DBWI: Churchill as PM in WWII

Suppose that Winston Churchill had been Prime Minister of the UK in World War II. What effect would he have had on the war, and on the world we live in today?
 
What's the POD for this?

Well, he lives past 1938, obviously. I'd guess he gets in instead of Halifax following Chamberlain's death?

As for differences: during the war, not much; he was a good orator, but it's hard to orate people up from fighting on to the end. The Soviets and the Allies eventually grind the Third Reich to powder, as OTL.

The postwar world - well, that's where the fun starts. I don't know that much about Churchill to say what his postwar policies would be. Hanging on to the colonies to the bitter end, I guess?

OOC: Actually, I don't know that much about Halifax. Suggestions?
 
Last edited:

mowque

Banned
As for differences: during the war, not much; he was a good orator, but it's hard to orate people up from fighting on to the end. The Soviets and the Allies eventually grind the Third Reich to powder, as OTL.

Did i study a different WW2 then you? I seem to remember England being far from 'fighting to the end'...:rolleyes:
 
Did i study a different WW2 then you? I seem to remember England being far from 'fighting to the end'...:rolleyes:

OOC: Apart from the fact that first post goes, yeah. Halifax may have been a wuss but he wasn't an idiot coward. The consensus, IIRC, (and before that thread got hijacked) is that trusting Hitler was out by 1940 and in any event there was no real common ground for terms.
 
The only way you could end up with Churchill as PM, especially during World War II, would be to set the PoD far enough back to remove his involvement in the Gallipoli campaign; that more than anything else would have killed his chances of ever beign accepted as a war leader by the British public. After his role in bringing back the gold standard during his stint as Chancellor of the Exchequer he was politically dead and was basically tossed out of his own party; it's no surprise he finally committed suicide in 1938 considering his history of depression and the fact that his political career had been nothing but an unmitigated string of disasters.

As for Churchill as PM ... he'd kill the economy, waste the military in some mad scheme, and we'd all be singing the Horst Wessel song if he were in charge of Britain in World War II.
 

JohnJacques

Banned
As I understand it, he was an alcoholic. Combine that with his overbearing manner and well..... you have someone who will end up losing the war.
 
And we here in the US would have been in a Cold War against the Nazis and maybe even the Soviets too.
 

Anaxagoras

Banned
it's no surprise he finally committed suicide in 1938 considering his history of depression and the fact that his political career had been nothing but an unmitigated string of disasters.

Some biographers suggest that he fell off the station platform, rather than jumped. It might be more dramatic to suggest that he killed himself, but there's no way to prove it one way or the other.

As far as Churchill as a war leader, it's hard to tell. You have the disaster of the Gallipoli Campaign, but it could be argued that it was a good plan ruined by faulty execution. And whatever else you say about him- the Royal Navy was ready for war in 1914, and this was largely his doing.

He certainly had some sound military ideas. The invention of the tank was largely due to his support, and he also favored far-sighted innovations in terms of air power.
 
It would depend when he got in, Chamberlians correct assesment of the Nazi systems economic desperation that led to the policy of defence on the western front with the blockade doing the real damage can't be faulted, churchill was naturally impetuous and I'ld be worried that he'ld make the western cold war hot far too quickly. The only way Chamberlains plans could really have failed in this respect is if France and her resources had fallen to the Germans in a stupidly short time, the Germans lack of bulletts and fuel wasn't that obvious at the time, the fact Chamberlian realised this is part of his genius.
If Churchill had replaced Chamberlain after his death rather than Halifax then the capacity to do damage would have been greatly lessened, I'ld worry that his weird fascination with "the soft underbelly" of Europe would hold over from WW1, (I still find the idea that the 39-41 war was somehow a 2nd world war odd, you can't really compare the Nazi house of cards to the Kaisers war machine but that argument appears to have been lost) the man has obviouslt never visited Southern Italy or Croatia. The other overriding concern with Churchill is his antagonism to the Soviets, their neutrality could have been compromised by his bull headedness and Nazi-Soviet pact that lasted longer than the memorandum of understandign could have had terrible consequences, no large defence resources tied up to cover the East and the worry of unblockable trade. No I think history can be pleased that Churchill never reached power.

OOC Point of departure no Nazi Soviet Pact.
Why is Halifax always seen as a terrible option? To many people buy into Churchills self mythologising.
 
Just jumping in here, but one word. Gallipoli. Make that man PM and we'll see Gallipoli repeated ad infinitum. Don't get me wrong, he was a fine Sea Lord, but don't let the adventurer touch an army.
 
Epping...

I thought it was the decision of the Conservative party to de-select him as MP for Epping that was the motivation for his suicide.

I think his widow Clementine said he couldn't bear the thought of life outside the House of Commons.
 
I thought it was the decision of the Conservative party to de-select him as MP for Epping that was the motivation for his suicide.

I think his widow Clementine said he couldn't bear the thought of life outside the House of Commons.
Yes, most historians say that it was the utter destruction of his political career that drove him to suicide, though a history of depression and the fact he had started drinking heavily didn't help.

Anaxagoras had a fair point that Churchill did make several good decisions at times and some of his failures were arguably not his fault, but if nothing else popular perception put the blame on him and there's no way the public or other politicians would have accepted him as a war leader.
 
Top