2007-10-10 00:25:59 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Arts & Humanities ➔ History
Certainly not. His speech was completely factual, and all his other analyses of international political situations had been proved to be quite correct too. It is you who are paranoid, or worse, if you think that the speech or anything else he did could entitle you to call him paranoid.
2007-10-10 03:07:04 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Stalin allied with Hitler partly in order to carve up Poland between them. Communists in Western Europe were shocked and amazed at the Molotov-Ribbontrop pact. The Soviets had given up the idea of international Socialist revolution but the threat from USSR was felt deeply.
2007-10-10 03:09:32 · answer #2 · answered by JOHN B 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
"From Stettin interior the Baltic to Trieste interior the Adriatic, an IRON CURTAIN has descended around the Continent. in the back of that line lie each and every of the capitals of the classic states of correct and jap Europe. Warsaw, Berlin, Prague, Vienna, Budapest, Belgrade, Bucharest and Sofia, all those admired cities and the populations around them lie in what i might desire to call the Soviet sphere, and all are undertaking in a single variety or yet another, no longer basically to Soviet impact yet to an extremely intense and, in lots of circumstances, increasing degree of administration from Moscow. Winston Chrchill the focal factor of the chilly conflict. Europe, nevertheless convalescing from the 2d international conflict replaced into no longer in a position to take a pacesetter place in keeping off Soviet Hegemony. The reliance on the U. S. to furnish that risk-free practices has led the U. S. to be the only great skill left interior the international. No ask your self that Europeans and Russians are bitter approximately it.
2016-11-07 21:10:25 · answer #3 · answered by clapper 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
He was a typical English xenophobe, and a Russophobe in particular. A simple analysis of his deals shows that he hated not the Soviet Union, but the Russian people.
Churchill was the same kind of politician as Hitler. Stalin allied him with only one reason: somebody to help on the Western front. But Churchill generally failed his promises: he managed to avoid serious battles, so the Red Army got the toughest enemy.
2007-10-10 02:19:44 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
i dont think he was overly paranoid, considering he was PM during a war, but he was clearly anti-communist
2007-10-10 00:29:41 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
He had vison he warned his people about germans no would listen untill they saw and made him prime minister again!!! THe russians were as bad as germans a threat to there lives . Look how long we live in fear, they help to win2nd ww2 They killed there own if they startedto retreat!!!!
2007-10-10 00:33:39 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
No , he was spot on. He had met Stalin and knew how ruthless and devious he was.
2007-10-10 05:20:44 · answer #7 · answered by brainstorm 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, he was pretty much spot on with that speech.
2007-10-10 00:29:02 · answer #8 · answered by remowlms 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
It couldnt have been paranoia as it was true. I think he was a very, very clever man.
2007-10-10 00:33:26 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋