US ambassador says UK would have lost WW2 with Starmer as leader
US ambassador says UK would have lost WW2 with Starmer as leader
www.bbc.com
Mike Huckabee: US ambassador to Israel says UK would have lost WW2 with Starmer as leader
12 comments
-
-
Considering the direction the US is headed.
Overtly repeating many of the ideas and actions of the 1930 fascist government.
Not really sure leaders of such governments should be considered to have much value in such ideas.
-
That’s right up there with some of the most stupidest things I’ve ever heard.
Maybe pick somebody from the same time period.
-
And The Union would've lost the American Civil War if Trump was president. Your point is?
-
Of course trump would have been on the side of the South. So the union would have probably won the war even more easily if they were going up against him as chief decision maker.
-
-
" it may be dangerous to be America's enemy, but to be America's friend is fatal."
- Henry Kissinger
-
what did he actually mean by that
-
Ask Gadaffi, Noriega, Suharto, Mubarak, Diem, Hussein or any number of leaders who made the mistake of trusting the US.
-
https://www.snopes.com/news/2025/03/10/henry-kissinger-america-quote/
It's misquoted. The full quote is warning Nixon that if America doesn't protect their latest fascist dictator in Vietnam other "anti-communist" dictators won't be as eager to ally with them.
-
-
It's a war crime as well then.
-
I don't like Starmer very much, but that's a utterly stupid and incredibly ignorant thing to say. Especially from the US ambassador.
The UK was under attack by a hostile force who were literally bombing the country. A military response was inevitable, the current prime minister would have had very little effect on that. One way or the other there was going to be a war, victory for that war was largely down to experience military commanders and not the prime minister. I'm fairly sure that if we reran history and kept everything else the same except had Starmer as prime minister we would have still won the war.
In reality we might have done slightly better because Churchill was incredibly uncompromising and inflexible. A better relationship with Eisenhower might have actually helped slightly. Although it probably would have not made a huge difference.
12 comments
What kind of argument is that? Winston Churchill was a genocidal Tory who was dragged kicking and screaming away from starting another war once the war was over
We dont even concretely know who our friends or our enemies are to start with pointless wartime rhetoric
Why is the BBC giving this the time of day