Would Halifax have been a better PM than Churchill?

MontyB

All-Blacks Supporter
Halifax in my opinion was more of a pragmatist and far less of a dreamer than Churchill.
Halifax was pro-appeasement in terms of the occupation of the Rhineland and Austria but he wanted to support Czechoslovakia and seemed happy to go to war over Poland.

Further to this he was prepared to at least listen to German peace overtures in 1939-40 but there seems little chance he would have sued for peace had no equitable one been offered by Germany indicated by this quote to the American President...

'If necessary, we shall continue the war alone and we are not afraid of that. But I trust you realise, Mr President, that the voice and force of the United States may count for nothing if they are withheld too long.' - 15 May 1940:

Just another hypothetical question...
 
My personal opinion is that Churchill was the better man, he didn't trust Hitler as far as he could throw him. Churchill warned parliament many times that was was imminent, as history shows he was ignored and branded a war monger.

Again if I remember correctly, FDR thought Britain was finished thanks to Joe Kennedy and another bloke (I can't remember his name off hand), FDR initially approached the Canadian PM regarding some sort of treaty for mutual protection. William Lyon Mackenzie King stated that his loyalties laid with Britain.

Churchill was convinced that the only way he could get FDR to back Britain, was to show him that Britain would not roll over easily and meant business. The attack on the French Fleet showed that Churchill was serious. If I remember correctly FDR stated "Churchill might be a drunk and a war monger, but he's a fighter."

I don't think Halifax would have the courage to do what Churchill did.

Churchill at the closing days of the war in Europe warned the world of the intentions of the Soviet Union. Churchill didn't trust Stalin either. Again he was ignored until it was too late.

Again, my opinion for what its worth, one of the reasons behind Churchill's downfall at the end of WW2 was his determination to prevent the National Health Service and Welfare State being brought into being. Britain's poor and working class often couldn't afford medical treatment and suffered because of it.

As I have said before, Churchill was the right man at the right time.
 
Last edited:
All great people of history succeed and fail. But the impact of great peoples' successes outweigh those of their failures, and Churchill is no different. As a statesman and leader with a keen eye for strategic opportunity, even though not all his plans and ideas were successful, he at least understood that the key to Britain's ability to exert political and diplomatic leverage on the global stage, and military power when required, was derived from Britain's maritime power.

Alliances were made and decisions taken that ensured the UK survived and then was able to contribute to an Allied victory. Eastern Europe was in the Soviet sphere of influence the second Russian tanks drove through it. That Greece did not go the same way might be seen as a plus in the Churchill story from a historical perspective. Churchill was a flawed hero! But what hero does not have flaws?
 
My personal opinion is that Churchill was the better man, he didn't trust Hitler as far as he could throw him. Churchill warned parliament many times that was was imminent, as history shows he was ignored and branded a war monger.

Again if I remember correctly, FDR thought Britain was finished thanks to Joe Kennedy and another bloke (I can't remember his name off hand), FDR initially approached the Canadian PM regarding some sort of treaty for mutual protection. William Lyon Mackenzie King stated that his loyalties laid with Britain.

Churchill was convinced that the only way he could get FDR to back Britain, was to show him that Britain would not roll over easily and meant business. The attack on the French Fleet showed that Churchill was serious. If I remember correctly FDR stated "Churchill might be a drunk and a war monger, but he's a fighter."

I don't think Halifax would have the courage to do what Churchill did.

Churchill at the closing days of the war in Europe warned the world of the intentions of the Soviet Union. Churchill didn't trust Stalin either. Again he was ignored until it was too late.

Again, my opinion for what its worth, one of the reasons behind Churchill's downfall at the end of WW2 was his determination to prevent the National Health Service and Welfare State being brought into being. Britain's poor and working class often couldn't afford medical treatment and suffered because of it.

As I have said before, Churchill was the right man at the right time.

In part I agree but there is also a part of me that thinks Churchill's intransigence exasperated the problem, the fact that he did not trust Hitler (rightly or wrongly) mean't that there was no other option but war, you could argue that he was right about Stalin (and there is no argument that he was a paranoid megalomaniac) as well but history shows that many of the Russian actions post war were more through paranoia than agression.

Basically I think in many ways Churchill painted himself into a corner and then just happened to have a can of paint remover with him to facilitate the escape.

I am not sure on this one (and reality is we will never know) but I am inclined to believe Halifax may have proved to be just as effective if not more so especially in the earlier years of the war.
 
Last edited:
From another POV:Halifax had no enemies (maybe,because he had no convictions? :he was an appeaser when the appeasers dominated,partisan of the war to the end,when Churchill was PM),he was trimming his sails according to the wind ,well,a politician .He was liked by Labour,he was the darling of the establishment.
and, Churchill:would it be an exageration to say that,before the war, he was detested by every one ?
And,Chamberlain :would it not be a good description to say that he was stubborn,with convictions ?
Whatever,about Halifax as PM during the war :I doubt that he would last ,because
1)while Chamberlain was keeping Winston on his place,I doubt that Halifax could do this
2)Chamberlain had the unconditional support of the Tories (majority in the Commons),but,it is not certain that this support would be inherited by Halifax:till the death of Chamberlain,Britain had in fact 2 PM's:Churchill and Chamberlain,but,after november 1940,the Chamberlainites became Churchillians,and, Halifax ? He was exiled to Washington(inimaginable while Chamberlain was there),and,no Tory protested .
 
If Halifax became PM, Churchill would have effectively become the Minister of Defence: steps like this had begun before 10 May with his chairing of the Defence Committee. Halifax as PM would leave Churchill as the most prominent Minister in the House of Commons, and the one increasingly running the war effort - a job Halifax admitted he was not best fitted for. So, even if Winnie doesn't become PM in May 1940, he would still be all but PM in effect.
 
If Halifax became PM, Churchill would have effectively become the Minister of Defence: steps like this had begun before 10 May with his chairing of the Defence Committee. Halifax as PM would leave Churchill as the most prominent Minister in the House of Commons, and the one increasingly running the war effort - a job Halifax admitted he was not best fitted for. So, even if Winnie doesn't become PM in May 1940, he would still be all but PM in effect.

I agree, Churchill was in my opinion made of sterner stuff and more willing to take chances. I believe Halifax was more suited to his job as ambassador to the US. I don't see Halifax visiting the front lines on North Africa or Europe as Churchill did. Churchill's I believe helped boost the morale of British troops and the people at home.
 
If Halifax became PM, Churchill would have effectively become the Minister of Defence: steps like this had begun before 10 May with his chairing of the Defence Committee. Halifax as PM would leave Churchill as the most prominent Minister in the House of Commons, and the one increasingly running the war effort - a job Halifax admitted he was not best fitted for. So, even if Winnie doesn't become PM in May 1940, he would still be all but PM in effect.

Yes but with the failures of the war in the early days the role of Minister of Defence may well have been a poisoned chalice.

I would also argue that Halifax was an "appeaser" only when he believed that appeasement would work, he was for appeasement in both the Rhineland which was German territory anyway and Austria as long as it was peaceful but he was far from an appeaser over Czechoslovakia and pushed for military support for the Czechs and more or less told Germany they would go to war over Poland.
 
Halifax had come to realised that appeasement had failed during the meetings at Munich over the Sudetenland, it was Chamberlain who pushed for the agreement. Some may think that Lord Halifax "might" have dealt with Hitler if he had been appointed PM after Chamberlain stepped down in early 1940, but it appears that he had taken himself "out of consideration" for the post and by July at least had completely abandoned any idea that peace could be made with the Nazis or the Fascists.

As Lord Halifax broadcast Britain's answer to the world, Monday, Jul. 29, 1940 in response to Hitler’s speech asking the British to come to terms with Germany and "save themselves" from the horrors of war, his voice was deep, full of religious feeling, hollow and lonely as an empty church. It was not a voice to inspire fury, but it did instill hope, a sense of justice, a calmness of conscience.

"Hitler has now made it plain that he is preparing to direct the whole weight of German might against this country. This is why in every part of Britain, in great towns and villages alike, there is only one spirit of indomitable resolution. Nor has anyone any doubt that if Hitler were to succeed it would be the end, for many besides ourselves, of all those things which, as we say, make life worth living. We realize that the struggle may cost us everything, but just because the things we are defending are worth any sacrifice it is a noble privilege to be the defenders of things so precious. . . .

"We shall not stop fighting until freedom, for ourselves and others, is secure.. ..

"Where will God lead us? Not, we may be sure, through easy or pleasant paths. That is not His way. He will not help us to avoid our difficulties. What He will do is to give to those, who humbly ask, the spirit that no dangers can disturb. . . ."

I certainly could be incorrect here, but his (Halifax's) own words seem to belie any thought of making a deal with Hitler because, now it was too late...That had not stopped him from trying to reach a so called compromise though and that is something I for one will never rise in his defence for. While Churchill was doing his utmost to rally the nation he and others of like ilk if not seditious....were trying to reach a compromise with the very nation that Chruchill was rallying the nation, its tropps and his fellow mp's to see his view over the appeasers that were still operating even as late as June 1940...Halifax, Hoare and Butler being some pretty big proponents at a negotiated peace still even at that stage.

And then he was gone....Ambassador to the USA. Again Churchill at his best...
 
Yes but with the failures of the war in the early days the role of Minister of Defence may well have been a poisoned chalice.

I would also argue that Halifax was an "appeaser" only when he believed that appeasement would work, he was for appeasement in both the Rhineland which was German territory anyway and Austria as long as it was peaceful but he was far from an appeaser over Czechoslovakia and pushed for military support for the Czechs and more or less told Germany they would go to war over Poland.

Hitler knew Chamberlain was an appeaser and used that to his advantage during the Munich crisis, more or less forcing and brow beating Chamberlain into accepting the the German invasion of Czechoslovakia. I in all honesty believe, rightly or wrongly, that had Halifax been PM during the Munich crisis the end result would be the same at the end of the day. Hitler without a doubt knew Halifax's weaknesses including his appeasement attitude, Hitler admitted that the only man in Britain that worried him was Churchill.

My own experiences in life have proven to me that appeasement never works with bullies, they do not like a "Stuff you, get in your face attitude," which Churchill had.

If I remember correctly Churchill once said, "Jaw Jaw Jaw is better then War, War, War...................so say the appeasers."
 
Britin, I totally agree with you.

The appeasers, led by Chamberlain, seemed totally unaware that Hitler's plans, blueprinted in Mien Kampf, were now emerging in frightening reality. The appeasers sat idle in their ignorant hope that Hitler would eventually stop. What they did not understand was Hitler's aim and that standing idle and watching would not help stop him. Churchill was basically alone in his stand against appeasement.

"One pound was demanded at the pistol's point. When it was given, two pounds were demanded at the pistol's point. Finally, the dictator consented to take one pound, 17 shillings and sixpence, and the rest in promises of good will for the future."

Churchill made this remark while speaking to the House after the Munich Agreement had been signed and Germany was allowed to take the Sudetenland from Czechoslovakia. For Churchill, this was the last straw. He understood that Hitler pushed Chamberlain.

Hitler's aggressive and unchecked actions led Churchill to say, "There can never be absolute certainty that there will be a fight if one side is determined that it will give way completely. I always held the view that the maintenance of peace depends upon the accumulation of deterrents against the aggressor"

Instead of creating peace, appeasement encouraged war: if Hitler was never challenged in his aggression, why would he stop aggressing?

The leadership and determination seen in Churchill well before the war started gave strength to the British people and without this courage the war would have been over at the Battle of Britain. Churchill's leadership in creating the Grand Alliance and determination the entire war secured the British and all free people a victory over the Nazi empire.

He was the lion who roared when the British Empire needed him most.
 
Hitler knew Chamberlain was an appeaser and used that to his advantage during the Munich crisis, more or less forcing and brow beating Chamberlain into accepting the the German invasion of Czechoslovakia. I in all honesty believe, rightly or wrongly, that had Halifax been PM during the Munich crisis the end result would be the same at the end of the day. Hitler without a doubt knew Halifax's weaknesses including his appeasement attitude, Hitler admitted that the only man in Britain that worried him was Churchill.

My own experiences in life have proven to me that appeasement never works with bullies, they do not like a "Stuff you, get in your face attitude," which Churchill had.

If I remember correctly Churchill once said, "Jaw Jaw Jaw is better then War, War, War...................so say the appeasers."

I think Hitler's view of Halifax was misguided then, Halifax while not enthusiastic about rearmament firmly supported it, he did not support the Munich agreement and on march 31st 1939 gave Poland its guarantee with the statement "There will be no more Munich's" and to back this up he was behind the rejection of German peace offers through the Papacy, Portugal and Finland in mid 1940.

There is no doubt that he was tainted with Chamberlains appeasement policies but I would suggest his actions were hardly the actions of an appeaser but rather a pragmatic politician.
 
Britin, I totally agree with you.

The appeasers, led by Chamberlain, seemed totally unaware that Hitler's plans, blueprinted in Mien Kampf, were now emerging in frightening reality. The appeasers sat idle in their ignorant hope that Hitler would eventually stop. What they did not understand was Hitler's aim and that standing idle and watching would not help stop him. Churchill was basically alone in his stand against appeasement.

"One pound was demanded at the pistol's point. When it was given, two pounds were demanded at the pistol's point. Finally, the dictator consented to take one pound, 17 shillings and sixpence, and the rest in promises of good will for the future."

Churchill made this remark while speaking to the House after the Munich Agreement had been signed and Germany was allowed to take the Sudetenland from Czechoslovakia. For Churchill, this was the last straw. He understood that Hitler pushed Chamberlain.

Hitler's aggressive and unchecked actions led Churchill to say, "There can never be absolute certainty that there will be a fight if one side is determined that it will give way completely. I always held the view that the maintenance of peace depends upon the accumulation of deterrents against the aggressor"

Instead of creating peace, appeasement encouraged war: if Hitler was never challenged in his aggression, why would he stop aggressing?

The leadership and determination seen in Churchill well before the war started gave strength to the British people and without this courage the war would have been over at the Battle of Britain. Churchill's leadership in creating the Grand Alliance and determination the entire war secured the British and all free people a victory over the Nazi empire.

He was the lion who roared when the British Empire needed him most.
Seehund:I totally disagree with you
You are ignoring the following
1)Peace or War in 1938 did not depend on Britain:Britain had no army,it was disarmed.
2)This was caused because all British governments since 1919 had decided that Britain would disarm and avoid any involvement with what happened on the continent (the 10 years rule)
3) Between 1924 and 1929,there was a Chancellor of the Exchequer who wanted to keep the military budget as low as possible ;you know who ? Winston Churchill:he was co-responsible for the situation of the British forces in 1938
4)Any increase(between 1931-1938) of the offensive capabilities of the British forces would result in losing the elections .The taxpayer (=the voter) accepted to pay more taxes for the defense of Britain,NOT to send again a BEF to defend the Czechs .
5)In 1938,Churchill was detested by every one and considered by a lot of people as a war monger and a crypto fascist.
6)In the Sudeten crisis,Britain had no moral reason to intervene,unless its POV was that the Sudeten Germans had no right to secede from Czechoslowakia and that the selfdetermination of the peoples did not apply to the Sudeten Germans .
7)Britain also had NO obligation to help the Czechs
8)The result (Munchen) did not endanger Britain,nor France .One can argue that it was bad for the Czechs,but that was not the business of Britain .
 
I think Hitler's view of Halifax was misguided then, Halifax while not enthusiastic about rearmament firmly supported it, he did not support the Munich agreement and on march 31st 1939 gave Poland its guarantee with the statement "There will be no more Munich's" and to back this up he was behind the rejection of German peace offers through the Papacy, Portugal and Finland in mid 1940.

There is no doubt that he was tainted with Chamberlains appeasement policies but I would suggest his actions were hardly the actions of an appeaser but rather a pragmatic politician.

If Halifax had been PM and refused to support the Munich agreement, could war have been declared earlier then September or even delayed beyond September. To be honest, I have no idea.

In my opinion German offers of peace were no more then smoke and mirrors to avoid conflict with Britain, thereby giving Hitler a free hand in Europe. I believe Halifax was aware of this, and so was Chamberlain finally.
 
He was the model aristocratic conservative, concerned more with pragmatic solutions than theoretical concerns. His early views on Hitler and National Socialism were terrifyingly naïve and misguided, but by May 1940 Halifax could not ignore the dangers that Hitler presented. Still, he fought to the end for a diplomatic solution, which he thought could be achieved by appeal to Mussolini. In his retirement Lord Halifax wrote his memoirs, Fulness of Days (1957) where he attempted to defend the policy of appeasement.
 
Seehund:I totally disagree with you
LOL, Well IIjadw, I would be surprised if you had the same view as me.

IMHO He was one of the great statesmen of world history. Often satirized as a bulldog, Churchill’s far-sightedness, toughness, tenacity, courage and will to win despite the odds, enlisted support at home and abroad. The mere sight of him, with the characteristic Cuban cigar in his mouth and two fingers raised in the “V for victory” sign, encouraged the population. He was John Bull, a British mythical character and the symbol of the common people, come to life.

But we have different perceptions of world history - I can see ;)
 
Well,you are avoiding the discussion by using a strawman(=Churchill as war leader),but,this is of topic :we are discussing the prewar period:during this period,the majority of the British people supported appeasement (as well as the majority of the politicians,as ..Eden;-)),and refused to follow Churchill .One of the reasons was that Churchill had a bad image (rightfully or wrongfully).
For Labour,he was the man who used the army against the miners.
He also said several ...unwise things,as abolishing general suffrage,he was a well known admiror of Mussolini,there was his opposition to more autonomy for India, his disastrous attitude during the constitutional crisis,his attempts to unseat Baldwin as leader of the Tories,he had the image of a war lover...
 
Well,you are avoiding the discussion by using a strawman(=Churchill as war leader),but,this is of topic :we are discussing the prewar period:during this period,the majority of the British people supported appeasement (as well as the majority of the politicians,as ..Eden;-)),and refused to follow Churchill .One of the reasons was that Churchill had a bad image (rightfully or wrongfully).
For Labour,he was the man who used the army against the miners.
He also said several ...unwise things,as abolishing general suffrage,he was a well known admiror of Mussolini,there was his opposition to more autonomy for India, his disastrous attitude during the constitutional crisis,his attempts to unseat Baldwin as leader of the Tories,he had the image of a war lover...

Churchill became Prime Minister during WWII, not before. I don't know much about Halifax so I can't answer the topic question but in my opinion Churchill was the right man at the right place at the right time. What Eisenhower did for the allies militarily, Churchill did politically.
 
History came close to being quite diffrent. While 1st Sea Lord he was onboard a Battleship that was hit by @ least 1 torpedo that failed to detonate. Considering the habit of British Battleships blowing up....
 
Back
Top