-
Anonymous users2024-02-07Chamberlain fattened Germany, and if he did not destroy Hitler, he would not have won the war, because Germany had a nose in the face.
-
Anonymous users2024-02-06It's hard for you to be so stupid that you can tell you how many teammates Chamberlain sold, fattening Germany and being embarrassed to talk about saving the country? Germany occupied the Rhine demilitarized zone, he was quiet, if he had not bought his teammates in the first place and prevented Germany from occupying the Rhine, there would have been no behind Hitler, and he would not have fattened the United States and the Soviet Union in World War II. Got it?
If you don't understand, drain the water in your head and irrigate the Taklamakan Desert.
-
Anonymous users2024-02-05This should be up to the British, we can only stare dryly.
-
Anonymous users2024-02-04Neville Chamberlain and Chamberlain were two people who served as Prime Minister of China Chamberlain from 1937 to 1940. Chamberlain was very experienced, the Queen of England was a soldier behind Chamberlain's guidance, the Queen of England got married, and Chamberlain wore George VI to attend the wedding. A huge contribution to the UK.
-
Anonymous users2024-02-03On May 28, 1937, Churchill uncharacteristically flattered Chamberlain. In his speech, he praised Chamberlain as an outstanding parliamentarian and activist. Yet Churchill was still excluded.
After that, his disagreement with Chamberlain grew. Chamberlain was a man of limited intellect, and he thought he had found a way to kill two birds with one stone. He advocated pushing Germany to war with the Soviet Union, which would either destroy the Soviet Union or make Germany exhausted and incapable of fighting Britain for European hegemony.
Churchill, on the other hand, saw Germany as a threat not only to the Soviet Union, but also to Britain and other countries.
-
Anonymous users2024-02-02Can't say that.
Neither are fools, Churchill can see it, and Chamberlain can see it.
But what about seeing through the "heavenly machine"! Fight, Europe will be finished, if you don't fight, there will be hope, Chamberlain is doing his best, maybe a miracle will happen.
But the war still happened, the era of Europe was over, the United States and the Soviet Union became the protagonists, and Europe could only survive by relying on people's breath, this is the wheel of history, and the situation is stronger than people.
-
Anonymous users2024-02-011. The evaluation of the Munich Agreement is different. Chamberlain thought it was a success; Churchill considered it a failure.
2. The future of the policy of appeasement is different. Chamberlain believed that it was the solution to the "last" and "most dangerous" problems; Churchill considered the "most serious" consequence.
3. Different views on the appeasement policy that was previously implemented. Chamberlain saw it as "the road to stability"; Churchill considered it a "disaster".
It will still be weakened, after all, Britain was so affected in World War II that this influence cannot be changed by a single prime minister.
What is the theory upstairs At that time, the largest debtor of the United States was the United Kingdom, followed by France, that is to say, if Germany destroyed Britain and France, the United States would go bankrupt, at that time resources were tight, and the United States made a fortune by selling arms, but at that time, the war continued, and it was impossible to have full cash payment, so it could only be in debt, and at the beginning of World War II, Britain and France owed the United States more than 20 times more than Germany (I remember this number, only a little more) That is to say, the famine owed by World War I has not been paid off Therefore, the United States can only choose a position to stand on the side of Britain and France. There is also the fact that Hitler's goal was not to conquer the whole world, at least he did not mean to destroy Britain. Otherwise, Dunkirk would not have given the British a chance, and his goal was to capture France, stabilize Britain, and destroy the Soviet Union, so as to turn the whole of Eastern Europe into his own resource base. >>>More
The Battle of Leyte Gulf refers to the general term for four relatively independent but interrelated naval and air battles and several other sporadic naval and air battles that took place in the waters around Leyte Gulf in the Philippines between October 23 and October 26, 1944. >>>More
I also think it's Auchinleck because Alamein's battle plan was formulated by Auchinleck, although the command was commanded by Montgomery, but because the battle plan was properly designed, and the preliminary work was perfect, the situation of the big war was basically expected, the command was quite easy, and there was no major psychological test, plus the large number of M4 Sherman medium tanks that the U.S. military assigned to the British army at that time greatly increased the attack ability of the British armored forces, and you should know that Rommel's chief of staff and he was a sworn enemy, Always against him, and the position is not firm, the German army on the Eastern Front is tight, so I have to draw troops and heavy ** from the relatively grim North Africa to deal with the Soviet army's powerful armor torrent and overwhelming deep tactics, I think Montgomery has not done anything big except for the battle of El Alamein, and he and his British troops are responsible for covering and cooperating with the American army in battles such as attacking Sicily. I think Auchinleck's merit is a little bigger!
1.scale, belligerent countries, troop strength;
2.** Equipment, aircraft, tanks, aircraft carriers, submarines are massively used; >>>More