Which was Churchill's biggest wartime blunder?

Strongbow

Banned
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?
 
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.
 
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.
 
Re: Churchill

melkor the first said:
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.
 
Strongbow said:
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
LeEnfield said:
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.
 
Ill be damed.......Funny I thought Chamberlain was the PM when war was declared against Hitler....Churchill took took over later along with a National Government.
 
I never knew that Churchill made any disparaging remarks about Australia. Churchill was very much a supporter of the Commonwealth and I can't see him going out of his way to upset an ally like Australia.
 
Churchill had a deep resentment for the Australians in WW2. Why was this?

I think the only reason he got pissed off with Australia was when we brought our troops home to the pacific after North Africa rather than having them head to Italy. They missed the horrible battles of Monte Casino for the horrible battles of Kokoda. What a choice!
 
Lord Londonderry said:
Churchill had a deep resentment for the Australians in WW2. Why was this?

From what source do you draw this statement? I have read his series on WW2 and several biographies of the man and have never seen anything other than a possible personal dislike of the Aussie PM of the time...
In his 6 volume set on the war he wrote very much in praise of the Austrailian soldiers throughout the series.
 
I can't see that Churchill would object to Australia moving there troops into the Pacific campaign, lets face it they stayed in North Africa until the Battle was won and were they fought with great courage. Also they were plugging gaps in lines fighting the Japanese that would other wise had to be filled by British Troops.
 
Also they were plugging gaps in lines fighting the Japanese that would other wise had to be filled by British Troops.

I can tell you, a lot of the battles were not a matter of choice. Without our Aussie soldiers back there would have been no British support. They were too busy in Burma. We had plenty to do to our north. PNG, Kokoda, Milne Bay, Balikpapan, Bouginville, The Solomon Islands, Tarakan, Borneo, New Britain, New Ireland, The Battle Of The Coral Sea etc etc. There were few if any British troops in this entire region, more US support, and it seemed that if the request was made for the Brits, they wouldn't be sent (not a criticism, they were well and truly busy with The Mediteranian and Europe at this time). So I'd hardly call it plugging gaps, it was mainly Australian fighting in the entire region (lower pacific islands and Indonesian archepelago), bar Guadalcanal which was a US affair.
 
Back
Top