sadam had to die, where they fucked up was not following up properly, like elsewhere
The rule based order of milktoast politicians is over, the only way we achieve sense and peace, is by strength, now
You’ve spent years delving into archives, interviewing veterans, and visiting battlefields. What’s the most surprising or unexpected discovery you’ve made in your research, and how did it shape your understanding of the war?
Are you familiar with the book "ordinary men" (about the final solution and the 101 police battalion) and the point it makes about how ordinary people can be put in situations where they would be willing to do otherwise horrific things? Do you worry about or see any modern parallels?
Given the relative strength of German vs RAF bombers, the hurried, yet incomplete, preparations of radar defence, and the Home Office estimates of up to 600,000 air raid casualties in the first few weeks of a war with Germany, is there a case that the Munich Agreement was a desperate, if cowardly, play for time- vital for Britain to develop both deterrence and defence in order to resist a determined air campaign by Goering's Luftwaffe?
Had Trenchard's view that 'the Bomber will always get through', Guernica, the overwrought imaginings of silver screenwriters, and the misguided sabotage of pacifists, created a reality which necessitated a temporary realpolitik compromise with Hitler, and which subsequent bellicose geopoliticians have ignorantly seized upon as idealistic naivety, and as an excuse to both provoke war and not seek off ramps during war when they become available?
In eleven months, bombers with the capacity to drop bombs on German cities had increased by 45%. Chain Home Low was barely completed within months of the Battle of Britain. 50 million gas masks had been distributed to civilians by the outbreak of war. In the minds of many, gas attacks on London were a very real possibility.
What is your favourite "what if?" moment from WWII that would have changed the war? Doesn't have to be the most important, could be an idiotic or drunken moment.
How important was the relationship between Churchill, Hitler and Stalin and their chiefs of staff? Is it a fair assessment to say that by democratically listening to his staff, Churchill had an advantage over Hitler and Stalin?
PS: This weekend, I travelled from Norway to St. Paul's Cathedral and saw the graves of the British war cabinet, which moved me profoundly. So, a shout out to the undervalued efforts made by brilliant men in the hour of need.
To the detractors of Churchill's legacy, how would you summarise his "theoretical absence" from the politics and history of WW11 and the implications for "peoples of colour" of whom the majority of anti Churchill rhetoric, along with the left emanates?
Clearly we all want to hear about the current re-writing of history by certain ahistorical pundits who want to make Churchill a war monger and H!tler just a troubled guy.
I'm torn on giving them any credence or air time or even the time of day.
Is there a specific website or book that addresses the primary arguments being made that "Churchill was the villain"? What is the book?
For example, HDOT.org addresses most of the common arguments on holocaust denial.
I would like to know what he thinks are the ways we can protect ourselves and our societies from walking down the path of totalitarianism. Are there ways he approaches topics that helps him keep himself even-keeled?
What would've happened to the course of the war if the Japanese had not attacked Pearl Harbor, and Hitler didn't almost immediately declared war on the US, due to the Tripartite pact Germany had signed with Japan?
I would like to ask James on sources and directions whete the general public could get a more complete picture of what was going on during that "most popular last war" the West keeps fighting still...
I had the "fortune" to grow up in what is now Croatia, our and fellow western oriented Slavs education (post communism) was far more broad...
Hitler isn't the main villain, just one in a series.
A while back, I specifically asked AI for non-aligned geopolitical commentators. I became incredibly frustrated with polarised and propagandistic commentators who present a monopolar position. Kishore Mahbubani was the answer. He blames the West for both Ukraine and Gaza, whilst also acknowledging that the West clearly wasn't the only actor. On Ukraine, he blames the naivety of European politicians. Qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum. Geopolitics isn't a nice little club in which gentleman can work together to build a better world, but rather a brutal and nasty business in which both the weak and the ill-prepared get punished. On Gaza, he blames America. He believes that America had the power to impose a two-state solution on Israel decades ago. He's probably right, although it might have required America funding a Maginot Line for Israel.
I'm guessing the Iraq War had you shouting at the TV screen. The only thing worse than a strongman is the results of his removal.
The weak west is the fault for Russian aggression
The only way there is peace in Palestine is by precisely what Israel intends to do, complete domination, and for at least two generations so the islamist savagaes get bred out by people which haven't been indoctrinated like the muslims and druze in Israel itself
Sadam had to die, where they fucked up was not following up properly, like elsewhere
The rule based order of milktoast politicians is over, the only way we achieve sense and peace, is by strength, now
Why to this day are so many people ignorant of the holodomor and the obvious lessons we can learn from this in the world we find ourselves?
You’ve spent years delving into archives, interviewing veterans, and visiting battlefields. What’s the most surprising or unexpected discovery you’ve made in your research, and how did it shape your understanding of the war?
Are you familiar with the book "ordinary men" (about the final solution and the 101 police battalion) and the point it makes about how ordinary people can be put in situations where they would be willing to do otherwise horrific things? Do you worry about or see any modern parallels?
Not a question, just to say great guest. I'm a big fan of James and lucky enough to know him a little bit. Really looking forward to this.
Brilliant historian. Have you ever tried to get Simon Sebag Montefiore? He would be a brilliant guest.
Was Dunkirk one our greatest feats of the war if not what do you think was our greatest war time moment ?
Given the relative strength of German vs RAF bombers, the hurried, yet incomplete, preparations of radar defence, and the Home Office estimates of up to 600,000 air raid casualties in the first few weeks of a war with Germany, is there a case that the Munich Agreement was a desperate, if cowardly, play for time- vital for Britain to develop both deterrence and defence in order to resist a determined air campaign by Goering's Luftwaffe?
Had Trenchard's view that 'the Bomber will always get through', Guernica, the overwrought imaginings of silver screenwriters, and the misguided sabotage of pacifists, created a reality which necessitated a temporary realpolitik compromise with Hitler, and which subsequent bellicose geopoliticians have ignorantly seized upon as idealistic naivety, and as an excuse to both provoke war and not seek off ramps during war when they become available?
In eleven months, bombers with the capacity to drop bombs on German cities had increased by 45%. Chain Home Low was barely completed within months of the Battle of Britain. 50 million gas masks had been distributed to civilians by the outbreak of war. In the minds of many, gas attacks on London were a very real possibility.
What is your favourite "what if?" moment from WWII that would have changed the war? Doesn't have to be the most important, could be an idiotic or drunken moment.
-Was Churchill the "villain"?
-Would the world be better off if the allies teamed up with Hitler to conquer the Soviet Union?
-Is there any value in listening to people who aren't historians talk about history?
Someone had to do it. You're welcome
How important was the relationship between Churchill, Hitler and Stalin and their chiefs of staff? Is it a fair assessment to say that by democratically listening to his staff, Churchill had an advantage over Hitler and Stalin?
PS: This weekend, I travelled from Norway to St. Paul's Cathedral and saw the graves of the British war cabinet, which moved me profoundly. So, a shout out to the undervalued efforts made by brilliant men in the hour of need.
To the detractors of Churchill's legacy, how would you summarise his "theoretical absence" from the politics and history of WW11 and the implications for "peoples of colour" of whom the majority of anti Churchill rhetoric, along with the left emanates?