Anyway thanks for reply; this is a plausible explanation except that, as you say, it doesn't fully account for the behaviour of Chamberlain etc. Why would they have been so concerned about Churchill's personal straits? Why not just let him go under? Why did Chamberlain change his mind?
Anyway thanks for reply; this is a plausible explanation except that, as you say, it doesn't fully account for the behaviour of Chamberlain etc. Why would they have been so concerned about Churchill's personal straits? Why not just let him go under? Why did Chamberlain change his mind?
Chamberlain (and Halifax) may have taken a lot of guff from the war hawks after Czechosloavkia, and wanted to put his foot down on Poland. I don't know that they were concerned at all with Churchill's straights or aware of who subsidized him, but they saw reason for a peaceful resolution given Hitler's generous terms, and the German carpet bombing of leaflets for those terms across Britain appealed to a majority of Brits, tired of war. Churchill wouldn't have it. Chamberlain was already ill by then and died in Nov 40'
I meant 1926, not 1936...
Anyway thanks for reply; this is a plausible explanation except that, as you say, it doesn't fully account for the behaviour of Chamberlain etc. Why would they have been so concerned about Churchill's personal straits? Why not just let him go under? Why did Chamberlain change his mind?
A separate article maybe...
Chamberlain (and Halifax) may have taken a lot of guff from the war hawks after Czechosloavkia, and wanted to put his foot down on Poland. I don't know that they were concerned at all with Churchill's straights or aware of who subsidized him, but they saw reason for a peaceful resolution given Hitler's generous terms, and the German carpet bombing of leaflets for those terms across Britain appealed to a majority of Brits, tired of war. Churchill wouldn't have it. Chamberlain was already ill by then and died in Nov 40'