Dec 1st 1944: Winston Churchill shoot by british Nazi

and we Birtish cant be bothered to spell properlee thats for forigners:p
[rant/]yes, and picking on people for not being the best speller in the world. some thing else we are known for, as well as racial intolerance and petty yobbism. it makes me sick to be british sometimes, it truly does,:mad::mad::mad:youth<mither, mither>:mad::mad::mad: back in my day<mither mither>:mad::mad::mad:grihygijuhvcjrf,jmhsjdfg...:mad:[/rant]:rolleyes::p;)
 
During the break of the concert at the Royal Albert Hall. PM Winston Churchill is shoot and killed by a british nazi dressed as a waitor.

Will this effect the end of war anyway?

Nope, but Churchill would be even more revered and regarded and the conservatives will probably do better than otl in the subsequent election.
 
Gallipoli has already been (practically) forgotten by the British Public, as has the secretary abuse, and the stuttering, while the Drunkenness has become like the cigars, part of his image (take the famous 'Mr Churchill, you are drunk' quote for example.')

As for portraits of Churchill next to the Queen, possible in Embassies. Though where you get the idea we have portraits of the Queen in every classroom from is a mystery to me.
Gallipoli was excusable, he could get very drunk, but he could handle his drink so was hardly a George Brown figure. I'd like a link to the secretary abuse, I've never heard of that one. I've never seen a picture of the Queen in a classroom.
 
Hmm, intersting idea. Well apart from raising Churchill from icon to demi-god status it's intriging and a bit difficult.

Post-War, although I think a Labour victory is certain by this point Churchill will certainly be a greater asset to the Tories dead than alive. His new martyr status will be tossed about plenty (let's build the nation Churchill died for, etc.), modernisation internally will go ahead a little smoother (although far from reactionary on social reform, Churchill was stuck in his Edwardian ways and a little iffy about the postwar consensus) and Eden will probably get off in history with a better rep, if he wins in 1950/51 or butterflies simply see Nasser & Suez go away.

Still he was a powerful figure post-war and if things go similarly for Attlee's government (which butterflies might help or hinder, couple of untouched skeletons in the closet and petty gaffs may get shunted about) his absense may help them, maybe... really can't decide if his stature would be improved on with Eden's modern 'sexy' leadership at the helm.

Then there's the 'lost' election of 1951, does Eden pull off the popular vote, Attlee a majority of seats?

But yeah, a lot of political fallout certainly
 
Eden was immensely popular - almost certainly more popular, in a raw political sense than Churchill. At the end of the war, Gallup (and you'll have to forgive me but I can't remember the numbers) found that most people wanted Eden as PM - and this when Atlee was already Prime Minister. Eden would be a huge boost to the Conservatives going into 1945, whatever the Tory campaign message is. Churchill's martyrdom would add to this.

I don't think the Tories could win - I think that's stretching it - but they would be competitive, and could hammer down Labour's majority. (I'm thinking a Labour majority under fifty) Certainly, Eden would win decisively in 1950. (Assuming of course his health holds up)
 
Last edited:
IIRC, IOTL many wanted Churchill to resign the Tory leadership after '45 and hand over to Eden. As it was, Eden was the defacto Opposition Leader from '45 to '51, and ran domestic affairs during the second term while Churchill focused on FP. They can't win in 1945 because they've been in too long and can't create a domestic program for the country without me-tooing Lab.
 
this is the same churchill who shat all over the irish, right? split the nation in two, armed irish so they cud kill irish. civilized right?

Your post lacks spelling, punctuation, syntax, accuracy, balance, judgment, proportion or sense.

Congratulations.


However I believe leprechauns, not trolls are from Ireland.
 
this is the same churchill who shat all over the irish, right?
What utter twaddle.

Many on both sides of the Irish channel, nationalist and unionist thought that partition was a good idea as it prevented something far worse. Also, how does supporting one side in the Irish civil war equate as 'shitting over the Irish'? Nice bit of nationalistic Irish trolling. Are you American by any chance?

Also, are you unaware of the Second World War, or do you just not like democracy much?
 
We had a picture of the virgin Mary in our classroom, but we also had a big map of the world with lots of red bits on it.
Winnie being murdered in late 1944 wouldn't make much difference to the war's course would it? Stalin would lack an opponent and might get hold of Greece or who knows what else. A diminished labour majority might affect the new welfare state adversely (depending on your viewpoint). Did Churchill have much input into the final British military operations in Northern Italy, Germany and Burma or would his absence have had minimum effect on allied planning? (he asks lazily).
I can see there being more post war effects than late wartime. I can also just imagine the ecstatic entries in Goebells diary, 'it's a sign mein Fuhrer! The reich will be saved.' lol. :D
 
As for portraits of Churchill next to the Queen, possible in Embassies. Though where you get the idea we have portraits of the Queen in every classroom from is a mystery to me.
Hmmm... WE had pictures of her in (many?) classrooms. Probably only in elementary school. Also, in church halls, etc., etc.

Running into a random picture of her maj in most any public space was totally unexceptional. But maybe we did things differently in the colonies...:)
 
Top