if chambelm was p/minster of england and not churchill
do u think hitler would of beaten england?
Yes, if only because that would mean the Alien Space Bats were on the side of the Germans. Chamberlain had a cat in hell’s chance of political survival after the fiasco of Norway (and even if he had survived longer, he wouldn’t have withstood the loss of France as well), and in any case he died of Cancer in November 1940 - during the Blitz and only just at the end of the Battle of Britain.
Now, if you were to ask what would have happened if Lord Halifax had taken over instead of Churchill, things start to become rather interesting…
Dude, are you starting a thread? or r u text messaging? 
I thought I heard something of this on NPR:
Lord Halifax tried to negotiate peace with the Nazis
Lord Halifax, Britain’s Foreign Secretary at the outbreak of the Second World War, secretly met with an Old Etonian who tried to broker a peace deal with the Nazis, according to newly-declassified security files.By Chris Hastings, Public Affairs Editor
Last Updated: 2:05AM BST 31 Aug 2008
A still of Adolf Hitler from one of the many Nazi Propaganda films sent to Pathe in the 30’s but never actually edited into the newsreel
Lord Halifax, who met Hitler [pictured] in 1937, was criticised for being too close to the cause of appeasement Photo: PAThe files reveal that shortly after the outbreak of war Halifax helped with the travel arrangements of John Lonsdale Bryans, who believed he could bring down Hitler by making contact with prominent anti-Nazi Germans including Ulrich von Hassell, the former German ambassador in Rome.
Initially Lonsdale Bryans thought he could drum up support for an anti-Nazi coup in Germany. But he subsequently changed tactic and tried to contact Adolf Hitler in a bid to negotiate a peace.
The disclosure that the Foreign Secretary had such close links with someone trying to contact Hitler during wartime will reignite the debate about his own beliefs.
Halifax, who met Hitler in 1937, was criticised for being too close to the cause of appeasement. Shortly after Churchill took over as Prime Minister in 1940 he was moved from the Foreign Office to the British Embassy in Washington.
The documents reveal that Halifax met Lonsdale Bryans, personally helped with his travel arrangements and even accepted intelligence reports from him.
A letter in the files from the passport office to Captain WS Mars, dated January 9, 1940, states: “The permit granted on the 8th was given at the request of Mr CGS Stevenson, the Private Secretary to Lord Halifax, who telephoned to say that the Secretary of State wished that all possible facilities should be granted to Mr Bryans.”
More details of Lord Halifax’s involvement are contained in a internal note for the Ministry of Information dated October 19, 1945.
Its states: “Lonsdale Bryans met Lord Halifax on 25 August 1939. That he should travel to Europe to make contact with enemy groups opposed to Hitler. Lord Halifax is reputed to have said that Britain would not fight for Danzig and the [Polish] corridor and later to have minuted that he was impressed by the proposal.”
Security officials stumbled upon the mission by accident when they arrested an associate of Lonsdale Bryans called Anderson who had letters from the old Etonian on his person.
A note connected with an interrogation of Anderson states: “The main point which seemed to emerge from the interrogation was that according to Anderson, Lonsdale Bryans was a personal friend of Lord Brocket and also claimed to be something in the nature of an unofficial envoy of Lord Halifax. He wished to see Hitler and with this in view had asked Anderson to get in touch with a certain Stahmer that Bryans would be vouched by a number of persons including those on the list.”
On December 13, 1940, MI5 contacted Sir Alexander Codogan, the Permanent Under Secretary of State at the Foreign Office, to provide further details of the arrest and to disclose what the service had learned about Lonsdale Bryans from his associate.
The MI5 note states: "With reference to our conversation yesterday afternoon with regard to the case of John Lonsdale Bryans, I attach a copy of a letter which this individual wrote to the Director of the Schwartzhaupter Verlay, Leipzig, evidently offering to make a trip to Germany for the purpose of an audience with the Fuhrer.
“In writing this letter Bryans has of course been guilty of an offence under the Defence Regulations (DR4A) in the he has attempted to communicate with the enemy, but I certainly agree with your view that in the circumstances of the case the suggestion that we should request the Admiralty to intercept the Portuguese vessel on which Bryans is now travelling from Funchal to Lisbon is not practical.”
Sir Alexander agrees that given the Foreign Office’s involvement the idea of an arrest is out of the question. On 7th April 1941 he wrote: "Although there seems to be a good deal to be said for locking him up to prevent him airing his views to all and sundry, I understand that if this is done it will inevitably involve him bringing up the question of his contacts with the Foreign Office and the facilities offered to him to get into Italy.
“In the circumstances we feel that he might be left at large though of course be strictly watched.”
The Foreign Office seems to have spent the rest of the war worried that Lonsdale Bryans will reveal the mission to the outside world.
One Foreign Office note from the period states: “Bryans is becoming desperately short of money and although no mischief has been done so far, I anticipate the possibility that he might try to sell his story the press. It occurs to me that it might be a good idea to warn Lonsdale Bryans as seriously and solemly as possible that he should not go on telling people of how he contacted the Germans.”
An MI5 official notes on 1 March 1944: “Bryans story would make sensational reading in the Daily Mirror.”
The Foreign Office provided its clearest explanation of events in a letter sent seven years after the end of the war, when the security services found out about plans by Lonsdale Bryans to write about his adventures.
In a letter dated 15 August, 1952, an official wrote: “The truth of the matter seems to be that Bryans managed, by importuning a number of influential people in the country, to get himself an interview with Lord Halifax and, by virtue of his Italian contacts, to arrange a meeting with von Hassell in Switzerland to discuss a possible revolution in Germany and peace terms. He brought back a paper which he gave to Sir Alexander Cadogan purporting to be set out von Hassell’s views. His did this off his own bat and was never set on any mission by Lord Halifax or employed by HMG in any capacity whatsoever, though Lord Halifax did see him and though his journeys to Switzerland and Italy were facilitated on two occasions, but solely to the extent then necessary to enable anyone to travel.”
The only reason Lord Halifax didn’t become Prime Minister is the fact he turned the job down, when it was offered to him by Chamberlain in May 1940.
Chamberlain then asked Churchill, who accepted the position.
Ummm… bit more complicated than that - there was something of a patchwork of supporters on both sides at work there.
The other aspect here is that there is reason to suspect an attempted cabinet coup in summer 1940 by Halifax and RAB Butler. I’ve not been able to verify this, but AIUI the minutes for that particular cabinet meeting are under the 100 year rule. That opens up all sorts of fascinating possibilities - notably an Armistice between the UK and Germany in around July 1940…
hey im not a dude im a dudet [female]
im use 2 face book sorry
I heard that the king asked Winston Churchill to be prime-minister.
The king knew that Chamberlain was too weak too go against Hitler.
Maybe Lord Halifax was pressured not to take the job by the king, since the king had his sight on Winston Churchill.
More likely the other way around - Halifax was generally thought highly of by the King, while Churchill was generally thought of as a bit of a wild adventurer.
I’ll clear this one up…
QUOTE…
"Chamberlain, having hung on for so long, finally went to Buckingham Palace to tender his resignation to King George VI. Under the British Constitution it is technically the King who appoints the Prime Minister, and invites him to form a government, although the monarch invariably discusses the appointment with the outgoing First minister. On this occassion, King George suggested HALIFAX, who he thought was [COLOR=“Blue”]“the obvious man”.
Chamberlain, however, explained the obstacle, and recommended CHURCHILL.
Of all the countries in the world it is probable that only Great Britain, at war for eight months and facing real peril of German armed aggression in nearby countries, could allow the one man favoured by the King to be barred from leading the nation by the circumstances of his birth. The King, in fact, would have been happy to set aside Halifax’s peerage and let him do the job. But no, a commoner it had to be and there was only one choice. Ironically, Churchill also was a member of an old aritocratic family, was in fact the grandson of a Duke (Marlborough…he was born in Blenheim Palace…B5N2Kate), and was only by a bare margin spared the inconvenience of being born to a peerage. Whether Halifax would have made a better PM than Churchill is impossible to judge, but Churchill it was whom the British nation were to get as a leader, and at 6 o’clock that night he was called to the Palace.
The King, indulging himself for a few moments in an innocent private joke said:[/COLOR] “I suppose you don’t know why I have sent for you?”
Churchill played him along, briefly…“Sir, I simply couldn’t imagine why.”
The King laughed and told him; “I want to ask you to form a government…”
Thus, the most influential politician of the 20th century rose to the only Cabinet post that he had NOT occupied in all the years of his political career…
“…as I went to bed at about 3AM I was conscious of a profound sence of relief. At last I had the authority to give directions over the whole scene. I felt as if I were walking with destiny, and that all my past life had been but a preparation for this hour and for this trial. Ten years in the political wilderness had freed me from ordinary party antagonisms. My warnings over the last six years had been so numerous, so detailed, and were now so terribly vindicated, that no-one could gain-say me. I could not be reproached either for making the war or with want of preparation for it. I thought I knew a good deal about it all, and I was sure I should not fail. Therefore, although impatient for the morning, I slept soundly and had no need for cheering dreams. Facts are better than dreams.”
CHURCHILL…Page 46-47…David Mason…Purnell’s War Leader book No.9.
I didt think you guys knew what text messaging is:)
Yes finally,im half right on something.
I do use it. But I try to adapt my writing to each proper forum; as in this one is formal writing one must be capable of in producing as an essay in order to graduate. Please try it sometime!
Perhaps we should ask if Britain could have survived the German onslaught without the buffer than “piece in our time” provided…
Some revisionists consider it key as it delayed German aggression just enough to allow the RAF and the British civil defense to build up…
I just thought lower class people text,and people like youre selfs made mobile phone calls thats all i meant.
Yes we crusty old men know what a text is, I got one just the other month I think.
However, on this forum, you are expected to type in English to your best standards, use a spell checker and generally do your best. You dont have to be Shakespeare but you at least have to try to be fluid and construct sentences.
HaHa,thats funnie.
Yes i know got my head bitten off lol.
Im much better know,but its hard for me some times:cool: