Winston Churchill: War Hero or War Criminal?

Oh please...I've seen such trash about Gen Eisenhower as well, total nonsense in my view, complete and absolute garbage...my uncle was with Gen Eisenhower as one of his radio operators, as I've said on here many times, my uncle helped send the Telex to Gen Marshall of the German surrender, he saw Churchill at Southwick House before D-Day, many, many times, personally...war criminal? Yeah, right, sure, in their dreams or nightmares, total and complete garbage, as I'd said...by the way, my uncle swiped a copy of the Telex, my cousins still have it in a safe deposit box, plus, Gen Eisenhower personally handed my uncle his diploma at Columbia Univ after WW2 and remembered him briefly when my uncle graduated there on the GI Bill, when Gen Eisenhower was president there before being elected...I've seen such history rewrite by the losers for years, or those who discover that Churchill and Gen Eisenhower gave the Germans of that period exactly what they'd deserved...war criminals...yeah, right, sure...total and complete garbage.....

Screw that bitch and then you all wonder at RallyPoint why we get pissed off. You have this kind of horse hockey insulting us and but do not saying anything about the President. I know for an example that the President took out the bust of Churchill and that is his prerogative but it angers me to see this continual bullying of our friends in Israel and now the UK. It totally makes me think someone has an agenda.

Interesting. He had, as we all do, biases of the time. He certainly was the right one at the right time. Some say he played FDR like a fiddle. The stakes were so high. Interesting enough, some aspects of his speech regarding the rise of Islam would be considered hate speech today by the PC crowd.

He had a similar problem to Teddy Roosevelt. Teddy shot himself in the foot by announcing he'd never run for a third term. Both had huge egos that craved power and had serious mental anguish when they no longer had it. England wanted to move on from the war years and that included the leadership that went with it.

There's a lot of "looking with today's lens" when that in itself will skew accurate history. Pundits that do that quickly get dropped from my read list.

Please- the Germans started fire bombing and indiscriminate bombing of civilian targets in 1940 on England. Any war is not over until the other side sues for peace, the only way to make that happen is break the enemies will to fight. The cities that were targeted were legitimate targets, fire bombs might be questionable. Stalin killed millions of his own people in purges- find a communist that would try him for crimes. Numerous other politicans/country leaders did the same- how many have been tried. Also WTF does folks 60-80 years later who were not present/lived thru that war KNOW about it, other than someone else's writings?

False dichotomy. He was both. He was fine with using chemical weapons on African tribes, and he was the reason Britain held on in WWII. Why would it have to be one or the other? He was a strong leader and a real bastard.

Yes, he was a great leader. I did not go to the links. I bet he was f&*ked a lot on cognac though.