Which was Churchill's biggest wartime blunder?




 
--
 
March 29th, 2005  
Strongbow
 
 

Topic: Which was Churchill's biggest wartime blunder?


In my opinion, our great wartime leader has made some terrible bloopers in war during his colourful political life. These have cost thousands of unnecessary deaths.

Which do people consider his worst? eg the Dardanelles campaign in WW1 or the Greece campaign in WW2? Are there others?

I nearly forgot the Norwegian campaign.

Did Churchill ever make excellent strategic military decisions that ever worked?
March 29th, 2005  
A Can of Man
 
 
It has to be that World War I disaster. Then again he wasn't alone in that war... the whole friggin' thing was a disaster before it started, when it started, while it ran, when it finished and AFTER it finished.
March 29th, 2005  
melkor the first
 

Topic: Churchill


The Dardenelles in WW1 was not a blunder by WC but by the tactical command- the blunders there are countless and a harbinger of British ineptness in Normandy. The Greek campaign was a blunder operationally but necessary strategically as it demonstrated that Great Britain was not going to back down from confrontation. WC's worst blunders were his inabilty to interest his allies in relieving Warsaw and a disasterous 1944-5 incursian I believe in the Aegean.
--
April 1st, 2005  
Young Winston
 
 

Topic: Re: Churchill


Quote:
Originally Posted by melkor the first
The Dardenelles in WW1 was not a blunder by WC but by the tactical command- the blunders there are countless and a harbinger of British ineptness in Normandy. The Greek campaign was a blunder operationally but necessary strategically as it demonstrated that Great Britain was not going to back down from confrontation. WC's worst blunders were his inabilty to interest his allies in relieving Warsaw and a disasterous 1944-5 incursian I believe in the Aegean.
Unfortunately, as well as getting a belting in Greece and then in Crete, the British lost all the positive momentum in North Africa at the time of the Greece decision.

No strategically it was a terrible decision by Churchill. I wish people would stop trying to cover up for him.
April 12th, 2005  
Mohmar Deathstrike
 
 

Topic: Re: Which was Churchill's biggest wartime blunder?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Strongbow
In my opinion, our great wartime leader has made some terrible bloopers in war during his colourful political life. These have cost thousands of unnecessary deaths.

Which do people consider his worst? eg the Dardanelles campaign in WW1 or the Greece campaign in WW2? Are there others?

I nearly forgot the Norwegian campaign.

Did Churchill ever make excellent strategic military decisions that ever worked?
If unecessary deaths are what constitutes a blunder then the bombings of German cities which killed millions of non-combatants were his biggest blunders.
April 13th, 2005  
Lord Londonderry
 
Gallipoli is my pick.

Initially not a bad idea but terrible planning.

Kitchener has to take alot of the blame as well. Hamilton was unsuitable for the job.
April 18th, 2005  
MontyB
 
 
I will try a different tack and say his support for the area bombing of Dresden at the end of WW2.

Lets face it at that stage of the war the Germans were not going to make a comeback and Dresden was not a major military target so while Air Marshall Harris may have planned the attack Churchill as both prime minister and minister of defence has to take ultimate responsibility for it.
July 25th, 2005  
LeEnfield
 
 
Yes the Dardanelles was Churchill's idea and the General Idea was a good one, the problems that arose where most of the Military Planners thought the real war was being fought on the western front. The General that was put in charge had never commanded much more than a desk, he was refused his list of Generals for his staff, but they the same ones were called in to get them out of this mess. Security was at a low level and every one that was any one knew that this action would take place and know doubt that this information had been passed on to Turkey. The troops did not have full level of Naval Support or artillery support that was required for action of this size, as all the guns were being sent to western front. Like many other thing the whole action is full of ifs and we will never really know just would of happened with better planning and equipment. The one thing you can't fault is the soldiers bravery.
July 27th, 2005  
LeEnfield
 
 
Now it is very easy to pick out items from history and blame some one, in my humble opinion Churchill had a great grasp of what was required to win a war but not always the means to do it with, so things got half done which then turned into a mess. I think one of these that Churchill went for and failed was the sending of British and Australian troops to Greece and Crete in 41/42. Now these troops were soon overwhelmed and had to be evacuated from these places and again like Dunkirk with the loss of their heavy equipment. I can't but wonder just what would;d happen if he had left these troops in North Africa under Wavell to finish the Italians on this campaign. If they had been successful in this then there would have been a large number of battles that would have never been fought. Wavell had all ready captured a vast amount of prisoners and territory and if things had been pushed ahead rather than stripping all his forces for Crete and Greece just who knows what would have happened.
July 29th, 2005  
Strongbow
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeEnfield
Now it is very easy to pick out items from history and blame some one, in my humble opinion Churchill had a great grasp of what was required to win a war but not always the means to do it with, so things got half done which then turned into a mess. I think one of these that Churchill went for and failed was the sending of British and Australian troops to Greece and Crete in 41/42. Now these troops were soon overwhelmed and had to be evacuated from these places and again like Dunkirk with the loss of their heavy equipment. I can't but wonder just what would;d happen if he had left these troops in North Africa under Wavell to finish the Italians on this campaign. If they had been successful in this then there would have been a large number of battles that would have never been fought. Wavell had all ready captured a vast amount of prisoners and territory and if things had been pushed ahead rather than stripping all his forces for Crete and Greece just who knows what would have happened.
I agree with you 100% LeEnfield. I wish we had more of your type on this forum.