English Histree

[Ban-jani]

Churchill did though.

Churchill was livid Attlee’s government lost India.

 

[metalblue]

I think that argument might hold some merit. Churchill also reflected that “were subjugated and starving, then our empire beyond the seas, armed and guarded by the British fleet, would carry on the struggle”. Which might suggest he acknowledged their ability to fight on even if the UK had been defeated. Of course Australia, NZ and Canada also declared war on Germany independently but around the same time as the UK.

Anyway, I'm happy that their is a recognition that the UK did not factually stand alone during the Battle of Britain even if that phrase understandably has made its way into the fabric of the nation.

There was definitely an air of superiority about the British at the time at least in the the “ruling” classes. And this persisted for many years after. So I do agree it is important to ensure people recognise the sacrifices made by everybody wherever they came from.

You’ve reminded me that I was watching a program on BBC the other day called “Can’t get you out of my head” - worth a watch, it gives the account of one immigrant from the Caribbean (1960s I think) who had this romantic notion of Britishness only to be confronted with the reality of a racist country when he got here. But what he thought about Britain I believe played a large part on why so many were prepared to come to our side when we needed them most.

 

[Saddleworth2]

I completely agree with on that point.

My entire point is that on the world scale, the narrative at the time and now is that in Europe, it was only the British state opposing the German state, which is true, whilst there was help from elsewhere.

You are thinking too much in todays terms. Then it was the British Empire.

 

[Saddleworth2]

There was definitely an air of superiority about the British at the time at least in the the “ruling” classes. And this persisted for many years after. So I do agree it is important to ensure people recognise the sacrifices made by everybody wherever they came from.

You’ve reminded me that I was watching a program on BBC the other day called “Can’t get you out of my head” - worth a watch, it gives the account of one immigrant from the Caribbean (1960s I think) who had this romantic notion of Britishness only to be confronted with the reality of a racist country when he got here. But what he thought about Britain I believe played a large part on why so many were prepared to come to our side when we needed them most.

Absolutely true.

 

[Ban-jani]

You are thinking too much in todays terms. Then it was the British Empire.

In 1940 there wasn’t a lot the empire could and did do.

It was the island of Britain and 20% of pilots from elsewhere.

The rest of the war you are totally correct.

 

[metalblue]

Churchill did though.

He was definitely an imperialist - a product of his time. His rise to prominence came when attitudes were changing (and things fundamentally shifted post WW2) which makes him look out of step with the country and a relic of the empire. I think it unfair the criticism he faces on this.

 

[Saddleworth2]

In 1940 there wasn’t a lot the empire could and did do.

It was the island of Britain and 20% of pilots from elsewhere.

The rest of the war you are totally correct.

Except for:


When the United Kingdom declared war on Nazi Germany in September 1939 at the start of World War II, the UK controlled to varying degrees numerous crown colonies, protectorates and the Indian Empire. It also maintained unique political ties to four of the five independent Dominions—Australia, Canada, South Africa, and New Zealand[note 1]—as co-members (with the UK) of the then "British Commonwealth".[1] In 1939 the British Empire and the Commonwealth together comprised a global power, with direct or de facto political and economic control of 25% of the world's population, and of 30% of its land mass.[2]

The first Canadian convoy of 15 ships bearing war goods departed Halifax just six days after the nation declared war, with two destroyers HMCS St. Laurent and HMCS Saguenay.[13] A further 26 convoys of 527 ships sailed from Canada in the first four months of the war,[14] and by 1 January 1940 Canada had landed an entire division in Britain.[15] On 13 June 1940 Canadian troops deployed to France in an attempt to secure the southern flank of the British Expeditionary Force in Belgium. As the fall of France grew imminent, Britain looked to Canada to rapidly provide additional troops to strategic locations in North America, the Atlantic and Caribbean. Following the Canadian destroyer already on station from 1939, Canada provided troops from May 1940 to assist in the defence of the British Caribbean colonies, with several companies serving throughout the war in Bermuda, Jamaica, the Bahamas and British Guiana. Canadian troops were also sent to the defence of the colony of Newfoundland, on Canada's east coast, the closest point in North America to Germany. Fearing the loss of a land link[clarification needed] to the British Isles, Canada was also requested to occupy Iceland, which it did from June 1940 to the spring of 1941, following the initial British invasion.[16]

From mid-June 1940, following the rapid German invasions and occupations of Poland, Denmark, Norway, France, Belgium, Luxembourg and the Netherlands, the British Commonwealth was the main opponent of Germany and the Axis, until the entry into the war of the Soviet Union in June 1941. During this period Australia, India, New Zealand and South Africa provided dozens of ships and several divisions for the defence of the Mediterranean, Greece, Crete, Lebanon and Egypt, where British troops were outnumbered four to one by the Italian armies in Libya and Ethiopia.[17][18] Canada delivered a further 2nd Canadian Infantry Division, pilots for two air squadrons, and several warships to Britain to face a possible invasion from the continent.

The contribution of the British Empire and Commonwealth in terms of manpower and material was critical to the Allied war-effort. From September 1939 to mid-1942, the UK led Allied efforts in multiple global military theatres. Commonwealth, Colonial and Imperial Indian forces, totalling close to 15 million serving men and women, fought the German, Italian, Japanese and other Axis armies, air-forces and navies across Europe, Africa, Asia, and in the Mediterranean Sea and the Atlantic, Indian, Pacific and Arctic Oceans. Commonwealth forces based in Britain operated across Northwestern Europe in the effort to slow or stop Axis advances. Commonwealth airforces fought the Luftwaffe to a standstill over Britain, and Commonwealth armies fought and destroyed Italian forces in North and East Africa and occupied several overseas colonies of German-occupied European nations. Following successful engagements against Axis forces, Commonwealth troops invaded and occupied Libya, Italian Somaliland, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Iceland, the Faroe Islands, and Madagascar.[3]

 

[Citizen of Legoland]

There was definitely an air of superiority about the British at the time at least in the the “ruling” classes. And this persisted for many years after. So I do agree it is important to ensure people recognise the sacrifices made by everybody wherever they came from.

You’ve reminded me that I was watching a program on BBC the other day called “Can’t get you out of my head” - worth a watch, it gives the account of one immigrant from the Caribbean (1960s I think) who had this romantic notion of Britishness only to be confronted with the reality of a racist country when he got here. But what he thought about Britain I believe played a large part on why so many were prepared to come to our side when we needed them most.

I would say this air of superiority extended quite a way below the ruling classes. When I was taught in the seventies by ex Grammar school teachers (who would have been war veterans and children of the post-war era), there always seemed to be a sense of joy when they pointed out the victories in war we had and the lands we captured - the pink bits on the globe. This is what some today find unpalatable, the idea that past generations thought differently about such things, but their experiences had lead them to hold these views. If they had had our technology they would have been different I am sure. To truly experience history, then it's important to understand how the people felt at the time too.

 

[Saddleworth2]

He was definitely an imperialist - a product of his time. His rise to prominence came when attitudes were changing (and things fundamentally shifted post WW2) which makes him look out of step with the country and a relic of the empire. I think it unfair the criticism he faces on this.

I wasn't being critical mate. The original poster had decided that retention of the British Empire wasn't a central objective of the war. I was merely correcting him.

 

[Citizen of Legoland]

I wasn't being critical mate. The original poster had decided that retention of the British Empire wasn't a central objective of the war. I was merely correcting him.

Were you now!