Tap to unmute
Winston Churchill: The truth behind his legacy
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 11 ก.ค. 2025
- Winston Churchill is often seen as a figure of British pride, a war-time hero who defeated Hitler and a champion of empire. But his controversial colonial policies radically reshaped the Middle East, left the region in turmoil for decades and his deeply racial views shocked even his contemporaries.
So how true is Churchill’s legacy and what was his contribution to what now constitutes the states that make up the Middle East?
Catch MEE LIVE, our new biweekly live news programme, where we take a look at the news shaping our world through breaking coverage, expert analysis and hard-hitting interviews.
MEE LIVE: Tuesday & Thursday | 12pm ET | 5pm BST |
Join the conversation at MEELive@middleeasteye.org
Support stories that matter. Join this channel to get access to perks:
/ @middleeasteye
Subscribe to our channel: ow.ly/AVlW30n1OWH
Subscribe to MEE Telegram channel to stay up to date: t.me/MiddleEas...
Middle East Eye Website: middleeasteye.net
Follow us on TikTok: / middleeasteye
Follow us on Instagram: / middleeasteye
Like us on Facebook: / middleeasteye
Follow us on Twitter: / middleeasteye
Make no mistake, Churchill was a mirror reflection of Hitr, and his policies were equally, if not more barbaric, inhuman than the Nazis. We, in India, suffered a lot under his diabolical rule. The only difference however was that he belonged to the winning side, and thus got the opportunity to whitewash his crimes against humanity.
"history is written by the winners"
@@BasaruddinSiregar-u4fwinner history isn’t alway right and Churchill was a sob
Churchill and Stalin were both on the winning side and Hitr had been a demented reaction to them- after all they were in business much earlier.
Yes, the winners write the history. Self serving arrogant lies.
Churchill destroyed Europe AH tried to save her !!!
Wales hated Churchill. He was voted out after the war.
But voted back in again , I must study that election
@@highpath4776 his mother was Jewish so his heart would have been with Israel .
IRELAND HATES HIM
Background of Africa 😮Has Nothing to do with the Middle East 😊
my father who fought in WW2 told me the troops hated him .
Yes I served for 24 years and he was a complete disaster.
@@douglaskay9959 you must have served with SS
Your father is a coward
He had his fans and detractors in the military and civilian population. Isn’t that the norm for all elected heads of government?
@@douglaskay9959 Did you serve during his tenure as Prime Minister?
He’s not very popular in Ireland. He sent in the black&tans. In the victory celebration after WW2, he refused to let Irish and Polish troops march in the parade. His history in South Africa and India is not something to be proud of either.
He is not popular anywhere, everything he did was a disaster.
his mother was Jewish so being " on the winning side " regarding Israel was his natural mindset , i guess .
Not that popular in Scotland either.
A strange fact . Churchill lived in Dublin for about 4 years in Ratra House next door to Aras on Uachtarain ( the the Viceregal Lodge ) . Brendan Bracken born in Tipperary was Churchill's right hand man from early on and through WW2 and worked with Churchill into the 1950's . Isn't history intriguing and frightening.
@@douglaskay9959exactly
Small correction: Churchill did not lead the allies to victory over the Nazis in WWII. The Soviet Union was allied with the West in WWII and they and the Chinese in Asia destroyed BY FAR the most military attests and soldiers in WWII. We overlook this fact and that I think is one of the reasons we vastly overestimate the power of the West vs the power of the Russians and the Chinese. The Americans helped equip the Allied armies but in terms of the actual fighting, the Western powers were much less significant. Fact.
Britain acted as the last Allied stronghold in Europe, from which the Western Front counterattack was launched, a role largely defined by its geographic position as an island nation outside Nazi-controlled mainland
Churchill didn’t do much, it was mostly his generals, Churchill simply stole credit
Small correction to your correction: Yes, the Soviets and Chinese bore huge losses and played a massive role, but it’s a myth that the West was insignificant in WWII. The U.S. and UK didn’t just equip the Allies - they bombed German industry relentlessly, opened major fronts in North Africa, Italy, and Normandy, and forced Hitler to fight a two-front war. The U.S. alone supplied the USSR with 400,000 trucks, planes, fuel, food, and more through Lend-Lease - without which the Red Army would’ve struggled to move, feed, and fight. And Japan? Defeated mostly by the U.S. in the Pacific. It was a global effort - not a one-sided one.
I tthink you are forgetting that before the 2 world wars the europeans had conquered and colonized the whole world (by any reasonable measure) it was only after ww1 that the russian state was weakened enough for a successful revolution and only because of ww2 that the chinese state was weakened enough for a successfull revolution.
When the chinese came to help north korea against the Americans the could only arm a 3rd of there soldiers and the american reports describe chinese soldiers throwing rocks at their tanks, they won by the way, pushing the americans back from just shy of the chinese border to the center dividing line between north and south that we have today, hell of a a throwing arm in china I guess.
As for who did the most to win lmo it was neither the british nor the russian/chinese. On both fronts the Us was the decieding factor and they dictated the way the world would run thereafter forcing europe to dismantle its colonies and implementing neo colonialism.
The US didn't help by supplying arms, that sound as if the US were being charitable. The US sold arms, and many countries owed money that took many years to pay back.
One thing to add is Churchill’s role in Iran: during WWII, he helped invade the country to secure oil routes, forcing the Shah to abdicate. Then in the 1950s, while back in office, he pushed for the CIA-backed coup that overthrew Iran’s democratically elected Prime Minister Mossadegh after he nationalized British oil. That coup removed a popular leader and reinstated an authoritarian monarch, completely contradicting the democratic values the West claimed to champion. A democratic and secular Iran could have looked very different today.
Ok but I love the assumption that democratic and secular is something to aspire to. Look where it got us in the west. Please spare me the argument ‘oh but we don’t have real democracy and secularism’. If anything, the current situation shows us we need principles that go beyond national self interest and man made international “laws” (lol), where individuals, groups, and nations pursue morals and justice as taught to us by God
@@abul9052 yeah I want that too but I think not until the society update the next version of operation system. haha. The current version still based on self-interest.
@abul9052 so you basically want a theocracy! tell me how that is working out in israel and iran?? 🙄🙄🙄🙄
@@nl5828 Yeah, classic case of two uncles arguing over ideology while the rest of us just want Wi-Fi and peace.
Operation Boot. Yet more tragedy and subversion of democracy foisted upon nations by Western imperialism because 'We had better do unto others before they do unto us.'
You should go back to 1915 in this video. This imperialist led hundreds of thousands of young men all the way from Australia and New Zealand to their death in Gelibolu - and of course failed completely.
Gallipoli !
@@sunnyland3952 I'd rather not use the imperialist name of the location !
And they knew they were cannon fodder
It was an absolute disaster.
Gallipoli.
Not all British people revere Churchill. Ask people in Liverpool what they think of him. A lot of honour was heaped upon him because he was the leader of a country on the winning side. Students of history know the true character of the man.
yes but Churchill? Mate, Liverpudlians would boo a rainbow if it looked too posh 😂
he would get the same reaction in large parts of wales and scotland!
True my dad was taken out of borstal in the war and trained and became a navigator in the raf bomber command 50% of them didn’t return after every mission, my dad never celebrated victory in Europe etc and Poppy Day 11/11 because of how the raf were classed as an embarrassment after the war but we were led to believe that we would have been goose stepping over here if they hadn’t fought in the Battle of Britain and bomber command didn’t decimate Germany
My dad didn’t speak about the war I’ve only got his service history since he died I found a flight log book of his from his training at Heston park and at st Andrews
@@janedoh123 Thank you, Jane. What you said is so important and true. I am from New Zealand and my dad said the same as your dad. He was in the War, and lost his eye through shrapnel wounds. He never attended these parades either, as he said they were for the important types who avoided danger and grandstanded - like Churchill.
An old guy in Edinburgh said that there were two squadrons there to track the Germans coming over the Forth Bridge. If they flew to Glasgow, they let them go. If they went anywhere near St. Andrews, they went after them. The admirals and generals were playing golf there.
And Churchill's name was & is still hated in Ireland to this day.
Britain is a colonial power and the U.S. an even greater colonial power. Israel was a perfect fit for their geopolitical strategy.
Mind Begs the Question:
▪︎If Holocaust is repeated
▪︎West weaponize,orchestrate it
▪︎West orchestrated 1st Holocaust too
▪︎Unlikely or Likely?
The us is a great colonial power because they couldn’t stick it over here and they went there to escape the gallows or whatever
But they don’t teach us anything about the British empire just it was great and queen Victoria, then straight to the tutors that uk history in the Marxist school system
100%
America is not a colonial power. It was a colony of England
American Empire is not even close to the British Empire in terms of atrocities, crimes, blood sucking, double dealing, backstabbing, and cynicism.
Americans are generous and simple people with a continent size country with all sorts of resources, Britain is a small, cold, foggy, cloudy island with little resources and extremely frugal citizens.
American has been relatively fair until 1950 when they inherited the sinister practices of the British Empire. Yet, the majority of Americans root for underdogs despite their government. There is great hope for America to change course but not much for the England. There are decent English people not as many as Americans, but their government is much more under firm control of aristocracy and oligarchy than American system of governance.
He was a free Mason 🇮🇱 100% zio
Are the free masons making propaganda for zionists? I hate zionism...
And he didn’t like the religion most of Europe didn’t but we don’t talk about that
No front wheels in the masons plenty of Zionists like
Endless list of his crimes... he was responsible for two world wars, and was eager to start another one... perhaps the worst monster of XX century.
Probably the worst monster of XX century, responsible for two ww's and eager to start the third.... among all his other 'deeds' (including creation of lsraeI)
He was vice-president of the British Eugenics Society too. Vile.
Not so surprising for a literal aristocrat. Apparently it's making a comeback. It occurs to me exceptionalism is important to empire, in the same way citizens in Israel must be taught to hate and dehumanize the people they have pledged to destroy
Alcoholic and a racist.
He espoused the same views of the Austrian Painter... who ironically was a great admirer of British empire and believed that no other people had done more for the white race than Britain. He never wanted a war with the Britain.
In 1913 he propageted to euthanase People with psychic defeciencies. 20 years before the Nazis in German started with their T4 action program to kill people with genetic defencies
@@ravenblack7052 Oh Churchill actually liked AH, but he adored Benito Mussolini even more... he praised him so much back in '20s and even early '30s.... not surprisingly, Benito was paid by the Brits to write pro-British articles back in WW1.
the lack of teaching this history in british schools is a large reason why the british political class is how it is today!
putting churchill on the £5 note is the equivalent of putting idi amin on a ugandan banknote or an austrian mustachioed painter on a german banknote!!!!
They were all the same as they are today the same. If they are not the same they get killed like Olof Palme, Herrhausen, Lumumba, JFK, Allende...
Who determines what goes into history curriculums? Winners write the history books.
@@12theotherandrew Always! 🥃
@@12theotherandrew yeah but you can learn the given history , it gives you a backdrop for the critically realality when you find the real events and thinking
@@12theotherandrewthe colonizers write the history
Churchill was responsible for scores of deaths in British ruled India through famine which he caused.
“scores”??!!
it was A LOT more than that!
Yes . He single handedly changed the genetics of Indian people
Scores of Deaths? Reputable scholars put the victims of the British Empire in India at 165 million.
4 million Bengalis. My grandfather's family members included
Bullshit. The famine was caused by crop failure due to extreme weather. Burma was usually relied on when this happened to help with supplies, but this had been captured by Japan. Local authorities found the Indian elites were stockpiling for themselves. Church said something must be done and ordered hundreds of tons from Australia. This took time and India was surrounded by the Japanese navy. Remember a war was on and he was obliged to supply the most strategic places first, and if Britain itself fell, it would have been a disaster. As in chess, you must protect your king piece. Few realise how complex and tough the decisions were and the idea that all would be ideal is absurd, especially using hindsight, which he didn't have. Those who complain about the British Empire in India should contemplate a Japanese government. I'd have given them a day to realise the choices.
Most evil persn
Roosevelt was Even worse
All sociopaths.
No, just men of their time. In times of uncertainty, voters look for strong leaders, without too much scrutiny of their morals. (Save me, Big Daddy!)
@@12theotherandrewhe was a war criminal who waged unnecessary war because he was paid
@@12theotherandrewstfu and get ready for your enslavement draweth nye heathen caveman
Everybody knows it was the USSR, not Britain, who beat the Nazis.
it was a mix of both.
ussr vs hitler alone wouldn't have been a nice view, stalin got practically everything apart tanks - got them but stashed them - so his new armies to replace the ones he had sent to destruction could be equipped. the ussr fought and the others mainly produced for them
the katjusha is a ford truck for example
@@schrecksekunde2118It was a mix of both, and let us not forget the USA, thiugh they joind the effort late, had a big impact.
That is a silly and simplistic statement.
Germany militarises through the 1930s (Rhineland, Sudetenland, Anschlüß...) whilst all hope to avoid war.
Germany signs non aggression pact with Russia
Germany invades Poland. WWII begins. Britain declares war.
BEF to France in 1940.
Germans invade France and repulse BEF/French.
USA send supplies/armaments to Britain (lend/lease)
Dunkirk.
Britain fights Germany in Atlantic and in North Africa whilst also fight the Japanses in East Asia.
USA enters war after Pearl Harbour attack by Japanese.
Germany invades Russia
USA mobilise to Europe and Allies plan liberation of Europe
British dominant in North Africa
U-Boot attacks neutralised in North Atlantic.
Russians push back Germany
D-Day
Allies launch landings in Sicily and Southern France
...it took another year..
This man was an evil, and I am surprised Piers Morgan believes otherwise
More surprised anyone is surprised /He is an racist evil selfpromoting narcisist himself 🤷♀️
Morgan is always on the wrong side of history.
Two of a kind.
@@jake751piers Morgan is an oxymoron who says first isreals a right to defend itself, then they have took it too far in Gaza ( when they had undeniably done it) and now isreals done the right thing attacking Iran ? WTF 🤬actually drop the oxy
@@janedoh123 Hehe, you are so right: Drop the "oxy", and leave the rest.
It should be noted that Israels biggest supporters are its fellow colonial states.
The entire west is rotten
The film 'The Darkest Hour' was a great distortion. It shows Churchill on a tube train, considering seeking peace with Germany, only to be persuaded to continue the war by the ordinary Londoners on the tube. It was Churchill who needed to bring round public opinion in support of the war. One way he did this was by bombing Berlin, provoking the Germans into bombing British civilian areas for the first time, so that it would harden the masses in their hostility to the Germans. His racist comments about Arabs, native Americans and Aborigines are shocking. They don't print those on the £5 note.
That film is a good illustration of how the people are so easily fooled.
@@electraruby Yes, it's showing them the opposite of the truth. The makers of the film must have known that.
yes he was a war criminal
The fact that Adolf didn't destroy the BEF at Dunkirk showed that he wanted peace with britain. He regarded the english as fellow aryans which they were as they are descended from the angles, saxons and jutes of middle europe.
@@vmax4steve524 Yes, it must have been frustrating for him and the Germans. Britain would rather go to war and bankrupt itself, rather than allow one power to dominate the entire Continent. He underestimated how limited and, nationalistic we British can be at times. We had the same thing recently with Brexit. We have worse trade, we still have to meet EU regulations if we want to trade with them, but at least we can wave the flag at having scored this Pyrrhic victory over the EU.
It’s a beautiful interview with such clarity and message of hope ❤
Well done Owen, like always!You’re a true hero
Keep up your good work
Churchill seems like a very untrustworthy and bad person. Everywhere he went he hurt the people of that land.
This is so hurtful, almost takes faith away from so called politicians of civilised world.
My poor old British mother who died at 99 in January just before covid19 'hit' in 2020. As a multi lingual, fluent in German too, she was recruited as a sergent by the British Royal Air Force to intercept incoming German bombardment. She was highly educated and intelligent, however she fell for the propaganda that Churchill was a hero.
Churchill was a racist psychopath. I abhor the neglect of historical reality that hitler and mussolini became powerful enough for WWII by helping franco destroy the legal elected government of Spain. The world could have avoided WWII if it had acted honestly in 1936 and stopped the fascist war against Spain.
So sorry for your loss
Thank you for this
read the book by Tariq Ali, Winston Churchill: His Times and His Crimes
I would love to read it
The only reason the "allies" opposed Germany was because Germany did what they all wanted to do first just louder.
Exactly. German copied their tactics but came too late. And Israel even later...
No Germany did the opposite of what they wanted Germany opposed the elites and power structure in the west and east and was a threat to the elites
So true. Hitler's real aim was to destroy the Soviet Union so that he could exploit its resources and he could use the Soviet citizens for slave labor. He viewed the Slavic people as sub-humans. The goal of the USA, since the collapse of the Soviet Union, has been to break up Russia into principalities so that our corporations can exploit the resources, subjugate the Russian people and destroy Russia as a competing power. Our real goal is to dominate the entire world. Sound familiar. Another example is how friendly my country became with the Nazis even before the end of WW Two. Our real goal was to defeat the Soviet Union as a rival power.
The 'allies' did not exist in September 1939.
Most nations attempted a policy of appeasement with Germany's aggression.
Only when Germany invaded Poland did Britain and France declare for war, honouring their 'defensive' treaties with Poland.
@@JeremyV-eh7qxthe allied powers were planning for war long before and did everything they could to make it inevitable
Western powers not sticking to an Agreement (1916) what a surprise.
i appreciate having my bowdlerized version of history corrected. This makes the modern world make so much more sense.
The legacy of the historical sins of Western imperialism in the world includes various negative impacts that are still felt today, especially in former colonial countries. These impacts include political instability, economic dependency, shifting cultural identities, and the emergence of social conflict.
It is important to understand the historical sinful legacy of Western imperialism in order to learn from past mistakes and build a better future, especially for countries that have experienced colonization. The legacy of colonialism is often a source of conflict and instability in colonized countries, even after independence, due to artificially created borders and complex identity issues.
@@BasaruddinSiregar-u4fBeing born in the States right after the conclusion of WW Two I was propagandized to believe that my country was led by heroes who had the highest morals and principles. I was also taught to appreciate Western Culture as superior to all cultures. During college and afterward I learned what myths I had been taught and how the West and my country really were, Imperial invaders with no consideration for morals and principles. I was easily propagandized because i had tribal instincts like everyone else and instinctively wanted to share in the glory of my tribe.
Churchill was educated at Eton, where his views would have not been unusual. He was a man of his time, from the elite class who regarded themselves as entitled to rule over the “common people”, with whom they had little sympathy and no understanding. The war time required a leader who was decisive and unemotional. Once that was over, he was rightly rejected by the population.
Eton still teachers the same view ,
The inhabitants of the Greater Middle East, including the Levant, have faced division and external control for centuries. *It is simpler to separate individuals based on their differences than to unify them around shared traits.* Opportunistic outsiders exploit this for their own benefit. During the age of empires, the power shifted from Rome/Constantinople to London/Paris during WW1 (Sykes-Picot/Balfour Declaration/WW1), and post-1950s, as European colonialism waned, Washington DC emerged as the new authority (the entire Middle East became a battleground during the Cold War). The aim remains to prevent unity in the Middle East, enabling the _control/management/moderation of dissent,_ a classic divide-and-rule tactic. Currently, all leaders in the region are mere instruments. Borders were drawn arbitrarily without consulting those affected. They perpetuate endless conflicts and encourage persistent dissent.
*Divide-and-rule illustrates the historical timeline.*
Who has historically held a GEOGRAPHICAL ADVANTAGE, remaining distanced from the consequences of their own interventions while influencing other regions? Pax Romana, Rome. Pax Britannica, London. Pax Americana, Washington DC. Their consistent desire was for *peace* as they claimed they wanted, but who ends up picking up the *pieces* and benefiting while preventing others from uniting?
*Different Empires. Different eras. Same strategies...*
>>>
The people of Africa have also been divided and controlled by outsiders for centuries. Tribalism facilitates this division, keeping populations impoverished under the guise of exploitation. In the age of empires, North Africa was first influenced by Rome/Constantinople, then during Western imperialism, power shifted to the USA/Europe. After the 1950s, as European colonial power declined, Africa became a stage for Cold War conflicts. When the dividers reached their peak power, they drew borders without consulting the affected populations (Congo Conference/1884), allowing their systems to extract wealth like a giant vacuum cleaner. The goal was to prevent unity in Africa to _maintain control over dissent,_ a classic divide-and-rule strategy. Today, all dissenters in Africa opposing unity, including some corrupt leaders, are merely tools. The cycle of endless wars and persistent dissent continues.
_Give the weak mind money, and they will dance for the outside dividers..._
*Divide-and-rule.*
Different peoples and systems. Different locations on the map. Same antics.
>>>
The people of the Americas have similarly been divided and ruled by outsiders for centuries, as it is easy to categorize people into "ingroups." In the early stages of European Imperialism, Spain and Portugal entered the Americas, applying the divide-and-rule strategy to local systems (Aztecs/Incas). As European colonial influence waned in the 19th century, Washington DC assumed the role of divider. With the USA's growing power, the world became their playground around 1900. Today, globalists employ imperialist strategies to execute divide-and-rule on their neighbors.
*Forget nuclear weapons. The divide-and-control/rule/conquer strategy is the most potent force on the planet, as it can be applied equally in times of peace to CONTROL, in times of crisis to RULE, and in times of war to CONQUER.*
Since the two-faced snake descended from the tree of unity (fable), speaking deceitfully, wise individuals have warned against divisions within a peaceful status quo. Succumbing to division caused by deception leads to the loss of a good life... "and much that once was, is lost; for none now live who remember it." Such divisions benefit OUTSIDERS. Eden represented a status quo fractured by lies and deceit. The current aim is to prevent unity in the Americas, allowing for control over dissent through classical divide-and-rule. Endless conflicts over various issues, from "drugs" to "terror" (sic.), create constant dissent, with everything framed as a war.
Insert mechanisms of lies and mistrust. The *two-party duopoly* serves as two sides of the same coin, creating favoritism by granting access to POWER/WEALTH to those who act as proxies for their authority. The chaotic lives of domestic politics mirror the larger reality of international turmoil. The systemic (MSM) narrative points fingers elsewhere, using paid agents to present their orchestrated violence as reactions from "the oppressed, who need our help for freedom and democracy" (sic.). Deceivers create a BLACK LEGEND for the "other side."
*In February 1948, George F. Kennan's Policy Planning Staff stated: "[W]e have about 50% of the world's wealth but only 6.3% of its population. ... Our real task in the coming period is to devise a pattern of relationships which will permit us to maintain this position of disparity."* Kennan exemplified a GLOBALIST prototype. This is how they increased their wealth: by inciting conflict among people and siphoning off the wealth of entire regions.
*And that is what you are fighting for. That is the hegemon's consistent approach, masquerading as the "good pax," while playing "good cop/bad cop" globally from a position of strength.* Historically, the "good cops" were the INTERNATIONALISTS/GLOBALISTS, while the "bad cops" were the IMPERIALISTS/MILITARISTS. Their branding and doublespeak serve to mislead the public, who are enchanted by their "bread-and-circuses" existence.
America's allies and self-proclaimed rivals in Eurasia continue to be manipulated into a (quote) "pattern of relationships" that serves their dominance. This is how divide-and-rule is executed. Refer to Halford Mackinder (Pivot of History, 1904) and Zbigniew Brzezinski (Grand Chessboard, 1997) regarding Eurasia for the framework. Consult W.T. Stead (Americanization of the World, 1901) for guidelines on political, cultural, and economic domination. Read Smedley Butler (War is a Racket) for insights into the operational methods of imperialism/militarism.
*The games of Albion. Post-WW2, Albion 2.0 emerged.*
THE LINK OF THE WORLD.
The entire system favored in the USA/collective West is based on a pre-established *managed and moderated division,* benefiting a select few at the top of the hierarchy, accompanied by a frequently repeated appealing narrative. They create the script for their heroes. Their entire funded history resembles a Hollywood superhero film that seems too good to be true. Guess what? It is. What they conceal is what they strive to hide.
Who holds the POWER? Who has had the GEOGRAPHICAL ADVANTAGE to influence all other "buck catchers" (tools, proxies, and other Roman-era style instruments of POWER) while remaining unreachable due to geographical, technological, organizational, military, strategic, and political advantages throughout history? They create default rivals/enemies along their own paths. Typically, the power most likely to succeed is designated as the default rival/enemy. Notice how, when a rival begins to produce high-value products and competes for markets, it quickly becomes a systemic rival, subsequently surrounded geopolitically by the greater empire. This occurred around 1900 when Germany began manufacturing high-value goods and again around 2000 as China shifted from producing cheap toys to higher-value products.
*War is a significant **_divider._** It affects millions and billions, from the highest tiers down to the individual level. War disrupts alliances, divides organizations, fractures political parties, and ultimately tears families apart, reaching into the hearts and minds of individuals as they grapple with internal conflicts.*
It is divide-and-rule today, just as it was 20 years ago, 50 years ago, 100 years ago, 200 years ago, and 500 years ago, because the local populations were too weak/divided to unite.
*These dividers. See them for what they are. They want to meddle everywhere, but be responsible for nothing. Follow them, at your own expense.*
👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏
READ: "THE ANGLO-AMERICAN ESTABLISHMENT" PROF. CARROLL QUIGLEY AND ANOTHER BOOK"GLOBAL GOVERNANCE ON TWENTY FIRST CENTURY" DOTT. MICHAEL CHADWICK.
Muslims lost that's the only difference
@@ykcirnhoj2225 To the snakes and deceivers?
No, the original inhabitants didn't lose their dignity.
The snakes speaking with forked tongues, and the deceivers, and all their supporters, did.
@@ykcirnhoj2225 lost but they will win in the future 🙂
The problem with these people trying to erase history, sorry we know history
That’s why they try to off the elderly because they remember and they own their own homes
Let hope that you have not been brainwashed and that the history you 'know' is also the truth.
@@thewholetruth-now do you know that Churchill single-handedly stopped Hitler (may be since Hitler also killed jew you may think he was right)
Stella! More history of the region, please!
"...that indigenous people do not have a claim to their own lands." If only he was alive today to witness the marvelous societal transformation taking place in GB. He certainly was ahead of his times, this old drunk.
They divided and ate little piece by piece after ottoman collapse. İt must be a huge lesson for consequences huge mistake for Muslim world!
Divided the Arabs shall fall short.
And United the Arabs shall stand tallest!
Western Terror in the Middle East
From the early days of colonialism to this century’s “War on Terror,” Britain, France, and the United States and their allies have terrorized the Middle East and North Africa.
Western nations talk a lot about their purported global role in promoting democracy over dictatorship, freedom over terror, enlightenment over barbarism. Yet they have been responsible for monumental death and destruction. Think of the transatlantic slave trade, the genocides that stemmed from colonialism, the mass killings of two world wars, the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, napalm in Vietnam, depleted uranium in Iraq-the list goes on.
The Middle East has been a prime target for Western imperialism because it is home to two things that are vital to the people who run capitalism: oil and trade routes.
Oil has been capitalism’s most important resource since it emerged as a major energy source in the early 20th century. It is one of the dirtiest sources of energy, but because it is so abundant and so profitable, the global transportation system has never been without it.
The first major oil reserves in the region were discovered in Iran in 1908; the Anglo-Persian Oil Company was founded the following year to exploit them. The name suggests that it was a joint venture, but it was a British company and appropriately changed its name to British Petroleum in 1954. Its first major customer was the British Navy.
In the years that followed, oil was discovered in much of the region, leading to a constant scramble for the commodity-and for the entire region, which is now estimated to contain about half the world’s known reserves. Whoever controlled it controlled a pillar of the world economy.
The conflicts were not always about direct consumption of oil. The United States, for example, is an oil exporter, but control or at least significant influence over the Middle East gave that country’s capitalists leverage over their competitors, who depended on imported oil. That is why so many wars have been fought for control of the Middle East.
Sometimes, those in power are quite open about this. British Foreign Secretary Selwyn Lloyd put it bluntly in 1958, referring to Kuwait and Saudi Arabia: “These oil fields must be kept in Western hands at all costs. We shall have to intervene ruthlessly when things get bad.” In 1990, as the United States prepared to launch a war on Iraq under the pretext of liberating neighbouring Kuwait, Lawrence Korb, a former assistant secretary of defence, said: “If Kuwait grew carrots, we wouldn’t care.”
Then there are the trade routes: some of the world’s most important routes pass through the Middle East. As capitalists seek to increase their profits, for centuries they have sought to reduce costs by seeking cheaper sources of raw materials, cheaper labour or bigger markets for their products. So supply and production chains extend across the globe, and rely heavily on seaborne trade to move commodities between regions.
For example, Egypt’s Suez Canal is a key route between Europe and Asia, carrying about 12 per cent of global trade. The Strait of Hormuz is the passageway for about a third of the world’s oil. The strait connects the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman, and borders Iran, the United Arab Emirates, and the Musandam Governorate, an Omani enclave.
At the September G20 meeting in New Delhi, India, US President Joe Biden announced a new trade route connecting India and Europe via the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Israel. The aim is to rival China’s Belt and Road Initiative, originally designed to connect East Asia and Europe via a “new Silk Road” of rail infrastructure through the former Soviet republics of Central Asia.
Controlling access to such routes, or at least ensuring that they are controlled by allies, is a requirement for any global power. That’s why the United States often talks about “freedom of navigation” (a euphemism for navigating according to rules set by the US) in the South China Sea, and why there are major disputes over who controls the Suez and Persian Gulfs.
The most obvious problem the West faces in trying to control the Middle East and North Africa stems from the fact that the region is inhabited by other people. Millions of people, in fact, have the crazy idea that, because they live there, they should control the resources and exercise full sovereignty just as the US government does in its own North American territories.
Heroes don't lose election after winning wars
They do, if they don’t present policies the returning troops want after their experience of war.
@@12theotherandrew Growing up in the States after WW Two I saw what a great motivator Churchill was taught how he led Britain in their Darkest hour. I never could understand how he was voted out of office. Much later I found out what you said, the soldiers, mostly working class, wanted a piece of the pie, they'd earned it.
Once again, one needs to understand the 'zeitgeist' at the time.
In Britain, the population had really 'pulled together' through the war years under a pseudo-socialist, centrally-planned economy. The people in Britain were expectant of change from the class-ridden world before the war: the war introduced a new type of 'class equality'.
So the Labour party seemed to offer solutions that fulfilled the British people's aspirations: a welfare state - cradle to grave etc.
Thank you so much for telling this history.
InshaAllah he's burning in hell right now due to his crime against humanity.
Amin!
Hell in your ass.,beter enroll in a better school wane your delusion..jeje complex problem complex people..leadership is much more than this..your lawyer style of reasoning is such a swick lowlife style of reasoning that mankind invented..jeje
Yep, he was so bad. Essence of eviI.
In sha Allah
Inshallah
Excellent. Very informative and well presented. I was always suspicious of the admiration Churchill received, particularly as he turned the troops out to the striking miners in Wales.
Thank you for this authentic and masterpiece of a production Aaya.
Isreal is Not a state they are occupier’s of Palestine 🇵🇸 land is that simple
Israel is a colonialist project and a product of Western imperialism
Israel is racist, colonial, and fascist (and has been from the start). The founding of Israel was the result of enormous diplomatic and executive power, substantial financing, and immoral military violence.
Israel operates as a settler-colonial state, following the example of the United States and its unwavering support driven by ideology and geopolitical interests, implemented by the United Kingdom, and ratified by European states’ self-interest under the guise of guilt. Both the founding generation of Zionists and contemporary Zionists are far from being secular; instead, they adhere to a supremacist ideology. We need to recall the violent, colonial, and fascist nature of Zionism.
The State of Israel is not an entity that grew naturally out of local history and culture, but rather an artificially constructed entity, similar to a plant planted in soil that is not naturally conducive to its growth. This expression implies that the formation of the State of Israel involved the intervention of external forces and did not emerge entirely from the historical and social development of the local society.
Western imperialism in the Middle East, which took place in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, had significant and lasting negative consequences. These consequences included the redrawing of regional boundaries, ignoring ethnic and sectarian divisions, which led to instability and conflict. Imperial powers also exploited the region’s resources, especially oil, often prioritizing their own economic interests over the well-being of local populations. Furthermore, the imposition of Western political and economic systems disrupted traditional structures and contributed to authoritarianism and social inequality.
Here is a timeline of the History of Zionism
19th Century :
Mid-19th Century : The rise of nationalist movements in Europe, including among Jews, seeking national liberation and self-determination.
Late 19th Century : Theodor Herzl publishes Der Judenstaat (The Jewish State), advocating the establishment of a Jewish state in Palestine, and convenes the First Zionist Congress in Basel in 1897. This congress forms the World Zionist Organization (WZO) and adopts the Basel Program, which sets out the goals of the Zionist movement.
1882 - 1903 : The First Aliyah, the first wave of Jewish immigration to Palestine, begins.
August 29-31, 1897 : The First Zionist Congress, the inaugural meeting of the Zionist Organization, was held in Basel, Switzerland. The congress was initiated by Theodor Herzl and was attended by 208 delegates from various countries. The main results of this congress were the Basel Program which became the basis of the Zionist movement, the formation of the World Zionist Organization, and the adoption of Hatikvah as the national anthem. They agreed on steps to establish a Jewish state in Palestine which was then controlled by the Ottoman Turks.
20th Century :
1917 : In World War I, Britain seized Palestine from the Ottoman Empire.
2 November 1917 : Through the lobby of Jewish banker Walter Rothschild, British Foreign Secretary Arthur Balfour announced British support for the establishment of a Jewish state in Palestine. Britain promised a "national home for the Jewish people" there.
1918 : Britain as the winner of World War I occupied Palestine with mandatory status.
1919 : Opposition from the Palestinian people first emerged at a congress in Jerusalem.
1920 : Clashes began to occur between ethnic Arabs and the increasingly massive arrival of Jewish immigrants. These clashes came to a head in the mid-to-late 1930s, when two Palestinian clerics, Izzuddin al-Qassam and Amin al-Husseini, launched a mass strike. The British brutally crushed the uprising, resulting in an estimated 19,000 Arab deaths.
1922 : The League of Nations established the British mandate in Palestine, including guaranteeing the “establishment of a Jewish national home,” which would become Israel.
1930 : The wave of violence also led to the formation of Jewish terrorist militias such as the Haganah and the Irgun. They often terrorized Arab villages in Palestine, including murder and persecution.
1920s-1940s : Larger waves of Jewish immigration to Palestine, including the Second, Third, and Fourth Aliyahs.
● Nazi Germany’s genocide of Jews in Europe before and during World War II also led to mass Jewish migration to Palestine.
1939 : The British government issues the White Paper, restricting Jewish immigration to Palestine.
1945 : After World War II, the genocide in Germany gave Jewish settlers in Palestine the impetus to establish a Zionist state.
1947 : The UN General Assembly endorses the partition plan for Palestine, giving part of Palestine to a Jewish state and part to an Arab state.
November 29, 1947 : The UN then issues Resolution 181 (II) dividing Palestine into two states. The Arab community rejects this solution as unfair. The Jews, who comprise 33 percent of the population and legally own only 7 percent of the land in Palestine, are given a state area of 56 percent of the Palestine Mandate area. Meanwhile, the Arabs, who comprise 67 percent of the population and legally own at least 80 percent of the land in Palestine, are given less, namely only 43 percent.
The Development of Zionism After the Establishment of Israel :
March 10, 1948 : Zionist leaders, at the suggestion of David Ben Gurion, agreed to the Daleth Plan. The plan was a planned action to carry out ethnic cleansing against the Palestinians. A month later, Israel proclaimed its independence, when Britain officially relinquished its mandate in Palestine.
May 14, 1448 : The establishment of the state of Israel after the end of the British Mandate over Palestine and the first Arab-Israeli war.
● The proclamation of Israel triggered a response from Arab countries and volunteer fighters in Palestine. However, the Israeli army, which had a total of 50 thousand personnel, equipped with the most sophisticated weapons at that time purchased from the Soviet Union, easily defeated the Arab troops, which were smaller in number and minimally armed. Israel managed to control most of Palestine, while Jordan annexed the West Bank and Egypt controlled the Gaza Strip.
● Along with the Arab-Israeli war, the Zionist state began carrying out ethnic cleansing in the form of expelling around 800 thousand Palestinian Arabs from their homes. This event is known as the Nakba, aka "catastrophe" in Palestine. Hundreds of thousands of refugees were then spread across Gaza, the West Bank, Lebanon, Syria, Egypt, and other countries.
● A wave of violence raged in Palestine. Arab citizens who considered the UN resolution unfair often carried out
not protest action, While Jewish terrorist forces committed atrocities in various villages in Palestine. One of the most striking occurred in Deir Yassin near Jerusalem in April 1948. Hundreds of villagers were massacred by Irgun and other Jewish terrorist groups, Lehu.
22 Sep 1948 : Palestine declared independence, with the help of Egypt and Jordan carrying out attacks on the border with Israel in the 1950s.
1964 : The PLO was founded by the Arab League, with the aim of uniting various Palestinian resistance groups to fight for independence. The movement received legitimacy from Arab countries who saw it as the main Palestinian resistance organization.
June 1967 : The third Arab - Israeli War (6 days) Israel won the war, and expanded its territory significantly. The Palestinian land areas captured by Israel include the West Bank, East Jerusalem, the Gaza Strip, the Golan Heights in Syria, and the Sinai Peninsula in Egypt. All of these areas were captured within six days in a war known as the 1967 War or the June War.
● Until now, the six-day war is also called Naksa Day, which means 'Day of Setback'. Naksa is a continuation of the major events in 1948, which 'paved the way' for the 1967 War. Because in 1948, Israeli troops carried out a series of attacks that led to the ethnic cleansing of Palestine which was called Nakba Day.
● In order to carry out the mission to create a 'Jewish State', Zionist troops expelled around 750 thousand Palestinians from their homeland and destroyed Palestinian territories.
● The 1948 war ended with Israeli troops controlling around 78 percent of the historical territory belonging to Palestine. While the remaining 22 percent is under the supervision of the Egyptian and Jordanian governments.
● The following are the Palestinian territories occupied by Israel since the War: The West Bank or in Arabic called Al-Ḍaffah al-Gharbiyyah, is a former British mandate territory west of the Jordan River. From 1949 to 1988, the West Bank was claimed as part of the Kingdom of Jordan, but was occupied by Israel in 1967. It is also known by Israel as Judea and Samaria after its biblical name. In the 1967 war, Israel occupied the West Bank and established military rule over the entire territory, except for East Jerusalem.
The Jewish state also extended Israeli citizenship, law, and civil administration to the territory. During the first decade of Israeli occupation, there was relatively little civil resistance to Israeli authority and very little support among Palestinians for resistance activities.
1969 : Yasser Arafat in exile was appointed leader of the PLO. Although not a founder, Arafat played a key role in the PLO and became a central figure in the Palestinian struggle for independence.
1970s : The rise of anti-Zionist movements in various parts of the world.
● Believing that they could not defeat Israel through open warfare, Palestinian fighters used guerrilla tactics to fight for independence. Throughout the 1970s, hijackings, suicide bombings, and hostage-taking began to be carried out by fighters from the PLO and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) led by a Palestinian Christian George Habash.
1975 : UN General Assembly Resolution 3379, which determined that Zionism was a form of racism and racial discrimination.
1970 - 1980 : Palestinian resistance was also carried out through Lebanon throughout the 1970s and 1980s. This coincided with the civil war in Lebanon. Israel then invaded Lebanon.
1982 : To end the PLO struggle in Lebanon, Israel facilitated and allowed the massacre of 3,500 Palestinian refugees in the Sabra-Shatila Refugee Camp.
1987 : Palestinians in the Israeli-occupied territories boiled over due to discrimination, arrests, prohibitions on worship, and murder.
Dec 1987 : An Israeli army truck ran over a number of Palestinians and sparked massive protests. The protest then became a universal resistance of Palestinian citizens known as the Intifada, as many as 1,962 Palestinians were killed and 200 Israelis were killed.
14 Dec 1987 : During this period, an organization was formed that would later play a major role in the resistance group, namely Hamas. The Hamas group had actually existed long before the emergence of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
● Hamas was previously part of the Muslim Brotherhood (IM) in Egypt. IM members in Palestine established an IM branch in Palestine in 1946. After Israel was established, the Palestinian IM began to fight after the 1967 war.
1993: Encouraged by the Intifada resistance, the Israeli government under Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin was then willing to conduct peace negotiations with Yasser Arafat brokered by the US in 1993.
● After the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) peace agreement
ganization) represented by Fattah, while Yasser Arafat was rejected by Israel. Then Hamas became more visible with its struggle through taking up arms.
1995 : Both parties agreed on the existence of a Palestinian entity that would rule in the West Bank and Gaza. Although still detrimental to Palestine, this agreement ended the Intifada. Meanwhile in Israel, Yitzhak Rabin was executed by a right-wing Jewish terrorist due to this agreement.
● According to the official statement of the Gaza Government Media Office on Sunday (5/25/2025) the Israeli army now controls more than 77 percent of the geographical area of the Gaza Strip, the West Bank area was annexed and controlled by 44.5 percent by illegal Israeli settlers
Churchil is one of the bstard leader of all time
his mother was Jewish so naturally he would want to be on the "winning side" regarding Israel .
I can drink to that.
Rubbish
Churchill was an entitled Imperialist, why should we be so surprised!?
Speaking of dogs , as he himself used the term, he looked like a bulldog and definitely acted like one ! No offence to the dogs
as a dog as a dog as a dog there is no dog who worships a dog
Yes !
THANK YOU FOR THE RESEARCH WORK KEEP INFORMING US ON WORLD HISTORY AND CRIMINAL COLONISATION PROCESS. WHERE IS WINSTONE NOW
his a crook.
Thank you very much for this video thank you thank you free Palestinian 🇵🇸 ❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤
He's British, so I'm not surprised.
Read about Gertrude Bell, she was a british archeoligist, writer, explorer etc. In the middle east at the same time as Churchill. But she was the opposite of him...
Absolutely these are the people that started colonialism then everyone France, Spain etc joined in. Australia, New Zealand are all but extensions of Britain and America too(I was born and raised here and mix culture lot of European and African descent people don’t even know their lineage they’ll just say they are 20% this, 40% that)
The British are a subject nation. The upper class dominate and the rest obey. They were so indoctrinated in the past they lined up time and again to throw their lives away on battlefields and elsewhere to carry out the dirty work of their lords and masters. Many are still completely brainwashed. It's a good thing it's a system heading for its own destruction
Omfg so much most people don’t know about Churchill 🤬
Facinating history.
brilliant video! this should be part of the history syllabus in british schools!
the only issue is that the video gives too much of a free pass to clement attlee. the nakba happened on his watch (as did indian partition - another british foreign policy blunder)!
Nation States seldom allow students to learn the truth, they want the students and general population to believe the myth so that they are obedient citizens.
Thank you.
He also praised nazism many times
When?
@@zehnerevans7063 Churchill expressed his “admiration” for Hitler and “the courage, the perseverance, and the vital force which enabled him to . . . overcome all the . . . resistances which barred his path.”
@@zehnerevans7063 “Those who have met Herr Hitler face to face,” […], “have found a highly competent, cool, well-informed functionary with an agreeable manner, a disarming smile, and few have been unaffected by a subtle personal magnetism.” Hitler and his Nazis had surely shown “their patriotic ardor and love of country.”
Cite an example?
This british mad dog was a monster to our Indian sub continent. The famous austrain painter was not wrong at all
So you would rather the world be ruled by the Nazis who would have exterminated all Jews and anyone who does not have blond hair and blue eyes
Well this wasn't being taught in schools in the 90's
He pimped for his daughter in law.
I am from India and for us he is more villainous than hitler. He was responsible for starving 3 millions people to death in bengal. Whenever I see his image or listen his name I instantly feel hate and rage.
Same here was a sob
4.5 million in Bengal, 165 million total in India. Cutting off thumbs of weavers so cannot make beautiful Indian cloth & forced cheap Brit machine made cheap cloth into India forced to buy. Taxed the Indian peasant workers then he used that money to pay for railroads all over India, US, Britain. 45 Trillion dollars extracted from India in today's money. India was #2 world economy, reduced to lower than 50th by 1949.
Me too.
And let’s not forget that how they left India with a generational war with the same people and crippling legal system still abused. He is worse than Hitler.
He’s better than Hitler the man who wanted to exterminate all Jews and take over the world l?
Z Polski Bardzo dziękuję za ciekawe ważne informacje
He is a hero Winston Beelzebub Churchill. A hero in hell that is.
Now! That I can believe. Thank you
How is he different from the mustache man again?
Yes, I was brought up in the States to believe Hitler was the most evil leader ever. I now know most leaders are evil.
NO BALLS
Those already converted will never believe any of this I’m afraid. It does not matter what evidence you provide. Only might makes right.
"Si vis pacem, para bellum" is a Latin proverb meaning "If you want peace, prepare for war." This phrase emphasizes the importance of having the strength and readiness to defend oneself as a way to prevent conflict and maintain peace.
Yes we are all born with Tribal instincts which causes us to assume our Tribe is superior to all others. One has to have some self awareness to get past their emotional feelings and let their rational mind observe facts in an unbiased manner.
@@philipangelo595 Self Awareness is not a winning survival trait.
Basically a jerk,reasons for the genocide in Palestine
And yet there is a statue of this guy in central London. Make it make sense
This bull dog did nothing but bring misery to the world
Well, not really. He led a nation state, and its people, ultimately, together with its allied partners, to victory in WW2.
It was in 1940 not at all obvious whether Britain would be invaded and fall under the Nazi yoke.
France had been overrun; Dunkirk managed to repatriate 300,000 soldiers (British and French and Belgians) ,and then? Alone, Britain stood firm.
Churchill resolved to fight on. Alone and with troops from the Commonwealth.
In North Africa.
In Atlantic
In Far East (against Japanese)
On the Home Front
(Read Churchill's speech to the Commons - the 'fight on the beaches' speech).
@@JeremyV-eh7qx STALIN
War criminal, crimes against humanity.
Nonsense.
All so true....no bias here...........
He was no difference from Hitler or Netanyahu.
That's right
The worst monster of XX century
Don't be stupid.
Native Americans didn't say "Noone can come here". They were nice until they realized why they came
Churchill wrote about the indigenous population of US and Australia being a lower level race and it was fine that they were replaced and killed by superior races. Arundathy Roy did a reading of some of his books / and letters and I was shocked, as to how this is kept so suppressed.
But why is everyone called Woke if they suggest that all humans have an equality of life with the potential to positively contribute to all of society
@@highpath4776 there are poeple from that side ruin entertainement for all over thé World , liké movies and vidéo games most of" woke "are anti white or something liké that their purpose IS good but they used it in wrong way
@@highpath4776 AWAKE
So many dead people. A human disaster.
"Human commodity "
Churchill decided some national borders in Europe....
Brilliant summary of historical facts. Very informativa and very illuminating
Well said
The ultimate irony is that he despised the ordinary indigenous people of his own country too. He was an aristocrat who systematically stole land from the common people and made them serfs . The aristocrats had a grasp of psychological manipulation (otherwise known as Black Magic) which they used to cast an enchantment over the common people making them willing agents in their imprisonment. This was done through ritual. Take the coronation for example which claims that through anointing of the "King" with oil he has divine powers. Until the people break free from this enchantment they will remain trapped in their sefdom.
What utter nonsense
Indians today side with the Imperial west Masters.
Many native people of the conquered Indian sub-continent were willing allies in their nation's subjugation. Nothing has changed since Ancient Rome.
Because throughout the last millennium they have been subservient to Mughals & The British.
Hence they developed the shaking of head subserviently.😂
Oh my God, is it because they don't know their nation's history? or because they don't care about their nation's history?
Not only though. Most seem to run the west ( owners of british carmakers , drug companies, petrol processors, steel companies )
@@BasaruddinSiregar-u4f At present India is (tacitally) Supporting Russia , in part as it fears China on its northern borders, it makes friends with Western leaders in a way that its wealthiest can extract more wealth , dont expect any common (or for many the embedded caste system) to really care that their lot has not improved at all,
If one looks at it from a legal point of view the existence of Israel is based on the Belford declaration. In the Belford Declaration it states that the indigenes people’s rights are to be protected. The indigenes people are the Palestinians. The apartheid state of Israel has consistently grossly violated the rights of the Palestinians, with land grabbing and so on. So with this fact the apartheid state of Israel legally has no right to exist.
Balfour ....not Belford. Please read your history.
@@JeremyV-eh7qxSpelling program are sometimes to fast but even a stupid idiot like you understood anyway.
Excellent video. Great content with alot of facts.
A detailed history of betrayals and tortures by the west are well pictured in an article by Srmt. Arundathi Roy, the booker prize winner in an international magazine from India namely ' Frontline fortnightly ' a year before. It's an article of high importance to understand middle east.
Thank you! I added to my list to read.
Everything thing he said was a absolute contradiction to
Everything that he did, what right had he denounce the invasion of Poland and at the same time be a imperialist invader he was a robber barons a marauder of other peoples of the world nothing more,a slow learner,
Good production of history
It is important to understand the historical sinful legacy of Western imperialism in order to learn from past mistakes and build a better future, especially for countries that have experienced colonization. The legacy of colonialism is often a source of conflict and instability in colonized countries, even after independence, due to artificially created borders and complex identity issues.
No counterargument. The truth is a debate not to be found in Muslim nationalists or a member of the Churchill society either but by combining the conflicting views. He was a very complex character in complex times. He had massive failures and huge successes, so any view with true clarity will always be failed by the all white or all black brigade. It would also be interesting to see how the idealist with hindsight would have coped in a simulation of the huge number of complex decisions under stress for such a long period. Most would be in for a shock and would have had worse results. I am not defending his bad decisions just that a clearer view would take an unbiased and more balanced view, taking in the whole panorama
Excellent video, thanks MEE.
Ancient Egypt was African history, not Middle Eastern.
Changed my opinion on the guy
My mind was made up about him long ago.
Thank for the information ❤😊⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️
Oil was never mentioned, but it was all about securing oil and still is , using religion and now also media. Tax payer funded and fought war for oil and weapons company shareholders to profit. Let the oil companies fund and fight wars themselves…..buy an ev car
Correct. Until military planes and tanks are run on batteries or nukes or other power then it will always be about oil.
what arrogance and hatred they have left behind for their children to carry on
never teach your child hate
King Abdulaziz has nothing but disdain for the British. The claim that the British armed him is laughable.
The whole so called royal family were gang of thieves earning their living by robbing pilgrims on their way to haj or return until the British hired them to over the the Othoman Khalifate and the British took over mandate of the broken othoman middle east nd secretly conspired to create a Zionist state in the Middle East to use as a military base to dictate nd exploit the donkeys .
Superb doc. Congratulations!
if anyone meet winston in the plains of gathering, please kindly ask him there, who is the dog now?
Wow i didnt know how vile he was. A monster.
Incredible. Glad this clip was recommended to my feed, I’ve liked and subscribed. Looking forward to seeing more of this content.
Churchill did not place Abdullah in charge of Jordan. Abdullah had already installed himself there so Churchill was faced with the choice of expelling him or recognising him.
The Iraqi revolt was in 1920, before Feisal had been appointed King.
The disturbances that greeted Churchill on his arrival in Cairo were surely more about the Egyptian independence movement than Britain’s overall plan for the Middle East.
Your view is that Churchill had no interest in the welfare of the people of the region, but is worth noting that he had originally wanted to create an independent Kurdish state on the grounds that “British policy was giving very great support to the Arab course and that it could not overlook the rights of the Kurdish minority”. Unfortunately, Churchill made the mistake of listening to the experts (Gertrude Bell and Sir Percy Cox). If he had stuck to his guns, perhaps the history of the Kurds over the last century would have been happier.
As a German, I had to laugh at Churchill's hypocrisy. 😂 But then always: *points finger at me, because supposedly I'm the bad one. I don't feel any empathy, because basically the world is doing exactly the same thing today: almost everyone is chasing Israel. 😂 That's why I've never really been hostile towards Muslims in general. But the media is still full of propaganda that often distorts things, and when I read some people's comments, I think to myself, "Dude, it's no wonder anger is growing everywhere." But the citizens of these countries are still generally portrayed as scapegoats because they aren't Christians. 😂 So, you can fire a barrage of hate towards the East, but if something comes back in some way, then that's "hate and bullying"
I have great respect for the past. If you don't know where you've come from, you don't know where you're going. I have respect for the past, but I'm a person of the moment. I'm here, and I do my best to be completely centered at the place I'm at, then I go forward to the next place.
Maya Angelou
Churchill said that a nation that does not knows its past has no future. As a Scot I can identify with that.
@@Frazinator1869Churchill destroyed Britain and the empire
The old hyena of colonialism... the cunning fox of hegemony!
What should Muslims expect whenever they allow an invader to take their land we know what happens it is as if there is no law between the foreign soldier and innocent peasants
This was a result of Muslims betraying themselves
Ottomans you guys keep underestimating them but actually steamrolled Britain and raided past the Suez Canal winning many battles such as Gallipoli also in the Euphrates and Gaza
For Muslims, life is indeed seen as a test. This means that every phase and event in life, both pleasant and sad, is seen as a way for Allah SWT to test the faith, patience, and piety of a servant. This test aims to increase the status of a Muslim in the sight of Allah.
@@BasaruddinSiregar-u4f yeah
Adolf admired the British people and didn’t want a war. Britain choose war over diplomacy. Big question is why
Britain's natural underlying psyche is essentially 'laissez-faire' / individualist or tending left. It is certainly a long way away from Germany's more militaristic (think Prussia of middle ages under the Teutonic military order). Britain would want nothing to do with the boot-stomping and saluting - British people wave and cheer.
Britain chose war - rightly - after Germany's aggressive and unlawful invasion of Poland. Simplistically we honoured the obligations of our treaty with Poland. More covertly Britain by this time decided to fight the menace of nazism anyway.
@@JeremyV-eh7qx GEN PATON......WE FOT ZE RONG NM
We fought for the wrong side!
So you’d prefer the extreme racism of the Nazis?
@@12theotherandrewyes
@@12theotherandrewI would rather Europe remaining European and no communism
@@12theotherandrewit’s exaggerated also. Germany had no problem with China remaining Chinese or Africa being African etc
He just didn’t like mixing
@punishedgloyperstormtroope8098
And in which way this is relevant to your "Palestinian cause"?
BTW, George Patton has nice observations about the Arab world, after fighting in North Africa. Have you read that, or are you selective in reading Patton's books?
🇨🇦Canadian here, Very informative. Thank you!
Racist minister