The Relationship Between President Roosevelt And Winston Churchill

Captain Dennis W. Dingle’s dissertation, presented before the faculty of the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College in 1977, concerns the significance of the Soviet Union’s decisive victory at Stalingrad and its impact on the outcome of the Second World War. While much of this information is irrelevant for the purpose of answering the thesis question I have proposed, it does contain indispensable statistics showcasing the economic and military might of the two most pertinent combatant nations in the Second World War in the timeframe of December of 1941 and July of 1943.

Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson are two of America’s most celebrated presidents during the 20th century. Theodore Roosevelt who was a Republican had a military background and created the American conservation movement. Theodore Roosevelt was also once shot by an would be assassin and still managed to give his speech. Roosevelt was famous by his quote “It takes more than one to kill a moose.” On the other had Woodrow Wilson who is a Democrat formed the idea of preserve peace. The stories about these men are the stories that are taught in our

asing off of Roosevelt and Wilson's different points of view, it seems as they are in disagreement. This conflict did change the U.S. a lot, but at different times. When Roosevelt was in office, his Corollary went into role. Then, when Wilson took his place, his annual message affected the nation greatly. These opposing views caused problems not only in the United States, but in foreign countries also.

Allied victory in 1945 was not always inevitable. Richard Overy comments in Why the Allies Won that ‘no rational man in early 1942 would have guessed at the eventual outcome of the war’ . The key aspect for the Allies in winning the war was the defeat of Hitler’s Germany. Despite evidence suggesting allied victory was achieved through military might alone, this essay will argue that victory in 1945 was down to a multitude of factors and cannot be solely attributed to the use of military. Therefore, other important influences with changed a possible German victory into an inevitable Allied victory which will be discussed include the entry of the USA into the war with its huge population and industrial capacity. In addition, the failure of

Teddy Roosevelt was the “cowboy” president and Woodrow Wilson was the “schoolmaster”. After the fatal shooting of President William McKinley, his vice president Teddy Roosevelt took office. Woodrow Wilson was elected into office. Separated by one presidential term, both men had very different political and personal ideologies, but I found that they both were effective progressive presidents.

“The key to the eventual victory of the Allied states lies here, in the remarkable revival of Soviet military and economic power” (Overy 19).

Franklin Delano Roosevelt and Theodore Roosevelt are very influential individuals in the political development of the United States of America and are key to the history of the US. There are several differences and similarities between Franklin Delano Roosevelt and Theodore Roosevelt.

Even though the United States emerged as a clear victor of World War I, many Americans after the war felt that their involvement in the conflict had been a mistake (Markus Schoof, “The American Experience During World War II,” slide 3). This belief, however, did not deter the country from engaging in many other international affairs in the future, most importantly the WWII and the Cold War. Right from the Manifest Destiny, which led to expand its empire at home and abroad, to the World War I, the country had come a long way from being somewhat a lonely-land to a global superpower of the 20th century. Its influence in the international arena grew unprecedently after its commitment to the World War II, and like they say, the rest is history. If the WWII was a resounding success to the American legacy, what followed, the Cold War, put many implications on the American diplomatic relations with the Soviet Union and to the world. Although the rising Fascism in Europe and the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor drove the U.S. to enter the WWII, historians over the years have laid equal blames on both nations for starting the Cold War. These two events helped in shaping up many domestic and foreign policies for the U.S.

The development of the allied military strategy in World War II (WWII) presented challenges for the U.S. and Great Britain as they worked together to defeat the Axis powers. First, this paper will review the environment at the time of WWII when Admiral Stark penned the “Plan Dog” memorandum and MAJ Wedemeyer’s War Defense Team put together the “Victory Plan”. Next, it will look at the advantages and disadvantages of coalition operations with supporting examples. Then, a review of two major meetings between U.S. and Great Britain will identify what strategic decisions were made and the effects they have on the war. Finally, this paper will explore the foundations of strategy (Clausewitz and Sun Tzu) by which the allied forces used and

1. From May 26 to June 4, about 338,000 Allied troops were evacuated from the beaches of Dunkirk after retreating from the Germans, leading to a military disaster of 34,000 lost troops and destroyed equipment. On June 4 in his speech, Churchill warned that the ‘miracle of Dunkirk’ should not be a model for future wars, as evacuation does not win wars. He then praised the achievements of the Royal Navy and the Royal Air Force during the evacuation of Dunkirk and the blitzkrieg. Later on in his speech, Churchill warned Britain about the possible defeat of France and that the British would then stand alone against the Germans, possibly invasion. He rallied his audience by emphasizing that Britain would be determined to continue fighting till the end and never surrender. He ends his inspirational speech by appealing to the US to join the war if the British were to fail in defeating the Nazi German invasion.

Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson were both innovative, progressive presidents. Many of their policies were similar, focusing on reform, destruction of monopolies and trusts, and improving conditions of the common American through policy change in Washington. However, both presidents are remembered in different lights and for vastly different reasons.

Disagreements between the United States and Great Britain are directly attributed to differences in Clausewitz and Sun Tzu ideologies. Allied experiences and costs associated with World War I, forced coalition members toward decision-making based in the strategic theories of Clausewitz (US) and Sun Tzu (British) [Roberts, p139]. Anchored in demographics (e.g. manpower) and industrial mite (e.g. weaponry production potential), the United States WWII strategic planning advocated a Clausewitzian approach by attacking the enemy’s centers of gravity and achieving quick, decisive victory [Roberts, p.139]. In contrast, the British lacked sustainable troop strength and the industrial mite, necessitating Sun Tzu’s indirect approach to attack Germany’s

At the 2014 International Conference on World War II held in New Orleans, Louisiana on 6 December, Dr. Roger Cirillo, Director, Book Programs at the Association of United States Army, was asked to speak on the Allied Forces’ strategy to defeat Germany in the fall of 1944. Dr. Cirillo, pulling no punches, questioned the intellect of General Dwight D. Eisenhower’s decision to employ a ‘broad-front’ approach against German forces scattered throughout Europe in late 1944. It was on this issue Eisenhower was at odds with British Field Marshal Bernard Law Montgomery who supported quite a different strategy that would have instead concentrated allied power against Germany’s industrial base utilizing a ‘single-thrust’ attack. A hotly contested debate still today, there is no shortage of opinion concerning the two different strategies. Dr. Cirillo is unmistakably an admirer of British military thinking and how the war may have been influenced by concentrating allied efforts on German centers of gravity, as proposed by Montgomery. Obviously dismissive of the larger U.S. objectives and perhaps narrow-mindedly taking strong opposition to Eisenhower’s broad-front strategy given his British military school training, Dr. Cirillo’s criticism of Eisenhower fails to account for the positive effects of denying the enemy large swaths of territory, American and British public opinion at the time, and efforts to maintain Soviet assistance in the war, and differing thoughts on Germany’s

The American “way of war” can be seen politically through the evolution of military policy as political perspectives changed. Post-World War II reveals primary and consistent policies that lead American military policymakers to avoid major international conflict. Coined the Cold War, Americans began waging war

Winston Churchill being one of the most well-known leader during World War II, played a significant role in helping the Allies against the Axis powers and Adolf Hitler. Before becoming the Prime Minister of Great Britain, two times, Winston Churchill served in the British Army and was also a profound writer and statesman. In his legacy, he helped served his country greatly to where he was knighted by Queen Elizabeth II and also received a Nobel Prize for Literature. Sadly this profound man died in 1965 due to a stroke, at age 90. Churchill’s influence in the world will always show the great impact of his work shown in his earlier days, Leader during World War II and his speeches, like the “Iron Curtain” speech (Editors, 2017).