His speeches were so powerful because they reflected his nature of a fighter. Thank goodness we had such a strong spirit and character in such a difficult time. He acknowledges danger, but he brings hope and acted upon that. Take one of his famous citations: “If you are going through hell, keep going. “ See the mindset: tribulations are part of life, push forward, it is temporary, you are going through hell, you will pass it. He was so inspiring because he lived by what he preached.
Yet during the first ww he caused the deaths in Gallipoli and was sacked, he was a war mongerer that's for sure but he redeemed himself in the 2ww, people needed the security system that the labour party promised it changed the lives of millions
Although not his best speech, it could be argued that Churchill's most important speech was delivered during the War Cabinet Crisis, which occurred from May 26th - 28th, 1940. With the BEF and French 1st Army trapped at Dunkirk, the estimate was that only 45,000 solders of the BEF could be evacuated. With the prospect of the loss of most of the BEF , the practical Lord Halifax wanted to negotiate terms with Hitler via the Italians. However, Churchill did end round on Lord Halifax, and gave a speech to the 25 member outer cabinet in which he was able to convince them to keep fighting. During this speech, he reminded the cabinet members of the British concept of "duty."
Beautiful! Had Churchill done nothing, but only planned Dunkirk evacuation with Admiral Ramsay we would have to be eternally grateful to him, but he did way more, way more…Great man.
We shall fight on the beaches We shall fight on the landing grounds We shall fight in the fields and in the streets We shall fight in the hills We shall never surrender Decades on after that great war, these words motivated me, a 10 year-old bullied kid in public school, to fight on. I may have never stepped foot in Britain before, but I am fully indebted to Mr Churchill's unfailing resolve to rally his nation forward in the darkest of times. It gave me a light too in my own darkest hour
It's a basic military promise for any German/Axis attack on Britain. Nothing particularly noble about it. Everything he says is just what organised Brits would certainly do
He didn’t sheik and yell like Hitler. He spoke everyday English in a low voice with strength and common sense. Very inspiring. No wonder England won the war.
That is true, But Hitler's speeches, before the war, inspired fanaticism. Hitler spoke more like Margaret Thatcher, if you remember her famous "No,no,no" in the Commons. Hitler would complain, as a candidate, about the other parties who stated " national socialists, are not real Germans, because we do not want to collaborate with other parties, that we are intolerant and quarrelsome." Then after a few lines, he would double down as Thatcher would also do: " I have to admit that these gentlemen are correct, we are intolerant--- and I promise you to drive all these parties out of Germany.. I make that my fanatical and ruthless goal all the way to the grave". (And he did! Like Thatcher he kept his promises....) So Hitler appealed to the converted and the fanatics. Churchill, on the other hand, needed to reassure a populace who could have gone defeatist easily. It takes a totally different style.
England didn't win the war, that's an insult to the other countries, especially Russia that contributed the most. Politicians are usually full of hot air.
I'm glad to have spotted this video. Churchill has been a longtime hero of mine despite some of his obvious flaws. We are all human after all. I will be pleased to look forward to more material such as this.
His knowledge of Anglo-Axon Old English is what gave his oration such gravity and 'grit'. It resonated with the 'Folk Soul' of the nation, especially the English, whether the masses realised it or not.
any other nouthpiece would be famous for backstabbing their leader and have alegacy of familiar ! he did nothing another 10-15 people couldnt have done thus being dumped by english the next election!
Can't change history but stand in awe of the men and women who shaped it and of those who failed to influence it. Say what you will of Churchill, but he was a man of his time.
Great video, thank you. But some of the comments ? Man there are some very bitter and miserable people around. With all his faults Churchill was a great man
“With all his faults he was a great man” You know he staved millions of Indians to death and was informed and begged by his own government to send supplies
@@callummiller5886 … I doubt that you have ever faced the burden of the decisions that Churchill was required to make. 1. You have to be remarkably obtuse to think that Churchill could cause a natural disaster. He was not a Dictator and could not make decisions at this level without the support of cabinet and the War Office, at the very least. 2. The body directly responsible for food supply and famine relieve was the relevant Indian Government, not the British Government. 3. The demand on shipping for ALL purposes was immense, and the Axis were doing their best to sink as much of it as possible, including in the Bay of Bengal. 4. In spite of the overpowering demands of the War - in which millions of others ALSO died - Churchill’s Government DID attempt to provide relief supplies, much of which came from Australia. The simple fact is that the timing and the shipping did not permit the kind of relief that we’d expect today, and that fallacy of blaming one man for deliberately “causing” those deaths should be obvious.
@@gotze1772 they were not starving before him. When Bengal was hit with a famine, instead of giving them their own supplies, he took their supplies and exported them out. He denied sending aid to India countless times despite the English officials in India begging him. Moreover, he was outright racist and hated Indians. He said utterly disgusting words about them on many occasions. Please read about it
Sacrificed half a million British lives, the whole British Empire and all of Britain's gold, so that Germans could get rid of fascism and prosper under the blessings of American style democracy. What a generous man Sir Winston was.
@@bebedor_de_cafe3272 He saved what? 200 Million lives? Are you completely out of your mind? He wasted countless lives for nothing, ruined our beautiful continent, unlocked the door for Communism to spread out into the world, handed over the Empire to the Americans and opened our countries for the invasion of foreigners, multiculturalism and wokeness! Without any necessity. Here is a quote from your criminal "hero", Address at Fulton, Missouri, 1946. We could have easily prevented the war "without firing a single shot". We just didn't want to. They just didn't want to!!! It was a game for these criminals. And he furthermore said, "there never was a war more easy to stop than that (Word War II)" But, what the heck. Let the slaughter continue! He saved nobody's life. He wasted ten of millions!
Well, he was really like Hitler in that he could speak and inspire the people and Hitler knew if Churchill became Prime minister they would never take Britain.
Not perfect (who is?) but a great man who delivered victory over fascism so that decades later some idiots have the freedom to write rubbish about him on UA-cam.
what victory did he deliver over fascism? Engaging the Luftwaffe for months is victory over fascism? he lost, campaign after campaign in Europe, sacrificing Greek, Polish,French, Australian, ANZ lives for what? For Germany to have full rule over western europe. It was the unfathomable loss of life and massive influx of US equipment that grind down the Reich in a war of attrition. This drunk did nothing but save his island.
@@msreviews5576 when the French capitulated in 1940 German domination of Europe was inevitable….unlike the Germans Britain hadn’t actually been gearing up to fight another war. Victory in the Battle of Britain prevented German invasion of the British isles allowing it to be used as a base to mount the invasion of Europe yes with US help but at that time Britain had a massive empire and the largest most powerful Navy on the planet so we were not helpless. Churchill wasn’t a general and didn’t fight the battles directly, yes there were mistakes but that’ was true on both sides of the conflict…Fortunately the Germans made bigger ones…. massive casualties were the nature of total war at that time. If those sacrifices hadn’t been made a sizeable proportion of the world would have been under Nazi tyranny and the Holocaust would have continued. Whether you like him or not Churchill was the right man at that moment and his decision to keep on fighting in 1940 was pivotal to the outcome and allied victory. No doubt you would have done it so much better.
@@mikesaunders4694 nonsense! Churchill and Britains power was fading by the passing days which set the stage for the USSR and USA world domination. Indeed, UK served the purpose of a vessel from where the invasion of France would be launched however by that time the Germans were done by the soviets which took such horrendous loss of life and the majority of the lend lease was by the US not the UK which itself was taking loans from the USA. It doesnt matter if churchill would die or live, ww2 would still go on since the eastern front was the main focus of the Hitlerite perspective. what a anglo centric thinking. and dont forget Uk under churchill repeatedly failed to make any ground in Europe, were always smashed out by the Germans. they were good at bombing civilians though, at that they excelled.
Delivered Europe from fascism? Unfortunately he forgot about Spain, where Franco would have given in under the simple threat of an invasion. But neither Churchill nor Truman dit. Why?
Sacrificed half a million British lives, the whole British Empire and all of Britain's gold, so that Germans could get rid of fascism and prosper under the blessings of American style democracy. What a generous man Sir Winston was.
Notice, in the "shall never surrender" speech, that all the things we should do are Germanic Anglo-saxon short words. And surrender, the polysyllabic word, is of French origin. In other words, he uses what we might call "four letter words" for the things we all should do, and a "big word" for thing we ought not to do, ie, surrender. I think it is a quite unique usage of English that is difficult to render in a different language which does not have this dual vocabulary English inherited because of the Normand Conquest of 1066.
An excellent point. It's something which would only be noticed, if at all, subliminally, by his listeners; a very clever stylistic device nevertheless.
Imagine if Britain and the U.S. didn't share a language. How much different would things have been if citizens from both countries weren't able to directly understand the words said by either Churchill or FDR. Sure they can be translated, but it's not the same. Americans saw some of Churchill's speeches and that helped garner support before and after America entered the war.
@@sutherlandA1 HE wasnt voted out, the CONSERVATIVES were, people quite liked Churchill, but didnt want the conservatives, remember, British people dont directly elect their prime-ministers
"You burned the city of London in our houses and we felt the flames that burned it," "You laid the dead of London at our doors and we knew that the dead were our dead, were mankind's dead. You have destroyed the superstition that what is done beyond 3,000 miles of water is not really done at all. Librarian of Congress Archibald MacLeish talking of Edward R. Murrow live broadcasting from London blitz to America
Despite the ridicules in the secular academic world, I am fully persuaded of the agency of God in human history. From the vantage point of my Christian faith and knowledge of Scriptures it's not difficult for me to connect the dots of divine Providence in the eternal conflict between good and evil good
Could it have been a coincidence that a Winston Churchill rose to power in Britain to effectively lead an alliance that would successfully counter Hitler's arrogance and evil plan for the world? Was it human wisdom and permutations that threw up those equally strong opposite forces?
I know like all people of his era he had serious moral failings. But with that being said the Nazi almost won ww2. Britain had every reason to make peace with the Nazi but did not.
The comment that Churchill mispronounced Nazi is silly. The Nazional Socialist were indeed pronounced Nasi by Germans and those who had known them at their Inception like Churchill, not Nazi as latecomers like Roosevelt said it. Do some research before putting this stuff online please, @Imperial War Museum
Germany declared war in a nation that had its independence guaranteed by Britain, Germanys peace requests included having their old colonies handed back to them, and it would have made Britain in to a puppet state
@@bebedor_de_cafe3272 Germany getting their old colonies is only fair. Hell, there was no point in fighting for them, if Britain couldnt even keep their other colonies after the war (india or malaysia or other african parts). And Soviet Union also unvaded Poland (twice), and Britain never declared war on them, so they clearly dont care about that.
@@yep9817 giving their colonies back was absolutely unacceptable, Namibia was part of SA, and Tanzania connected the empire, and the defensive pact was against the Germans, not the soviets, Germany was threatening British survival, it made no sense just keeping out of the war
@@bebedor_de_cafe3272 I am hundred percent sure you are trolling right now. Britain give up most of their colonies after WW2 anyway, fighting for land you were gonna give peacefully is nothing more than nonsense. And you back up on your argument when I proove it wrong (like defending Poland's independence). But you can keep believing Germany was threatening British survival, after Britain declaring war on it and deny acceptable peace requests.
@@yep9817 I’m not trolling, giving its colonies to Germany is unacceptable, British survival was under threat, it doesn’t make sense for them to just let them take all of Europe, and hope Germany wouldn’t just go for them
Funny thing: those who say the most are the last ones to join the actual battles It's one thing to talk about victory, and a whole nother thing to actually fight for it on a battle field.
Not sure what you’re implying here. Churchill was a combat veteran who personally slew men in battle. He participated in Britain’s last cavalry charge - in the Battle of Omdurman.
I want to see impartiality. You conveniently have left out the Be Ye Men of Valour speech of May 19, 1940, in which Churchill said "...I have invincible confidence in the French Army and its leaders," and "In the air ... we have been clawing down three or four to one of our enemies; and the relative balance of the British and German Air Forces is now considerably more favourable to us than at the beginning of the battle." Also he abandonned Norway on 25 May 1940, which was damn near to surrendering. Please be academically honest!
@@dovetonsturdee7033 I'm sure you're right, but Churchill forgot to mention the French insistence and his opposition to this withdrawal in either 'The Gathering Storm' or 'Their Finest Hour'. In the latter, all he writes is that at a meeting with Reynaud in Paris, he stated the British Government believed "the Narvik area should be evacuated at once."
No man is perfect, how ever great they are, Washinton owned slaves and Rhoal Dahl was an anti-semite, but that does not mean we should not remember the great things he did, in difficult times.
Vous étiez une nation vaincue, la France avait le plus de soutien des Britanniques mais a produit la résistance la moins efficace par rapport à la Pologne
Sure! Unfortunately his best lines were not even his own. Remember his "we shall fight in the mountains, we shall fight on the beaches ..." Stolen from Garibaldi. When will you ever wake up? (Added later: and even from Clémenceau)
@@nukni4225 Churchill would have known about a similar phrase used by Garibaldi. Between the wars, Churchill contemplated writing a biography of Garibaldi. The phrase Garibaldi used was ' "I offer hunger, thirst, forced marches, battle, and death," which was hardly stolen by Churchill. However, that wasn't what you claimed. You wrote ' Remember his "we shall fight in the mountains, we shall fight on the beaches ..." Stolen from Garibaldi,' and you cannot produce a source to justify your statement. Therefore, you should not muddy the waters. You should apologise for your false claim, or concede that you are a liar.
@@dovetonsturdee7033 There is something rotten in the state of England. Should anyone rewrite the story and transport it to your country you might well call him a liar, don't you? My boy, get yourself a nanny to guide you through the internet, if you can't find the facts that Churchill stole. Not only ideas and phrases from Garibaldi but also money. He was a bankrupt, who forged the signature on his paintings and finally sold himself and his political creed to the FOCUS, he was responsible for turning a local conflict between Germany and Poland over an entirely German city into a world war, he was responsible for the deconstruction of the Empire. He was a war hero without decorations, he broke his word of honor given to the Boers, he was referred to by his best friend as the "drunken bum". Many of his speeches which you hear today were edited and recorded after the war. The whole figure is fake and false. And more than that. You call me a liar? How do you call yourself for refusing to see all of this?
@@nukni4225 So it appears that you lack the integrity to confirm that your first post was entirely false? I rather expected that that would be the way you would respond. You aren't really worth the time of any honest person, but to correct one or two of your additional falsehoods: First lie, Churchill was not in any government position when Britain & France declared war, and hadn't been since 1929. Second lie, he was not a serviceman when imprisoned by the Boers, and was not asked to give any 'word of honour' to anyone. Third lie, he stole nothing from Garibaldi. Garibaldi died when Churchill was four years old. Churchill admired Garibaldi, as I said earlier. Fourth lie, that he forged the signature on his own paintings. Perhaps to be fair that isn't so much a lie as merely an infantile comment. Fifth lie, his speeches were, in the main, recorded after the war, but their texts were recorded at the time in 'Hansard,' often read out on the radio by BBC newsreaders, and usually printed in full within a day or two of them being made in national newspapers throughout the Empire. Nothing was edited or changed. Fifth lie, he was never called a 'war hero' but he served at the Battle of Omdurman, left the army to become a journalist in 1899, but later commanded a Scots regiment on the Western Front for nine months in WW1. You may not consider serving in the military in wartime gallant, but frankly your opinion is of no merit. So yes, I do indeed call you a liar.
The Allied soldiers won the 2nd World War with their blood in both the Europe and Asia theatres; Churchill only numbed the masses with his rhetoric of Singapore - the impregnable fortress when in reality, the majority of the empire's resources were used in the European theatre instead. This was helped in no small part by the arrogance of the West in underestimating the Japanese. In the end, Southeast Asia, with the cohort of Australian, British, Indian and local soldiers (the Death Railway) as well as the ethnic Chinese civilians (the Sook Ching Massacre), were made to suffer greatly under the hands of the brutal Japanese. So much for his 'we shall fight / never surrender' speech; Churchill was a national hero but an international traitor.
Political speeches were often printed in full in daily newspapers the following day. Portions were sometimes read out by newsreaders. The full text was, of course, recorded in 'Hansard.' Nobody was re-writing anything.
And if Britain hadn’t kept them at bay for almost two years until the Yanks finally decided to get their hands dirty, everybody would have to know German now.
@@robertpearson8798 Kept them at bay|??? The drunk did nothing more than to save his own island. It was insignificant compared to where the intensity of fighting was present, the eastern front.
@@msreviews5576 'Save his own island' was quite an achievement. Presumably you aren't able to grasp the obvious fact that a nation with a smallish population, which has the largest navy on earth, cannot also have a large army. Britain was never a major land power.
I'm Irish,.but I have nothing but respect and reverence for Winston Churchill. A true leader and master oratory.
You should be ashamed of yourself he was nothing but a murdering drunken scumbag, how dare you call yourself Irish. 🤬🤬🤬
His speeches were so powerful because they reflected his nature of a fighter. Thank goodness we had such a strong spirit and character in such a difficult time. He acknowledges danger, but he brings hope and acted upon that. Take one of his famous citations: “If you are going through hell, keep going. “ See the mindset: tribulations are part of life, push forward, it is temporary, you are going through hell, you will pass it. He was so inspiring because he lived by what he preached.
Yet during the first ww he caused the deaths in Gallipoli and was sacked, he was a war mongerer that's for sure but he redeemed himself in the 2ww, people needed the security system that the labour party promised it changed the lives of millions
Although not his best speech, it could be argued that Churchill's most important speech was delivered during the War Cabinet Crisis, which occurred from May 26th - 28th, 1940. With the BEF and French 1st Army trapped at Dunkirk, the estimate was that only 45,000 solders of the BEF could be evacuated. With the prospect of the loss of most of the BEF , the practical Lord Halifax wanted to negotiate terms with Hitler via the Italians. However, Churchill did end round on Lord Halifax, and gave a speech to the 25 member outer cabinet in which he was able to convince them to keep fighting. During this speech, he reminded the cabinet members of the British concept of "duty."
Grateful to him.
Beautiful! Had Churchill done nothing, but only planned Dunkirk evacuation with Admiral Ramsay we would have to be eternally grateful to him, but he did way more, way more…Great man.
Churchill commands response pain and simple.
What did he actually say?
We shall fight on the beaches
We shall fight on the landing grounds
We shall fight in the fields and in the streets
We shall fight in the hills
We shall never surrender
Decades on after that great war, these words motivated me, a 10 year-old bullied kid in public school, to fight on. I may have never stepped foot in Britain before, but I am fully indebted to Mr Churchill's unfailing resolve to rally his nation forward in the darkest of times. It gave me a light too in my own darkest hour
It's a basic military promise for any German/Axis attack on Britain. Nothing particularly noble about it. Everything he says is just what organised Brits would certainly do
The darkest hour of your life *so far*
What doesn’t defeat you can only make you stronger… or stranger.
Keep fighting 👊🏻
“Never in the field of human conflict was so much owed by so many to so few”
He didn’t sheik and yell like Hitler. He spoke everyday English in a low voice with strength and common sense. Very inspiring. No wonder England won the war.
You mean the Soviet won the War
That is true, But Hitler's speeches, before the war, inspired fanaticism. Hitler spoke more like Margaret Thatcher, if you remember her famous "No,no,no" in the Commons. Hitler would complain, as a candidate, about the other parties who stated " national socialists, are not real Germans, because we do not want to collaborate with other parties, that we are intolerant and quarrelsome."
Then after a few lines, he would double down as Thatcher would also do: " I have to admit that these gentlemen are correct, we are intolerant--- and I promise you to drive all these parties out of Germany.. I make that my fanatical and ruthless goal all the way to the grave". (And he did! Like Thatcher he kept his promises....)
So Hitler appealed to the converted and the fanatics. Churchill, on the other hand, needed to reassure a populace who could have gone defeatist easily. It takes a totally different style.
The British Empire, England would've been destroyed without the Commonwealth and the dominions
England didn't win the war, that's an insult to the other countries, especially Russia that contributed the most.
Politicians are usually full of hot air.
@@omobolanlerasaq2492 The same Soviets who allowed Hitler to invade Poland and intended on aiding Hitler by not opening a second front?
I'm glad to have spotted this video. Churchill has been a longtime hero of mine despite some of his obvious flaws. We are all human after all. I will be pleased to look forward to more material such as this.
His knowledge of Anglo-Axon Old English is what gave his oration such gravity and 'grit'. It resonated with the 'Folk Soul' of the nation, especially the English, whether the masses realised it or not.
Maybe the only man that could have rallied the UK to believe victory was possible. What a great video-thank you so much!
any other nouthpiece would be famous for backstabbing their leader and have alegacy of familiar ! he did nothing another 10-15 people couldnt have done thus being dumped by english the next election!
Back when leaders had spine
Churchill is a genius.without him there's no Europe now
this video earned you my subscribtion, thanks for your quality content.
Can't change history but stand in awe of the men and women who shaped it and of those who failed to influence it. Say what you will of Churchill, but he was a man of his time.
Great video, thank you. But some of the comments ? Man there are some very bitter and miserable people around.
With all his faults Churchill was a great man
“With all his faults he was a great man”
You know he staved millions of Indians to death and was informed and begged by his own government to send supplies
@@callummiller5886 But they were starving before him, they were starving after him. So what is your point? Lets blame Churchill
@@callummiller5886 … I doubt that you have ever faced the burden of the decisions that Churchill was required to make.
1. You have to be remarkably obtuse to think that Churchill could cause a natural disaster. He was not a Dictator and could not make decisions at this level without the support of cabinet and the War Office, at the very least.
2. The body directly responsible for food supply and famine relieve was the relevant Indian Government, not the British Government.
3. The demand on shipping for ALL purposes was immense, and the Axis were doing their best to sink as much of it as possible, including in the Bay of Bengal.
4. In spite of the overpowering demands of the War - in which millions of others ALSO died - Churchill’s Government DID attempt to provide relief supplies, much of which came from Australia.
The simple fact is that the timing and the shipping did not permit the kind of relief that we’d expect today, and that fallacy of blaming one man for deliberately “causing” those deaths should be obvious.
@@gotze1772 they were not starving before him. When Bengal was hit with a famine, instead of giving them their own supplies, he took their supplies and exported them out. He denied sending aid to India countless times despite the English officials in India begging him. Moreover, he was outright racist and hated Indians. He said utterly disgusting words about them on many occasions. Please read about it
This man was great
U know his bad sides I hope
Hating indians and africans
The greatest.
@@JJ-ct7iy Hitler would have destroyed India and Africa when he got there.
@@stevenicol1 I didn't say that he is bad I'm just saying that he isn't great he is good. Most people don't know about Churchills other face.
I remember my gandfather to nod to this speach a german
A true statesman.
Sacrificed half a million British lives, the whole British Empire and all of Britain's gold, so that Germans could get rid of fascism and prosper under the blessings of American style democracy. What a generous man Sir Winston was.
he was no less than hitler
@@nukni4225 He saved 200.000.000+ lives, say what you want, but it was necessary
@@bebedor_de_cafe3272 He saved what? 200 Million lives? Are you completely out of your mind? He wasted countless lives for nothing, ruined our beautiful continent, unlocked the door for Communism to spread out into the world, handed over the Empire to the Americans and opened our countries for the invasion of foreigners, multiculturalism and wokeness! Without any necessity. Here is a quote from your criminal "hero", Address at Fulton, Missouri, 1946. We could have easily prevented the war "without firing a single shot". We just didn't want to. They just didn't want to!!! It was a game for these criminals. And he furthermore said, "there never was a war more easy to stop than that (Word War II)" But, what the heck. Let the slaughter continue! He saved nobody's life. He wasted ten of millions!
Well, he was really like Hitler in that he could speak and inspire the people and Hitler knew if Churchill became Prime minister they would never take Britain.
Not perfect (who is?) but a great man who delivered victory over fascism so that decades later some idiots have the freedom to write rubbish about him on UA-cam.
what victory did he deliver over fascism? Engaging the Luftwaffe for months is victory over fascism? he lost, campaign after campaign in Europe, sacrificing Greek, Polish,French, Australian, ANZ lives for what? For Germany to have full rule over western europe. It was the unfathomable loss of life and massive influx of US equipment that grind down the Reich in a war of attrition. This drunk did nothing but save his island.
@@msreviews5576 when the French capitulated in 1940 German domination of Europe was inevitable….unlike the Germans Britain hadn’t actually been gearing up to fight another war. Victory in the Battle of Britain prevented German invasion of the British isles allowing it to be used as a base to mount the invasion of Europe yes with US help but at that time Britain had a massive empire and the largest most powerful Navy on the planet so we were not helpless. Churchill wasn’t a general and didn’t fight the battles directly, yes there were mistakes but that’ was true on both sides of the conflict…Fortunately the Germans made bigger ones…. massive casualties were the nature of total war at that time. If those sacrifices hadn’t been made a sizeable proportion of the world would have been under Nazi tyranny and the Holocaust would have continued. Whether you like him or not Churchill was the right man at that moment and his decision to keep on fighting in 1940 was pivotal to the outcome and allied victory. No doubt you would have done it so much better.
@@mikesaunders4694 nonsense! Churchill and Britains power was fading by the passing days which set the stage for the USSR and USA world domination. Indeed, UK served the purpose of a vessel from where the invasion of France would be launched however by that time the Germans were done by the soviets which took such horrendous loss of life and the majority of the lend lease was by the US not the UK which itself was taking loans from the USA. It doesnt matter if churchill would die or live, ww2 would still go on since the eastern front was the main focus of the Hitlerite perspective. what a anglo centric thinking. and dont forget Uk under churchill repeatedly failed to make any ground in Europe, were always smashed out by the Germans. they were good at bombing civilians though, at that they excelled.
Delivered Europe from fascism? Unfortunately he forgot about Spain, where Franco would have given in under the simple threat of an invasion. But neither Churchill nor Truman dit. Why?
Sacrificed half a million British lives, the whole British Empire and all of Britain's gold, so that Germans could get rid of fascism and prosper under the blessings of American style democracy. What a generous man Sir Winston was.
Notice, in the "shall never surrender" speech, that all the things we should do are Germanic Anglo-saxon short words. And surrender, the polysyllabic word, is of French origin.
In other words, he uses what we might call "four letter words" for the things we all should do, and a "big word" for thing we ought not to do, ie, surrender.
I think it is a quite unique usage of English that is difficult to render in a different language which does not have this dual vocabulary English inherited because of the Normand Conquest of 1066.
An excellent point. It's something which would only be noticed, if at all, subliminally, by his listeners; a very clever stylistic device nevertheless.
Kid: Mum, can we have Winston Churchill
Mum: We already have Winston Churchill at home!
The Churchill at home: Boris Johnson
Ahhahahaha
Imagine if Britain and the U.S. didn't share a language. How much different would things have been if citizens from both countries weren't able to directly understand the words said by either Churchill or FDR.
Sure they can be translated, but it's not the same. Americans saw some of Churchill's speeches and that helped garner support before and after America entered the war.
@@trivialtrav England and the UK had an empire
Great Man of the world
Forever a hero 🇬🇧🏴
Well done.
How sad that the Woke generation are now trying to “cancel” this great leader.
He may have been a heroic wartime leader but was still a flawed person, he was voted out right at the war's end for a reason
@@sutherlandA1 oh well,,still a great man
he was a murderer and no less than hitler
@@sutherlandA1 HE wasnt voted out, the CONSERVATIVES were, people quite liked Churchill, but didnt want the conservatives, remember, British people dont directly elect their prime-ministers
@Jojo Rabbit he is probably from India which has a very revisionist way of studying history
"You burned the city of London in our houses and we felt the flames that burned it," "You laid the dead of London at our doors and we knew that the dead were our dead, were mankind's dead. You have destroyed the superstition that what is done beyond 3,000 miles of water is not really done at all. Librarian of Congress Archibald MacLeish talking of Edward R. Murrow live broadcasting from London blitz to America
Sah j ai kiffé
Il a bien raison le gamin
@@Ewan_Mich citation !
where can I find this transcriptions of the speechs?
Asda
Does somebody know the music of 9:15?
Land of Hope and Glory
Despite the ridicules in the secular academic world, I am fully persuaded of the agency of God in human history. From the vantage point of my Christian faith and knowledge of Scriptures it's not difficult for me to connect the dots of divine Providence in the eternal conflict between good and evil good
Could it have been a coincidence that a Winston Churchill rose to power in Britain to effectively lead an alliance that would successfully counter Hitler's arrogance and evil plan for the world? Was it human wisdom and permutations that threw up those equally strong opposite forces?
Churchill plays DmC4 confirmed!?
9:47
wowowowowowowowowow!!!!!!
I know like all people of his era he had serious moral failings. But with that being said the Nazi almost won ww2. Britain had every reason to make peace with the Nazi but did not.
The comment that Churchill mispronounced Nazi is silly. The Nazional Socialist were indeed pronounced Nasi by Germans and those who had known them at their Inception like Churchill, not Nazi as latecomers like Roosevelt said it. Do some research before putting this stuff online please, @Imperial War Museum
>Declare war on Germany
>Deny Germany's peace requests
> "wE sHaLl nEVeR SurReNDer"
Germany declared war in a nation that had its independence guaranteed by Britain, Germanys peace requests included having their old colonies handed back to them, and it would have made Britain in to a puppet state
@@bebedor_de_cafe3272 Germany getting their old colonies is only fair.
Hell, there was no point in fighting for them, if Britain couldnt even keep their other colonies after the war (india or malaysia or other african parts).
And Soviet Union also unvaded Poland (twice), and Britain never declared war on them, so they clearly dont care about that.
@@yep9817 giving their colonies back was absolutely unacceptable, Namibia was part of SA, and Tanzania connected the empire, and the defensive pact was against the Germans, not the soviets, Germany was threatening British survival, it made no sense just keeping out of the war
@@bebedor_de_cafe3272 I am hundred percent sure you are trolling right now.
Britain give up most of their colonies after WW2 anyway, fighting for land you were gonna give peacefully is nothing more than nonsense.
And you back up on your argument when I proove it wrong (like defending Poland's independence).
But you can keep believing Germany was threatening British survival, after Britain declaring war on it and deny acceptable peace requests.
@@yep9817 I’m not trolling, giving its colonies to Germany is unacceptable, British survival was under threat, it doesn’t make sense for them to just let them take all of Europe, and hope Germany wouldn’t just go for them
Funny thing: those who say the most are the last ones to join the actual battles
It's one thing to talk about victory, and a whole nother thing to actually fight for it on a battle field.
Well Said but, This is an example of doing it both.
Not sure what you’re implying here. Churchill was a combat veteran who personally slew men in battle. He participated in Britain’s last cavalry charge - in the Battle of Omdurman.
I want to see impartiality. You conveniently have left out the Be Ye Men of Valour speech of May 19, 1940, in which Churchill said "...I have invincible confidence in the French Army and its leaders," and "In the air ... we have been clawing down three or four to one of our enemies; and the relative balance of the British and German Air Forces is now considerably more favourable to us than at the beginning of the battle." Also he abandonned Norway on 25 May 1940, which was damn near to surrendering. Please be academically honest!
Actually, Churchill was opposed to the withdrawal from Norway, but, in view of events in France, the French insisted.
@@dovetonsturdee7033 I'm sure you're right, but Churchill forgot to mention the French insistence and his opposition to this withdrawal in either 'The Gathering Storm' or 'Their Finest Hour'. In the latter, all he writes is that at a meeting with Reynaud in Paris, he stated the British Government believed "the Narvik area should be evacuated at once."
they cant, how else will they stroke their ego if they do? let them wank at the drunk.
No man is perfect, how ever great they are, Washinton owned slaves and Rhoal Dahl was an anti-semite, but that does not mean we should not remember the great things he did, in difficult times.
@@janesda Just a small point, but how was evacuating Norway when things had begun falling apart in France damn near to surrendering?'
Les options anglaise vous êtes de looseur
Vous étiez une nation vaincue, la France avait le plus de soutien des Britanniques mais a produit la résistance la moins efficace par rapport à la Pologne
Churchill was drunk most of the time...
So?
How many of those mispronounced words were intended, and how many were because he was very drunk on the day he recorded his speeches after the war?
Sure! Unfortunately his best lines were not even his own. Remember his "we shall fight in the mountains, we shall fight on the beaches ..." Stolen from Garibaldi. When will you ever wake up? (Added later: and even from Clémenceau)
Really? Source please.
@@dovetonsturdee7033 Wikipedia Give in blood, sweat and tears. Easy to find.
@@nukni4225 Churchill would have known about a similar phrase used by Garibaldi. Between the wars, Churchill contemplated writing a biography of Garibaldi. The phrase Garibaldi used was ' "I offer hunger, thirst, forced marches, battle, and death," which was hardly stolen by Churchill.
However, that wasn't what you claimed. You wrote ' Remember his "we shall fight in the mountains, we shall fight on the beaches ..." Stolen from Garibaldi,' and you cannot produce a source to justify your statement.
Therefore, you should not muddy the waters. You should apologise for your false claim, or concede that you are a liar.
@@dovetonsturdee7033 There is something rotten in the state of England. Should anyone rewrite the story and transport it to your country you might well call him a liar, don't you? My boy, get yourself a nanny to guide you through the internet, if you can't find the facts that Churchill stole. Not only ideas and phrases from Garibaldi but also money. He was a bankrupt, who forged the signature on his paintings and finally sold himself and his political creed to the FOCUS, he was responsible for turning a local conflict between Germany and Poland over an entirely German city into a world war, he was responsible for the deconstruction of the Empire. He was a war hero without decorations, he broke his word of honor given to the Boers, he was referred to by his best friend as the "drunken bum". Many of his speeches which you hear today were edited and recorded after the war. The whole figure is fake and false. And more than that. You call me a liar? How do you call yourself for refusing to see all of this?
@@nukni4225 So it appears that you lack the integrity to confirm that your first post was entirely false? I rather expected that that would be the way you would respond.
You aren't really worth the time of any honest person, but to correct one or two of your additional falsehoods:
First lie, Churchill was not in any government position when Britain & France declared war, and hadn't been since 1929.
Second lie, he was not a serviceman when imprisoned by the Boers, and was not asked to give any 'word of honour' to anyone.
Third lie, he stole nothing from Garibaldi. Garibaldi died when Churchill was four years old. Churchill admired Garibaldi, as I said earlier.
Fourth lie, that he forged the signature on his own paintings. Perhaps to be fair that isn't so much a lie as merely an infantile comment.
Fifth lie, his speeches were, in the main, recorded after the war, but their texts were recorded at the time in 'Hansard,' often read out on the radio by BBC newsreaders, and usually printed in full within a day or two of them being made in national newspapers throughout the Empire. Nothing was edited or changed.
Fifth lie, he was never called a 'war hero' but he served at the Battle of Omdurman, left the army to become a journalist in 1899, but later commanded a Scots regiment on the Western Front for nine months in WW1. You may not consider serving in the military in wartime gallant, but frankly your opinion is of no merit.
So yes, I do indeed call you a liar.
The Soviet and the Americans saved little Britain
Soviets and US joined in 1941 yet Normandy wasn’t until 1944, almost like it wasn’t won by those two alone
The Allied soldiers won the 2nd World War with their blood in both the Europe and Asia theatres; Churchill only numbed the masses with his rhetoric of Singapore - the impregnable fortress when in reality, the majority of the empire's resources were used in the European theatre instead. This was helped in no small part by the arrogance of the West in underestimating the Japanese. In the end, Southeast Asia, with the cohort of Australian, British, Indian and local soldiers (the Death Railway) as well as the ethnic Chinese civilians (the Sook Ching Massacre), were made to suffer greatly under the hands of the brutal Japanese. So much for his 'we shall fight / never surrender' speech; Churchill was a national hero but an international traitor.
Churchill was a typical tory, A WINDBAG.
Hush yourself hating on a legend
Sorry you can’t compare to the legend
Short lines because he was too drunk to say anything longer. None of these were heard by the public until the 1950’s. talk about re-writing history 🙄
german
“Evidence?! Where we’re going we don’t need evidence!”
Political speeches were often printed in full in daily newspapers the following day. Portions were sometimes read out by newsreaders. The full text was, of course, recorded in 'Hansard.' Nobody was re-writing anything.
Don't you like a drink?
The only thing that needs to be rewritten is your statement, try thanking the man who helped liberate Europe
How many times did he vote against the founding of the NHS? That shows his true character.
Nobody’s perfect
@@lambethc So that makes it OK?
@@mercomania It was a perfectly valid position to take, of course it was OK.
@@CB-fz3li I bet your glad he and the Tory´s lost that vote, otherwise your parents may not have been able to pay for your birth.
@@mercomania i bet your glad your not speaking German and living under a fascist regime
Just by lieing!
Speaking like a madlad*
Murderer of 30 million Indians in Bengal famine
You have an odd way of thanking him. Try something like “I admire you rallying the allies to liberate Europe”
He didnt do that
I wish I knew what you’re smoking. Did you pull that number out of your arse?
@@Sleeponacouch he didn’t, he ended the famine though
We will fight them on the beaches, only time he was near a beach was on his holidays.
Churchill landed on Normandy less than a month after D-Day…
you'd love it if germany had won.
Bitter?
And you seem like the kind of guy who would have dodged the draft
He almost was killed tons of times during the war, he was almost bombarded by artillery while visiting Normandy
He was a conman, same as all Tories.
An extremely drunk one
He was better than all of us combined
If it wasn't for the yanks, britain would be speaking German now.
Grow up.
And if Britain hadn’t kept them at bay for almost two years until the Yanks finally decided to get their hands dirty, everybody would have to know German now.
and they made a furtune
@@robertpearson8798 Kept them at bay|??? The drunk did nothing more than to save his own island. It was insignificant compared to where the intensity of fighting was present, the eastern front.
@@msreviews5576 'Save his own island' was quite an achievement. Presumably you aren't able to grasp the obvious fact that a nation with a smallish population, which has the largest navy on earth, cannot also have a large army. Britain was never a major land power.
Churchill couldn't win a raffle.
Done more than you in life so
And you would have to hoped to dodge the draft