(One of a series of weekday posts on the life of Winston S. Churchill.)
Historian Manfred Weidhorn observed:
In the early 1910s, [Churchill] was the civilian head of the Navy. During the diplomatic crisis of August 1914 that led to the beginning of hostilities, he on his own initiative sent the British fleet to its war stations. When war broke out in a few days, the Navy, as Lord Kitchener complimented Churchill, "was ready."Well, there you are. Historians Weidhorn and Churchill are agreed on the matter.
Writing in September 1916 on his daring action two years earlier, Churchill remarked that if, instead of war breaking out, peace had been maintained (as it had indeed been during several war scares in preceding years), he would have been accused of endangering the peace, of acting in excess of his authority, of increasing the nation’s financial liabilities, and of losing his head. He might well have been sacked.
Nothing,[Churchill] concluded, is sooner forgotten than preparation for a danger successfully guarded against.
What about you?
The full text of Weidhorn’s remarks is here.
Hat tip: The Chruchill Centre
2 comments:
see my an anatomy of skepticism--manfred weidhorn
PS Let me clarify. If you enjoyed seeing how skepticism fuels the observations of Churchill, see my newly published AN ANATOMY OF SKEPTICISM [bn.com], esp., for political junkies and conservative/liberal ideologues, Part II on history and politics.
Manfred Weidhorn, professor and author of 4 books on Churchill.
Post a Comment