Great Stories from the Past
Great Stories from the Past
  • 22
  • 1 185 995
72 Hours: Churchills Cabinet Crisis (Part Two)
The second part of the inside story of the actual political and military events during the three critical days - 26th, 27th and 28th May 1940 - that would change the course of the Second World War and world history.
in Part One, the British army had been forced back to the sea and the French and Belgium armies were collapsing. Meanwhile, Germany’s Panzers had halted giving rise to suggestions that Hitler wished the British to escape.
This video continues the story and looks at the chronological look events and the fierce debate that was to come within the British War Cabinet which threatened to bring down Churchill’s fledgling coalition government. It shows a much more intricate story that the one usually told complicated by British manoeuvrings, French duplicity and Italian machinations.
Did Hitler purposely halt his tanks to let the British get away, and did the British come close to seeking peace terms with Hitler? In this, the second of two videos, we provide the insight that answers both these questions.
Переглядів: 6 271

Відео

72 Hours: Churchills Cabinet Crisis (Part One)
Переглядів 11 тис.Місяць тому
The first part of the inside story of the actual political and military events during the three critical days - 26th, 27th and 28th May 1940 - that would change the course of the Second World War and world history. The British army had been forced back to the sea and the French and Belgium armies were collapsing. Meanwhile, Germany’s Panzers had halted giving rise to suggestions that Hitler wis...
Britain's Greatest Battles of World War Two: Part 2, The Battle of France
Переглядів 1,7 тис.8 місяців тому
This video, which is about the Battle of France, is taken from a series being created by Great Stories from the Past about the major battles and campaigns that were fought by the British during the Second World War. This video tells the story of one of the classic "Blitzkrieg" battles of the War; how and why it occurred and, importantly, how the successful strategies and tactics used by the Ger...
Surrendering Singapore: A British Inspired Disaster?
Переглядів 7298 місяців тому
The British loss of Singapore in February 1942 was arguably the low point of the Second World War for a country that had been, by that stage, battling away for two-and-a-half years. The reality as that Britain was having to fight for its survival at home and was also increasingly having to find resources to combat Rommel in the Desert. So Japan’s attack on Malaya and Singapore (and Hong Kong an...
History Briefs: Field Marshal Bill Slim
Переглядів 106 тис.10 місяців тому
British Field Marshal Bill Slim was an outstanding General and, arguably, Britain’s finest army commander of the Second World War. Today he is often compared to the American General, George Patton. He is best remembered as the commander of the British 14th Army, the so-called Forgotten Army. In similar manner Bill Slim was also a, somewhat, forgotten General during the Second World War and, as ...
Great Stories from the Past
Переглядів 959Рік тому
There are no greater stories than those that come from the past. We wish to provide an ever greater variety of great stories in three different themes. The story of individual people are told under the section entitled, “History Briefs” giving a quick yet reasonably detailed overview of that person and the events in which they were involved. Stories about battles, campaigns, wars and strategies...
Battle of Belleau Wood - Where the US Marine Corps came of age and gained their fearsome reputation.
Переглядів 345 тис.Рік тому
The German Spring Offensive of 1918 had pushed the French 6th Army back to just thirty miles from the outskirts of Paris. There were concerns amongst the allies as to whether the French would be able to hold out against a further advance by the Germans. A Brigade from the US Marine Corps (as part of the US 2nd Division) joined the French frontline in an attempt to stop the onslaught. This is th...
Wonderful Radio London
Переглядів 19 тис.Рік тому
During the heyday of Pirate Radio, one radio station stood out. It was called Radio London, and it was the most professional, the most innovative and the most popular. It also became the blueprint, not only for BBC Radio One, but for most commercial radio stations in the UK. However, behind the scenes, this station, which was British run, was owned by American businessmen amongst who were some ...
History Briefs: Catherine of Braganza and the salacious Court of Charles II
Переглядів 2,5 тис.Рік тому
Catherine of Braganza was a Portuguese Princess and Queen Consort of England, Scotland and Ireland. In 1662, this loyal and pious young Princess arrived at the salacious Court of King Charles II as his bride. Her marriage to the King was part of a military alliance between Portugal and England. But she was quite unprepared for the debauchery and immoral behaviour of the King and many of his cou...
Military Stories: Battle of Monte Camino
Переглядів 1,9 тис.Рік тому
Some of the most ferocious fighting of the Second World War took place in the mountains of Southern Italy. Far from the eyes of the western press and overshadowed by the prospect of the Normandy landings, most elements of Allies' campaign in Italy remains little known. This is demonstrated in the famous TV series, The World at War. Of the twenty-six hours broadcast in that series, less than hal...
History Briefs: Captain John Walker RN - Britain's Greatest Fighting Naval Commander since Nelson
Переглядів 306 тис.Рік тому
The Royal Navy's Captain John Walker was the most successful anti-submarine commander of the Second World War. By 1939 he had repeatedly been passed over for promotion having specialised in the unfashionable art of submarine hunting. However with the U-boat peril in the Atlantic Ocean, his skills came to the fore. He provided much of the template for anti-submarine warfare during the war which ...
History Briefs: Britain's Home Front in the Second World War
Переглядів 33 тис.Рік тому
Experience the sights and sounds of Britain in the Second World War which was, arguably, the first time in history that whole countries went to war rather than just their armed forces. For Britain, with its proximity to Nazi Germany, this meant that the entire nation was, effectively, on the front line for nearly six years. This video tells the story of the life on the home front including many...
History Briefs: Keith Park - The Man who won the Battle of Britain
Переглядів 151 тис.Рік тому
Air Chief Marshall Sir Keith Park is a, somewhat, forgotten hero of the Second World War. He was the RAF's operational commander in the Battle of Britain; he defeated the Luftwaffe again in the Battle of Malta thus relieving the siege of that island; and he was the man behind the air-drop of supplies to the British 14th Army in their recapture of Burma from the Japanese. But before all that, he...
History Briefs: Alan Brooke and the Brittany Redoubt
Переглядів 36 тис.Рік тому
A little-known story about a scheme of Prime Minister Winston Churchill who wanted to keep the French in the war against Germany. While British troops were still being evacuated from Dunkirk, General Alan Brooke, who had saved the British Expeditionary Force from being cut off from the sea, was recalled and sent back to Brittany where he was to command four divisions in assisting the French arm...
Great Stories from the Past
Переглядів 1,2 тис.Рік тому
Great Stories from the Past does exactly that! It re-tells and brings back to life great stories about famous people, important events and notorious incidents from the past. We believe the best way to appreciate history is through the telling of such stories. We aim to deliver stories that are obscure, revealing as well as well-known. Some stories in history have become obscured by myth; here w...
History Briefs: The Zimmermann Telegram: Why America entered the First World War
Переглядів 4,7 тис.Рік тому
History Briefs: The Zimmermann Telegram: Why America entered the First World War
History Briefs: Alvar Lidell. The voice of the BBC during the Second World War.
Переглядів 14 тис.Рік тому
History Briefs: Alvar Lidell. The voice of the BBC during the Second World War.
History Briefs: The Duke of Marlborough, England's Greatest General
Переглядів 17 тис.Рік тому
History Briefs: The Duke of Marlborough, England's Greatest General
History Briefs: The Great Siege of Gibraltar
Переглядів 103 тис.Рік тому
History Briefs: The Great Siege of Gibraltar
European conflicts in Belgium
Переглядів 242Рік тому
European conflicts in Belgium
History Briefs: Clive of India
Переглядів 5 тис.Рік тому
History Briefs: Clive of India
Military Stories: The Battles at El Alamein
Переглядів 20 тис.4 роки тому
Military Stories: The Battles at El Alamein

КОМЕНТАРІ

  • @nigelhamilton815
    @nigelhamilton815 13 годин тому

    Uncle Bill, a good man.

  • @williamwilson2270
    @williamwilson2270 День тому

    It was always the Welsh, Scots, Irish and Northern English that did all the fighting and dying, while the upper classes hid at home f8nally taking the jobs that the poor did at home to ensure their safety. Oh there were a few brave souls who fought but too many worked in safer jobs. God helped those who helped themselves, but too many hid under their working class disguise. My Grandfather and father in law fought In the first War, the Indian war needlessly. twenty men of higher class came to the mines of Scotland. My Grandfather listed their names and one roared :":my name is Todd, T.O. D.D. two D's, He replied to him "One :":D:": is good enough for God. swine tried to have him fired even though he fought with gallantry 8n the First war, upper class git'

  • @DouglasBrightman-yb8ry
    @DouglasBrightman-yb8ry 2 дні тому

    A truly great man He saved Britain and Malta The greatest British commander this country had in WW2

  • @chrisaris8756
    @chrisaris8756 8 днів тому

    Very interesting I’m sure. But what had it got to do with Radio London? Being an avid listener for its life, I can assure you that no one listened to the religious programme at 7pm. To be honest I only vaguely remember it. You need to rd name this video it’s precious little to do with Radio London.

  • @tedthesailor172
    @tedthesailor172 11 днів тому

    So, our beloved pirate radios were sacrificed to the Common Market? That wouldn't surprise me. I well remember that duplicitous creep Anthony Wedgewood Benn, spouting all that eyewash in order to ban them. Later, in a different cabinet position, he created the UKAEAC or the "Nuclear Police", a special constabulary that was so secret it couldn't even be scrutinised by Parliament. Later still he tried to reinvent himself as a paragon of civil liberties. Socialists - never to be trusted...

  • @AlanSaltman-y7g
    @AlanSaltman-y7g 13 днів тому

    As the author of two books which in large part focus on the British War Cabinet debates from March 26-March 28,1940, (NO PEACE WITH HITLER and THE ANTAGONISTS WHO SAVED DEMOCRACY which will be published on March 31,2025) I was extremely pleased when I came across 72 Hours: Churchill’s Cabinet Crisis (Part Two) However, my excitement soon changed to disappointment because the ambitious 25 minute presentation painted with too broad a brush, ignored some important points, spent too much time on others (e.g. Italy’s posture on European equilibrium) and was just wrong about several things. The latter includes the following assertions: 1. During the debate Chamberlain said an outright refusal “to Italy” might be unfavorable to British efforts to keep France fighting. a. Chamberlain made the statement at the War Cabinet meeting on May 27th at 4:30 that Britian’s response to France’s request that it and Britian jointly ask “Mussolini to mediated the dispute [with Germany] should not be a complete refusal.” 2. Halifax and Chamberlain controlled the majority support among Conservative MPs. a. That power was Chamberlain’s and Chamberlain’s alone. 3. It was not until the War Cabinet meeting at 2 PM on May 28 that Chamberlain indicated he supported Churchill’s no-peace-talks position. a. Chamberlain unequivocally indicated that he supported Churchill’s position on the 26th, reiterated it on the 27th and in fact had agreed with Churchill ever since the Germans invaded Poland that Britain must fight to the finish For more interesting reading about what took place during these very important War Cabinet debates, I suggest that you read John Lukac’s FIVE DAYS IN LONDON, MAY 1940 and Anthony McCarten’s DARKEST HOUR and watch the extremely entertaining movie made from that book. For both an interesting and more historically accurate reading on the subject I would immodestly commend NO PEACE WITH HITLER to you. An even more exacting examination of the War Cabinet debate will be found in THE ANTAGONISTS WHO SAVED DEMOCRACY which will be available in early spring. Alan Saltman

  • @AlanSaltman-y7g
    @AlanSaltman-y7g 13 днів тому

    As the author of two books which in large part focus on the British War Cabinet debates from March 26-March 28,1940, (NO PEACE WITH HITLER and THE ANTAGONISTS WHO SAVED DEMOCRACY which will be published on March 31,2025) I was extremely pleased when I came across 72 Hours: Churchill’s Cabinet Crisis (Part Two) However, my excitement soon changed to disappointment because the ambitious 25 minute presentation painted with too broad a brush, ignored some important points, spent too much time on others (e.g. Italy’s posture on European equilibrium) and was just wrong about several things. The latter includes the following assertions: 1. During the debate Chamberlain said an outright refusal “to Italy” might be unfavorable to British efforts to keep France fighting. a. Chamberlain made the statement at the War Cabinet meeting on May 27th at 4:30 that Britian’s response to France’s request that it and Britian jointly ask “Mussolini to mediated the dispute [with Germany] should not be a complete refusal.” 2. Halifax and Chamberlain controlled the majority support among Conservative MPs. a. That power was Chamberlain’s and Chamberlain’s alone. 3. It was not until the War Cabinet meeting at 2 PM on May 28 that Chamberlain indicated he supported Churchill’s no-peace-talks position. a. Chamberlain unequivocally indicated that he supported Churchill’s position on the 26th, reiterated it on the 27th and in fact had agreed with Churchill ever since the Germans invaded Poland that Britain must fight to the finish For more interesting reading about what took place during these very important War Cabinet debates, I suggest that you read John Lukac’s FIVE DAYS IN LONDON, MAY 1940 and Anthony McCarten’s DARKEST HOUR and watch the extremely entertaining movie made from that book. For both an interesting and more historically accurate reading on the subject I would immodestly commend NO PEACE WITH HITLER to you. An even more exacting examination of the War Cabinet debate will be found in THE ANTAGONISTS WHO SAVED DEMOCRACY which will be available in early spring. Alan Saltman

  • @BenAndJeffsAudiobooks
    @BenAndJeffsAudiobooks 14 днів тому

    Briton today is led by people who hate Jews and British culture. We are so unworthy of past generations...

  • @Sheffield_Steve
    @Sheffield_Steve 16 днів тому

    Radio Luxembourg were inadvertently gifted some of the best studio equipment when the Nazis left at the end of the war. It was a shame that the International Broadcasting Company's offices were lost to bombing during the blitz, as they might've been able to have kept making dents in the BBC's audience as they did along with Radio Luxembourg before the war, when the Beeb was seen as dull & stuffy. You should hear the way a continuity announcer might introduce an entertainment programme, very snappy and sound offended they were broadcasting a dreadful popular music programme.

  • @Sheffield_Steve
    @Sheffield_Steve 16 днів тому

    The BBC had decided to have the newsreaders give their names, so making it a little more difficult for the Nazis to imitate.

  • @thewatcher5271
    @thewatcher5271 18 днів тому

    Great Video! My Dad Was There & I Have Much Admiration For Wartime England. Thank You. (Like #519)

  • @AnthonyGarlic-tr9br
    @AnthonyGarlic-tr9br 21 день тому

    Thatcher is a bull 🐂♉ dog 🐶🐕.

  • @Historian-wv4wn
    @Historian-wv4wn 24 дні тому

    Thank you for an enlightening perspective, especially British data security failures that gave Imperial Japan more accurate intelligence and confidence to invade Malaya. Admittedly, the surrender of Singapore was a British inspired disaster in more ways than covered by this video contents. They date back to the waning of Pax Britannica as a global empire since the dawn of the 20th century. That Britain had to enter into an alliance with Japan from 1902-1923, to help defend its interests east of Suez, and later switching from Japan to the US as ally after 1923, was already proof that it could no longer defend its global empire interests on its own. For the period between the two world wars (1919-1939), successive British governments prioritized to restoring fiscal health and improving the economic welfare of their electorate (over defence) in order to get and stay in political power. This contributed to British military decline that accelerated after WWI. (See smallwarsjournal.com/jrnl/art/british-military-decline-1919-1939). The Far East (including Hong Kong and Singapore) was long considered as a backwater in British military terms. This meant that the Far East had long been accorded lower priority in allocation of imperial defence resources, both in quality and quantity. Churchill did play an active role in cutting back Royal Navy budget when he was Chancellor of the Exchequer in the 1920s and depriving Malaya of adequate defences despite appeals from his top military commanders in Whitehall and in the Far East. Even without the Patrick Heenan's betrayal and capture of top secret documents on SS Automedon, it wouldn't change the overall outcome with an aggressive imperial Japan seeking territorial expansion. Of course, the reasons that led to the surrender of Singapore extend beyond the above coverage. They included, though not exclusively, the accuracy of Japanese intelligence of British doctrine, fixed defences in Malaya, terrain and weather.

  • @andysheepleton
    @andysheepleton 25 днів тому

    Trafford Leigh-Mallory was the epitome of what was wrong with British Leadership in ww2. (Maj. Gen. Henry H. “Hap” Arnold was what was the epitome of what was wrong with American Leadership) Both men relied on the tried and true method of lying to the public, which could mean that the complicit media was the actual problem.

  • @cireynolds
    @cireynolds 28 днів тому

    My great uncle, CPL James Reynolds was killed on 26 Jun 1918 during the Battle of Belleau Wood, he was with the 82nd Co, 3rd Battalion, 6th Marines.

  • @NVRAMboi
    @NVRAMboi 29 днів тому

    A great man. Perhaps I've been mistaken in considering Admiral Sir Andrew Cunningham as the Royal Navy's greatest fighting admiral/commander. In any event, two legendary men. I'm grateful they were on our side. Cheers from America.

  • @ianlowery6014
    @ianlowery6014 29 днів тому

    Hedgehogs are NOT depth charges! Depth charges are set to explode at a set (guesstimated) depth. Hedgehogs explode only on contact. A depth charge contains 600lb of explosive. Each individual hedgehog bomb contained 24lb of explosive. Hedgehog mortars are arranged in a group of 24 or 36, making a total of 576lb or 864lb of explosive. They were arranged in rows of 4, the rows being set off with a slight delay to avoid recoil problems. The mortars were arranged so that the bombs landed in an elliptical pattern over an area. It took 80 depth charges to kill a submarine. It took 5 hedgehog firings.

  • @ianlowery6014
    @ianlowery6014 29 днів тому

    The only HMS Exeter in WW2 was a heavy cruiser, NOT a destroyer. She, with the light cruisers Ajax and Achilles, battled the pocket battleship Graf Spey. the battleship was ultimately scuttled in the River Plate. Exeter took a year to repair.

  • @peterrobinson8588
    @peterrobinson8588 Місяць тому

    Very good….except for pronunciation of Rennes!

  • @robm4834
    @robm4834 Місяць тому

    Mrs Walker should of received an O.B.E . The decent thing to do would be posthumously Knight Sir Walker. Mrs Sir John Walker would of continued to been an asset to the knighthood and Britain and her people. Just as she obviously was for her husband and family.. My respect admiration and appreciation goes out to Captain and Mrs John Walker R.N .

  • @JohnnySmithWhite-wd4ey
    @JohnnySmithWhite-wd4ey Місяць тому

    Admiral Horton was a submarine commander in the First World War. Stationed in Russia, They began calling the Baltic Horton's Sea.

  • @barbararice6650
    @barbararice6650 Місяць тому

    Slim realised although tenacious and mean the Japanese army wasn't that good 😊👍

  • @keithprice5208
    @keithprice5208 Місяць тому

    There seems to be a few discrepancies. The IBA didn't appear until the preparation for commercial radio began in the early '70s. The organisation was originally called the ITA. 1966 saw the appearance of Swinging Radio England, and not England Radio. It did however, share a ship with Britain Radio. Much of the other inferences, seemed a little iffy. Nothing was said about Kenny Everett being suspended by the Big L, after he made on air jokes, and other comments, about the World Tomorrow, including Garner Ted Armstrong.

  • @willhovell9019
    @willhovell9019 Місяць тому

    Yes a cabinet of Labour and Liberal ministers.

  • @redtob2119
    @redtob2119 Місяць тому

    Unfortunately only just discovered he was a predator

  • @VulcanDriver1
    @VulcanDriver1 Місяць тому

    The Bjg L was my goto radio station.

  • @StuartH922
    @StuartH922 Місяць тому

    Bader was part of the Mallory stitch up that got him sacked. Mark of his hypocrisy that he would phrase Park in death.

  • @robertewing3114
    @robertewing3114 Місяць тому

    England stood alone in 1938. Yes, 1938. No Empire unity for war. The USA, the so-called hidden reserves, was isolationist - Roosevelt, like England, stood alone. Of course the Welsh, the Scots and Irish were there, but the Irish people generally werent. So one man with an umbrella was vital if England was ever to achieve something better than unreliable France. What a hero to many that man must be! Best foot forward, guarantee Poland. Heroic indeed! Yet only Ironside called him wonderful. My chief has a will of steel, Churchill growled - yet all this is forgotten today, as if it is simply too good to be true, a competent British government just when the US needed one.

  • @halamish1
    @halamish1 Місяць тому

    Excellent

  • @halamish1
    @halamish1 Місяць тому

    Excellent

  • @LeslieOgilvie
    @LeslieOgilvie Місяць тому

    Germans they worshipped a useless corporal with a bad temper.

  • @whiteonggoy7009
    @whiteonggoy7009 Місяць тому

    A wonderfull documentary, clear and accurate English, the likes of this should be played in schools history lessons.

  • @robertewing3114
    @robertewing3114 Місяць тому

    The Cabinet got it all right in 1938-39-40, by discussion. The only difference in 1940 was the relevance of the RAF, the question of whether the RAF could protect the ports and factories, the RAF reply gave the Cabinet the option to continue the war. Chamberlain recorded Churchills readiness to end the war if it could be cheaply bought, possibly as another act of denying Churchill a clear field to claim all credit for good results.

    • @GreatStoriesNow933
      @GreatStoriesNow933 Місяць тому

      In his book about the Second World War, Churchill puts more emphasis upon the ability of the Royal Navy than the RAF to keep Britain safe and to prevent an invasion. But perhaps, he would have said that having previously been responsible for the Navy! I have also come across reports that at this time the Royal Navy seriously mistrusted the RAF's ability to maintain vigilance particularly with regard to their ports in the south of England. So to test the situation, the Navy flew, one night, some of their planes over Portsmouth, Weymouth and Plymouth without any of them being intercepted. Hearing nothing further the Navy messaged the RAF saying that they had received reports of enemy planes flying over their ports the previous night. The RAF replied that their records showed that no planes whatsoever had flew over any of the aforementioned ports the previous night! Thanks for watching.

    • @robertewing3114
      @robertewing3114 Місяць тому

      @@GreatStoriesNow933 your particular field of study involves the question of Halifax and Churchill who disagreed over India, and Churchill also disagreed with forcing Edward VIII to abdicate, so surely it must have been at the back of Chamberlains mind and on Halifaxs mind that Churchill might once again play the die-hard, except this time as PM with the future of England in the balance. This surely helps to explain the Cabinet sparks, and certainly Halifax was advised not to disagree on account of Churchills bombast, and it may be wrong therefore that historians dig in to the sparks and explain them as appeasement versus victory, the personality and knowledge of the two is important to consider, and in my judgment the sparks represented something of a show-down between Churchill and Halifax, although Halifax stated that Churchill was not alone speaking what he called rot. History of course is rarely truly accurate, and Churchill certainly made no effort to be accurate in his written version of those times. Great story, quote Chamberlain, I am not such a mug as is generally supposed!

  • @robertewing3114
    @robertewing3114 Місяць тому

    What Douglas Home told Keith Feiling and also published himself absolutely made clear that the publicity given to the Anglo-German declaration by Chamberlain cannot represent the word appeasement, rather represents what was said in Cabinet and advised on paper by MI6. Your presentation emphasis is on Cabinet discussion yet shows the document as representing appeasement. You were unaware of what Douglas Home said, and you were indoctrinated with the idea that Chamberlain was blind to the dangers, not least that Hitler had a habit of disregarding German signed documents and surprising the world. The publicity concerned that danger.

    • @GreatStoriesNow933
      @GreatStoriesNow933 Місяць тому

      I dont think that we suggest that Chamberlain was blind to dangers posed by Hitler. The sea-change in Chamberlain's attitude came in January 1939 when MI5 informed Chamberlain that Hitler had described him as "an arsehole" over the agreement. Two days later Chamberlain made a speach in Birmingham where he first drew lines in the sand over Hitler's beh

    • @robertewing3114
      @robertewing3114 Місяць тому

      @@GreatStoriesNow933 I don't identify what you mean by Chamberlains attitude, you may mean his hopes. His attitude was stated in Cabinet before he was PM, that the object of policy should be to make German expansionism more difficult, and his Cabinet was vocal along those lines also. None of that can be said to represent the word appeasement, and there has been a witch-hunt style preoccupation to identify that yes appeasement was blind. Perhaps the routine showing of the Heston scene and word appeasement spoken or written is never meant in a witch-hunt context, but it really is the iconic symbol of failure concerning Hitler, and according to the evidence it cannot possibly be the iconic failure and would more naturally represent the realistic policy of what Home called time for diplomacy and rearmament, and the kind of diplomatic game Eden wrote of and published as worthwhile trying but wasn't attempted by the FO. In fact, of course, Chamberlain subordinated the FO to his games, and the FO didn't like this, and the MI5 report handed to him by the FS as described by you could only assist the FOs determination to avoid further antics such as occurred on 30 Sept 1938, at Heston and at No. 10. None of that was a sea-change, and the PM was able to quote from Sept 1938 in March 1939, showing his consistent policy, and in real terms representing the antics that the FO disliked on 30 Sept 1938, a clear continuity between accepting the invitation to Munich and rejecting Hitlers destruction of the Czech State in March 1939. Therefore the iconic image of failure to avoid WWII, including the failure of the Anglo-French military plan, wrongly rests on something Chamberlain did, or did not do, and something that both the FO and Churchill would have done differently, and presumably Hitler would never have called them what MI5 reported he called Chamberlain. Some commentators on u-tube have said much the same thing as MI5 reported, and all it requires is the word appeasement and the Heston image, iconic indeed, yet of a man and a policy that never existed.

    • @robertewing3114
      @robertewing3114 Місяць тому

      ​@@GreatStoriesNow933PS I coincidently read today that Chamberlains hopes were still significant in February 1939, and I remember Halifax wrote that the Nov or Dec 1938 intelligence report that Hitler had ordered plans to bomb England influenced Chamberlains thought, so the situation was always changing except for keeping as much as possible to the underlying policy - rather like driving on the designated side of the road, and driving without undue risk.

  • @tiptoptechno
    @tiptoptechno Місяць тому

    Well presented with good analysis. I have read through the cabinet papers for this period on the national archive website and I have to say this 2 part series made droll meeting minutes into a flowing story. New subscriber here.

  • @ChristopherWHerbert
    @ChristopherWHerbert Місяць тому

    The image used of where Brigadier Claude Nicholson died. Clearly looks like Colditz Castle. When he was never a prisoner of war at that location. He died at Rotenburg an der Fulda, Germany. Colditz Castle (or Schloss Colditz in German) is in the town of Colditz near Leipzig, Dresden and Chemnitz in the state of Saxony in Germany. Two different places in totally different parts of German. Rotenburg a.d. Fulda) is a town in Hersfeld-Rotenburg district in northeastern Hesse, in central Germany, situated, as the name says, on the river Fulda.

    • @GreatStoriesNow933
      @GreatStoriesNow933 Місяць тому

      You are entirely correct but were unable to obtain image of the place he died. Thanks for watching

  • @PJ-pj8lr
    @PJ-pj8lr Місяць тому

    The photo at 7:41 has got me stumped, looks like a oddball variant of JgPz IV with two step front plate, whatever it is its not 1940 period.

    • @GreatStoriesNow933
      @GreatStoriesNow933 Місяць тому

      sorry that I can't answer your question. The photo is supposedly an example of how Panzers, being short of fuel during their dash to the channel, pulled into local French filling stations and helped themselves to fuel.

  • @landsea7332
    @landsea7332 Місяць тому

    As I just posted in Part 1 , really appreciate that " Great Stories " has explained the British War Cabinet Crisis in context of the Battle of France , Italy , Belgium and other events . - and the Americans were maintaining their position of Isolationism - and at the time , the Soviets had a non aggression pact with Hitler ( Which turned out to be worthless ) . - 18:05 When Paul Reynaud came to office , one of his first acts was to negotiate and agreement with Chamberlain that neither France or Britain would negotiate terms with Hitler without mutual consent. - Also in context , the Kriegsmarine had been devastated during the Norwegian campaign , and its infamous battle ships were not in use at this time . Where as the Royal Navy's home fleet had 5 capital ships and was totally dominant .

    • @GreatStoriesNow933
      @GreatStoriesNow933 Місяць тому

      Paul Reynaud was actually an associated of Churchill's. Churchill was extremely pleased when Reynaud came to power because he thought he was the only politician in France that would be prepared to stand up to Hitler. Churchill made numerous efforts to support Reynaud and keep France in the war. However, it appears that Reynaud somewhat had feet of clay especially when his cabinet became reluctant to support him and he was eventually stabbed in the back by the fascist Petain. With regard to the Kriegsmarine, their U-Boats had torpedo detonation problems at this time otherwise the evacuations from both Dunkirk and Narvik would have been blood-baths.

  • @landsea7332
    @landsea7332 Місяць тому

    Gordon Welshmen at Bletchly Park came up with the idea of " Traffic Analysis . " - In Hut 6 , they had a chart showing the hierarchy of the German Generals - Using triangulation of radio transmissions , they knew in Hut 6 where each enigma machine was - from the call sign and "touch" of each morse code operator , they knew which German General was transmitting , how often and the length of each message Recall the famous photo of Heinz Guadarian in the communication truck . - So during the Battle of France , the British War Cabinet and Lord Gort would have know exactly where Heinz Guadarian was , even though they weren't breaking the enigma code . .

  • @landsea7332
    @landsea7332 Місяць тому

    Great Stories - really appreciate you explaining the British War Cabinet Crisis in the context of the Battle of France . - I've never understood why this defining moment of the 20th Century is over looked by historians . - I think you are the only historian who has pointed out that while the Wehrmach Generals and Hitler were having their arguments , almost at the same time , the British War Cabinet were having their arguments. Same thing happened during the Battle of Britain . - Its absolutely staggering the shear number of decisions Paul Reynaud , BEF Generals and the British War Cabinet had to make under extreme pressure . They were discussing the fate of entire countries and preserving Liberal Democracy in Europe. .

    • @GreatStoriesNow933
      @GreatStoriesNow933 Місяць тому

      The fact that they were having up to three cabinet meetings per day demonstrates the number of decisions that were having to be made.

  • @philipbrooks402
    @philipbrooks402 Місяць тому

    Very enjoyable and informative. The historian James Holland has stated that if he was able to travel back in time to any historical moment he would have chosen to be a fly on the wall during these momentous seventy-two hours. One small criticism, Sir Alexander Cadogan was the Permanent Under Secretary at the Foreign Office and not a secretary of state.

    • @GreatStoriesNow933
      @GreatStoriesNow933 Місяць тому

      You are enrirely correct above Alexander Cadogan. He did have a reputation as Churchill's Mr Fit It.

  • @Lassisvulgaris
    @Lassisvulgaris Місяць тому

    I normally don't like "what ifs", but it's an interesting thought what could have happened with Lord Halifax as prime minister.Much can be said a bout Churchill, but at least he was a fighter....

    • @GreatStoriesNow933
      @GreatStoriesNow933 Місяць тому

      I think the issue for Halifax was that, if he became Prime Minister, he would have had to appoint Churchill as the person who ran the war as Churchill was in the House of Commons. In such circumstances, Halifax was clearly fearful of being responsible for what Churchill might do!!

    • @ruthjellings6648
      @ruthjellings6648 Місяць тому

      Halifax didn't become PM, because at the Labour Party conference which was held around the same time in May 1940, conference voted to support Churchill as PM. Even the Miners' delegates and they hated his guts! Probably because half the Labour Party would have been arrested if Hitler had invaded Britain.

  • @janlindtner305
    @janlindtner305 Місяць тому

    Strong words against oppression and tyranny that are just as relevant today. Stay vigilant👍👍👍

  • @evdyo
    @evdyo Місяць тому

    This is a great documentary. Thank you.

  • @curiousuranus810
    @curiousuranus810 Місяць тому

    I've really enjoyed these two posts, thank you.

  • @Lassisvulgaris
    @Lassisvulgaris Місяць тому

    Excellent. Look foreward to the next one.....

  • @philipbrooks402
    @philipbrooks402 Місяць тому

    This video has confirmed something I read/heard some years ago that the Halt Order came down to a game of chicken between Hitler and his generals. Hitler wanted the glory for the destruction of the BEF for himself and not to be shared with others. Had he allowed the generals the success and had been seen to defer to them they might have had greater authority and many of the mistakes later in the war might have been averted.

    • @GreatStoriesNow933
      @GreatStoriesNow933 Місяць тому

      Thanks for your comments. I think you have made the point exactly. The idea that Hitler halted his tanks to let Britain get away and then they would (effectively) surrender through Mussolini (as is often portrayed) does not stand up to close scrutiny! Thanks for watching.

    • @philipbrooks402
      @philipbrooks402 Місяць тому

      Looking forwards to Part 2.

  • @landsea7332
    @landsea7332 Місяць тому

    14:23 Clarification on the decision to Evacuate the BEF - morning of May 25th , 1940 , French General Blanchard promises Lord Gord he will provide 3 divisions and 200 tanks to help implement the Wegand Plan . - But at 1730 hours , Lord Gord is informed that the French will only provide 1 division . * - " Ultra " Using triangulation of radio transmissions from enigma machines , Bletchly Park knows where each enigma machine is. They also knew which Enigma machine each German general was using , and how often they were sending a message ** - So Lord Gord knew Blanchard had mislead him and from "Ultra" he also knew the BEF were in a hopeless position . - As such , on the 25th at 1800 hours , Lord Gord made the decision to evacuate the BEF . * Dunkirk : Retreat to Victory , Major General Julian Thompson , Page 143 ** Gordon Welshman's only interview .

    • @GreatStoriesNow933
      @GreatStoriesNow933 Місяць тому

      Thanks for your comments and for watching. With regard to General Blanchard, I suspect that the difficulty that he had was that after the attempted counter-act and the Battle of Arras on 20/21 May, there was effectively very little left of the French army north of the Somme. What had been, two weeks earlier, France's three best armies, little more than a few Divisions were left. Also, it is probable that Churchill was being slightly economical with the truth with the French in a desperate attempt to keep them fighting as will become more apparent in Part Two..

  • @harrisonbergeron9746
    @harrisonbergeron9746 Місяць тому

    so churchill did leave the french out on a limb then

    • @GreatStoriesNow933
      @GreatStoriesNow933 Місяць тому

      There is more in Part Two. Essentially, all the European allies had different agendas. It is a good example of what happens in war when allies do not hang together. Fortunately the British,the Commonwealth countries and (later) the Americans did hang together and won the war. The lesson should not be lost today over how different European countries view the current war in Europe and what would happen if push comes to shove? Thanks for watching.

    • @philipbrooks402
      @philipbrooks402 Місяць тому

      He didn't have any choice. As Air Chief Marshall Dowding pointed out, Britain had just sufficient fighters to defend Britain and could not afford to lose any more in the defence of France.

  • @landsea7332
    @landsea7332 Місяць тому

    Great Stories - Thank you for presenting this . May 26th - 28th - The British War Cabinet Crisis - in a nut shell . ( Churchill , Lord Halifax , Chamberlain , Attlee and Greenwood ) The initial estimate given to the British war cabinet was that only 45,000 solders of the BEF could be evacuated . - Lord Halifax was invited by the Italian ambassador , who offers to mediate a peace agreement . - Lord Halifax then attempted to get the British war cabinet to agree to enter into negotiations to explore what was on offer . - Churchill disagreed and said Hitler hasn't honoured any terms he has agreed to , and will turn Britain into a slave state. - Halifax says they could loose 200,000 men and the Luftwaffe would bomb Britain into submission . Some historians think Churchill was buying time too see how the evacuation was going . Churchill then does an end round on Halifax , meets with the 25 member outer cabinet , and pursuades them Britain should continue fighting . Had Churchill not been able to convince the cabinet to keep fighting , Hitler would have been able to unleash the entire Wehrmacht on the Soviets in the Spring of 1941 . Either way , Stalin or Hitler would have ended up ruling over Russia , the Middle East , North Africa and most of Continuemtal Europe . For this reason , the British War cabinet crisis is one of the defining moments of the 20th Century . .

    • @GreatStoriesNow933
      @GreatStoriesNow933 Місяць тому

      Part Two is till to come ... very shortly!

    • @GreatStoriesNow933
      @GreatStoriesNow933 Місяць тому

      Thanks for your comments. Some of your points will be covered in Part Two which we are about to publish. One point on the War Cabinet: Sinclair had been asked to attend the war cabinet although he was not a member. However, on the 26th May it became clear that Sinclair supported Churchill's position rather than Halifax and, at that point, Churchill persuaded the other members of the War Cabinet that Sinclair should become a full member of the War Cabinet. Thanks for watching. I hope you enjoy Part Two.