Churchill's Finest Hour Speech - June 18, 1940

[BinkieBaumont]

http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/churchill/interactive/_html/wc0104_2.html

Churchill's speech of June 18th 1940

 

[Smithy]

An absolute corker of a speech Binks although as you can tell from my avatar I am biased in these matters.

Good job posting it.

 

[KilroyCD]

An absolute corker of a speech Binks although as you can tell from my avatar I am biased in these matters.

Good job posting it.

My sentiments exactly.

 

[dhermann1]

This was the broadcast version, right? I believe the speech was originally given in Parliament. His delivery to the microphone was considerably toned down from what the speech in the House must have been. Oh, to have been a fly on the wall that day!

 

[Spitfire]

Bravo!!! :eusa_clap :eusa_clap :eusa_clap

 

[dr greg]

delivery

Wasn't the radio one given by an actor? or is that a legend....

 

[Chas]

Except that there was never a "few". It was more correct to refer to them as "the quite a few". It just doesn't make that good of a speech.

 

[Smithy]

Except that there was never a "few". It was more correct to refer to them as "the quite a few". It just doesn't make that good of a speech.

Bollocks.

48 squadrons of 754 Spits and Hurris against Luftflotten 2,3 and 5's 1,464 fighters and 1,808 bombers is "few". Also when you consider what the percentage was of British Fighter Command aircrew compared with the entire British Armed Forces you can see that the brunt of the Battle of Britain fell on a "few" of those Armed Forces rather than the many.

You obviously haven't been reading Overy's book which you said you were off to read.

 

[Spitfire]

OMG! Are we down that road again.

Don't know how you calculate Chas but everytime RAF had one fighter up the nazis had four (fighters and/or bombers). Wouldn't you feel pretty lonely and "few" if you were in that Hurricane or Spit?

There were situations where half a squadron of Hurricanes - that's six - climbed up to attack more than 75 (some say 90) german planes.
I would say that's few. And I don't know where they got the guts to do it.

Just like I still can't understand why you keep on with this.

 

[dhermann1]

And I think we have to consider what he meant by "so many", proportionally. His point was that a few hundred (maybe a couple thousand?) flyers were being Horatio at the Bridge for the entire civilized world. They weren't simply defending the little island of Britain, they were defending humanity. Do the math.

 

[Story]

Pop Culture funfact : the heavy metal band IRON MAIDEN did a tribute song to Churchill's speech, thanks probably due to member Bruce Dickinson*
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruce_Dickinson
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aces_High_(song)

Probably not to the musical tastes of most folks here, but the spirit in which it's performed does capture a certain sense of backs-to-the-wall desperation.

[youtube]8eUDIDwG3gs[/youtube]

* Dickinson is a respected aviator, flew copilot on the last RAF Vulcan's last flight http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vulcan_Restoration_Trust

 

[Smithy]

Horatio at the Bridge for the entire civilized world.

A very good analogy dhermann.

Churchill had always equated what was occurring as a battle for "Christian civilisation" and "the whole world". It was a a recurring theme in his speeches and is especially noticeable in the speeches of the 28th May and the 18th June. The idea of the Few was first mentioned in his famous speech of the 20th September and gave rise to that moniker for those operational members of Fighter Command who flew in the Battle of Britain.

And few they were indeed in both the grand scheme of things and the British Defence Forces.

 

[the hairy bloke]

Today is also the seventieth anniversary of De Gaulle's speach to Occupied France.

As important, perhaps as Churchill's speach, or Roosevelt's post Pearl Harbour address.

Vive La France!

 

[dhermann1]

Speaking of those two, for a fascinating read, try Francois Kersaudy's "Churchill and DeGaulle". Great book.

 

[Chas]

Lots of people defended the UK. The Home Guard, the Chain Home radar operators, the ground observers, the RN, the AA gunners, the firemen, Air Raid Wardens and such. That, and 12 Group wasn't even fully engaged until the latter half of the battle. So the RAF was never in any real danger of being wiped out. That, of course, didn't stop Churchill (or his speech writer) from putting an embellishment on the whole thing. That's what politicians do. Especially in times of war.

It's not my fault some of you guys intend to worship or perpetuate the myths, but that doesn't mean that I have to. I care about history and the study of it, not so much the study of myths.

 

[Smithy]

Lots of people defended the UK. The Home Guard, the Chain Home radar operators, the ground observers, the RN, the AA gunners, the firemen, Air Raid Wardens and such. That, and 12 Group wasn't even fully engaged until the latter half of the battle. So the RAF was never in any real danger of being wiped out. That, of course, didn't stop Churchill (or his speech writer) from putting an embellishment on the whole thing. That's what politicians do. Especially in times of war.

It's not my fault some of you guys intend to worship or perpetuate the myths, but that doesn't mean that I have to. I care about history and the study of it, not so much the study of myths.

Once again, bollocks.

What becomes blatantly obvious with your posts here in this thread and in the Battle of Britain book thread is that you are neither knowledgeable nor particularly well read about the Battle of Britain. Which begs the question of why you continue to post sweeping statements about the Battle of Britain when you know bugger all about it? Doing a bit of trolling are we to try and wind people up? Having a look in your posting history you seem to like doing a bit of trolling and shit-stirring.

Lots of people defended the UK. The Home Guard, the Chain Home radar operators, the ground observers, the RN, the AA gunners, the firemen, Air Raid Wardens and such.

Yes, but the reference to the few in the 20th September speech was an acknowledgment by Churchill of Fighter Command and those at the sharp end especially after the fierce fighting of the second week of September.

The reason why they are referred to as the Few is for the reasons outlined above in mine and others' posts. You can whine and jump up and down as much as you like, it doesn't change the fact that they were few.

That, and 12 Group wasn't even fully engaged until the latter half of the battle.

Comments like this one demonstrate perfectly how little you actually know about the Battle. The reason why 12 Group wasn't "fully engaged" was because their purpose at a group level was to defend the Midlands (and especially from raids by Luftflotte 5). The reason why 12 Group didn't see any real action until late in the Battle is because the vast majority of the fighting occurred over the Channel and southeast coast - the area for which 11 Group were responsible. 12 Group became more involved once Luftwaffe raid tasking changed in late August/early September and daylight raids were venturing further over Britian.

So the RAF was never in any real danger of being wiped out.

Nonsense.

Even the more disparaging authors such as Robinson will admit that Britain was in danger of losing air superiority over her southern skies. And as I said in the Battle of Britain book thread to you if Britain had of lost this superiority it would've made it very difficult for her to continue to wage war and could very well have forced them to accept a ceasefire.

It's not my fault some of you guys intend to worship or perpetuate the myths, but that doesn't mean that I have to. I care about history and the study of it, not so much the study of myths.

Calling the operational members of Fighter Command of the period the Few is not perpetuating a myth in any way whatsoever. And whether you like it or not they were few in both the grand scheme of things and in the defences of Britain.

For somebody who cares so much about history Chas it's just a shame you choose to post about things you're not very au fait with.

 

[KilroyCD]

For somebody who cares so much about history Chas it's just a shame you choose to post about things you're not very au fait with.

Agreed Smithy, as the reference to "The Few" had nothing at all to do with the "Finest Hour" speech (the subject of this thread) of June 18, 1940. This speech was given just two weeks after Dunkirk, and before the beginning of the Battle of Britain (which is generally considered to be 10 July).

 

[Corky]

Seventy Years Later, Churchill's 'Finest Hour' Yields Insights

Seventy Years Later, Churchill's 'Finest Hour' Yields Insights

CAMBRIDGE, England — Historians have called it one of the greatest speeches ever delivered in English, and surely one of the greatest ever delivered by an Englishman, at a moment of national peril unparalleled in modern times.

LINK

 

[Chas]

I have been doing reading, Smithy, so you can calm down. There are a number of British historians who's conclusions back what I have been saying about the BoB. It was not a decisive conflict, it was a dramatic stalemate with a political and moral victory. Nothing more. There was no miracle, no danger that Sealion would succeed in spite of "what ifs" about German air supremacy, and the RAF could have easily pulled it's a/c out of range of German day fighter range, licked it wounds and come back whenever it wanted. 11 Group got hammered for a few weeks, but that was pretty much it. German sources back up the claim that the British never seemed to be lacking for a/c or pilots.

Yes, it was a good speech. It was also hooey. But that's ok, that was Mr.C.'s job. To make things look less scary and to remind his peeps that "hey, you guys, this thing ain't over. We ain't licked. Still Here."

As far as the BoB goes....it's like I've been trying to say all along....

The real battle for Britain's survival was fought in the Atlantic, against the U-Boats. So I guess it could be said that the claims that "The Few" saved Britain is something of an unintended slap in the face to the men who died in the RN, RCN, USN and the Merchant Marine in that five-year battle. The real Battle of Britain.

Even Mr. Churchill admitted in his memoirs that the U-Boats were the only thing that ever really frightened him.

 

[Smithy]

Yes, it was a good speech. It was also hooey.

I'd be inclined to say that the one talking a lot of "hooey" in this thread is actually you.

As far as the BoB goes....it's like I've been trying to say all along....

So Chas that's the extent of your reading of the Battle of Britain?

A weblink.

How very well read you are on the subject.

The real battle for Britain's survival was fought in the Atlantic, against the U-Boats. So I guess it could be said that the claims that "The Few" saved Britain is something of an unintended slap in the face to the men who died in the RN, RCN, USN and the Merchant Marine in that five-year battle. The real Battle of Britain.

Even Mr. Churchill admitted in his memoirs that the U-Boats were the only thing that ever really frightened him.

How on earth is acknowledging the contribution that the Few made to retaining Britain's control over her airspace a "slap in the face" to the naval contribution?

And if you don't think that it was essential for Britain to keep control of her airspace then you're even more ignorant of what was at stake and also the importance of air power for the successful conduct of land and naval operations.