[quote]pushharder
This is simply not so. It was precisely the defeat of the Spanish Armada that caused Spain to eventually decline. It WAS truly world changing. It put Britain on the map, so to speak, as the emerging world power – power that was projected by her navy. The Royal Navy was one of the most significant entities of the last 500 years, unsurpassed in reach until the advent of the US military of the 20th century.
Also, Drake’s raids throughout the western hemisphere changed so much of how Spain, the number one world power at that time, did its business. He was feared up and down the Pacific, Atlantic and Caribbean coasts. This fear rippled all the way back to Iberia and commerce had to change as a result.
It could be argued that he single handedly effected the demise of the greatest empire of that time and ushered in the greatest one following that.
There’s more to it than that, of course, but I think he absolutely fits the Great Man mold. To a T.[/quote]
Ok push you win. But adverse conditions and a storm caused more damage than the fire ships or Drake. Then there’s the question of whether a successful invasion would have defeated Elizabeth’s forces and how the Spaniards would resupply with the British navy on their heels.
[/quote]
Like I said, there’s more to it than that.
There’s also more to Genghis Khan’s greatness than him being “a simple, humble man who ate simple meals in a simple fashion while providing decadent luxuries for those loyal to him.”
There’s more to Churchill than participating in four wars, giving great speeches and smoking cigars too.
By the way, it’s not about “winning,” my friend, it’s about discussion, debate and the exchange of ideas. If you need everyone to submit their entries so as to cooperatively bring you nothing but great satisfaction perhaps you should’ve submitted your pre-approved list of great men so as to keep us from erring by suggesting otherwise.[/quote
Winning was just an expression. I also agreed with most of what you said about Drake. Churchill was probably in the top three historians of the 20th century and one of the most prolific.
Dunkirk was an utter failure of course. Churchill’s strategic genius was exemplified in his Dardanelles plan to ensure Turkey did not enter the war and to bring back mobility which had been lost on the western front since the battle of the Marne. It had degenerated into a war of attrition.
Churchill was intimately involved in the development of the tank.
He set up special forces units that carried out successful attacks in Norway.
As you say there’s more to him than cigars.
I’ll leave you with an using anecdote from his bodyguard’s memoirs.
The Irish republican leader Michael Collins met with Churchill. Collins slammed a piece of paper on Churchill’s desk. It was a picture of Collins and read: wanted dead or alive. 50 pounds reward.
Churchill got up from his desk and went over to a drawer, removing a piece of paper. He showed it to Collins . It had a photo of Churchill and read : wanted dead or alive. 100 pounds reward. You should consider yourself lucky Mr Collins.