4 ms·

I was somewhat surprised at the level of secrecy around the location, given that it was a couple hundred yards from what I would assume were actual known target

by mnutt 10y ago

I was somewhat surprised at the level of secrecy around the location, given that it was a couple hundred yards from what I would assume were actual known targets. A stray bomb could have hit it totally by accident.

Theodores 10y ago
I believe Syria's President Assad would understand why Churchill stayed put in the capital. In the current Syria situation President Assad stays put with his family because if he was to move then that would show he has lost confidence in his armed forces and their ability to free the country from the terrorists/defend the capital. Saddam Hussein was probably in the same boat when the same neo-cons/neo-liberals wanted regime change, Iraq was given the chance to hand him over but he chose to stay put. Taking flight from the capital didn't work out for Gaddafi, sometimes the hardened bunker under the known palace is the only option. Moving is tantamount to resigning in a game of chess.
- gaius 10y ago
  Remember the context at the time. Rommel had led the invasion of France, disobeying orders his armoured division had charged ahead, leaving the main formation far behind, out of range of communications. The German high command had no idea where he was so couldn't reinforce or resupply him (or summon him for a court-martial I suppose). And Rommel was in trouble at this point; his men were exhausted, his tanks were out of fuel and breaking down, spread over miles of countryside. If the French had sent one reconnaissance aircraft they would have realized this, and in fact could have just ignored him, he wasn't able to go anywhere. Instead word reached Paris that the Germans had penetrated 150 miles into France and the French government panicked and fled, and that's how Rommel invented blitzkreig. Churchill would have been perfectly well aware of what happens when the government abandons its capital. The French are still suffering from that reputation even today!

by mnutt 10y ago

Theodores 10y ago

I believe Syria's President Assad would understand why Churchill stayed put in the capital. In the current Syria situation President Assad stays put with his family because if he was to move then that would show he has lost confidence in his armed forces and their ability to free the country from the terrorists/defend the capital. Saddam Hussein was probably in the same boat when the same neo-cons/neo-liberals wanted regime change, Iraq was given the chance to hand him over but he chose to stay put. Taking flight from the capital didn't work out for Gaddafi, sometimes the hardened bunker under the known palace is the only option. Moving is tantamount to resigning in a game of chess.

gaius 10y ago
Remember the context at the time. Rommel had led the invasion of France, disobeying orders his armoured division had charged ahead, leaving the main formation far behind, out of range of communications. The German high command had no idea where he was so couldn't reinforce or resupply him (or summon him for a court-martial I suppose). And Rommel was in trouble at this point; his men were exhausted, his tanks were out of fuel and breaking down, spread over miles of countryside. If the French had sent one reconnaissance aircraft they would have realized this, and in fact could have just ignored him, he wasn't able to go anywhere. Instead word reached Paris that the Germans had penetrated 150 miles into France and the French government panicked and fled, and that's how Rommel invented blitzkreig. Churchill would have been perfectly well aware of what happens when the government abandons its capital. The French are still suffering from that reputation even today!