Is he one of the more overrated leaders from human history?
His military plans seem to have been ripe for failure whenever they weren't massively overhauled by his own marshals and generals and his speeches, the main point he is remembered as a great leader, don't seem to have had much impact.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/history/britain-at-war/10255153/Winston-Churchills-speeches-were-overrated-and-some-went-down-badly.html
His accomplishment is losing the British empire and submitting to America, the only time a dominant power ever abandoned its position to another willingly.
So yes he's pretty overrated.
>>1382233
Britain was not the dominant power by any stretch of imagination.
>>1382237
They weren't since the 1890's at least
They entered the First World war to reverse that and got the Opposite result
>>1382253
>Britain was the dominant power until WW2
Do Brits seriously believe this? Hilarious and sad at the same time.
>>1382260
Well who else was according to you?
I'm the first to mock the many British delusions about their history but this is just a fact.
>>1382253
Being the No.1 power =/= Being the Dominant power
Being the Dominant power implies being miles ahead of the other Powers
>>1382290
Britain was not No.1 by any measure, not economic, not political, not military.
>>1382297
not economically, not politically and not militarily*
And he's not saying that, he's saying that it was recognised as the most powerful state even though it wasn't actually the dominant one.
>>1382308
>not economically, not politically and not militarily*
Are you retarded? Economic, political, military are adjectives modifying the word "measure" in that sentence. Go back to fucking grade school you moron.
>>1382335
>Then who was? Stop being so butthurt.
Why don't you provide some evidence showing that Britain was no. 1 by any meaningful measure? After all, the burden of proof is on the moron who made the dumbfucking statement.
>>1382312
>Getting this mad over someone trying to help you learn English
Dear God.
You're still wrong by the way you fucking sperglord. The -ly suffix is necessary to transform the adjectives into adverbs that are used to provide information about the manner, frequency, degree, or other circumstances of the activity indicated by the verb or verb phrase, in this case 'being'.
And by the way, when you make a list with comas the last element of the list has to be preceded by an 'and', not another comma.
>>1382343
Dumbass, there is no 'being' indicated. The words that are omitted are 'not by economic measure, not by political measure, not by military measure.'
And guess what, even if the word omitted was 'being,' you would still use adjectives. Being is not activity and it is not modified by an adverb, you simpleton. Do you ever hear people say I am quickly or I am stupidly? I hope to god you are a sassy foreigner trying to show off your ESL knowledge and not a native American.
If you are going to play grammar police on the internets, come prepared with at least grade school education.
>>1382341
The British Empire covered 1/4 of the world's surface.
Since you can't even think of a single country more powerful than Britain I'm considering this argument concluded.
>>1382376
>Muh Clay
Yet they were economicly surpassed by the Germans
>>1382351
>Dumbass, there is no 'being' indicated
Oh okay so "was" is no longer a conjugation of the verb "to be"?
Ya know what I've never seen someone get so worked up over not wanting to accept they wrote something wrong on 4Chan before, this is honestly pathetic. You're clearly not gonna accept whatever logic I put forward so I'll just let it go, fel free to spout "haha, running away" or "not an argument" or whatever to make you feel like you're right, I won't respond.
Nice job totally ignoring the coma list thing and the original argument so you don't have to try to refute those either.
>>1382384
Completely wrong, the British Isles and India alone always had a higher GDP than Germany, not even counting the rest of the empire.
>>1382407
Most of colonial GDP was used for subsistence. In the areas where it matter, industry and surplus production, Germany was far ahead of Britain.
>>1382376
>The British Empire covered 1/4 of the world's surface.
Surface area != nation's power.
Unless you are willing to argue that Russia and Canada are the first and second most powerful countries in the world right now, I would either come up with a more convincing evidence or just stop posting if I were you.
>>1382407
And China and India had higher GDP than Japan, what is your point?
>all these babbies saying Britain wasn't the most powerful nation at the time
>"ok then, who was?"
>no answer
Oh, it's another "shit all over Britain" thread on /his/, these are SO RARE.
