It’s also important to note that Germany had been engaging with urban bombing from the start of the war—Warsaw in September 1939 and Rotterdam in May 1940.

Churchill’s “Plan”

Cooper speaks of the “media operations, propaganda operations they were running in the United States to eventually drag us into the war.” For Cooper, Churchill’s “whole plan was we don’t have a way to fight this war ourselves,” and Britain needed “either the Soviet Union or the United States to do it for us,” describing it as “a craven, ugly way to fight a war.”

Though Churchill knew the British Empire could not win this war alone, he ultimately failed to convince the United States to join the Allies on his own. It was a combination of Imperial Japan’s attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, and Hitler’s subsequent declaration of war against the United States on December 11, 1941.

Secondly, this idea that Britain sat back and let others do the fighting is ridiculous.

The Royal Navy was the largest in the world and would not be overtaken in size by the United States until 1944/1945. She was fighting multiple battles, like those of the Atlantic and the Mediterranean. British forces were fighting in North Africa. In fact, in March 1941, a British Expeditionary Force from North Africa arrived in Greece, which was currently battling an Italian invasion. Germany, in response, invaded Greece to help her fascist ally in April 1941.

Paired with the BEF and Britain’s naval and air support, German forces were drawn two months south prior to Barbarossa. On the matter of Barbarossa, it was not long after that Britain came to the aid of the Soviets. In August 1941, the first convoy carrying aid left Britain heading for Russia. By the end of the year, eight of these arctic convoys were dispatched.

Britain’s continuation in the war was both distracting and deferring German resources away.

As Hitler wrote in January 1941, “The situation in the Mediterranean area, where England is employing superior forces against our allies, requires that Germany should assist for reasons of strategy, politics, and psychology.” In Fact, Hitler initially planned Operation Barbarossa for May 15, 1941. This was delayed, given Britain’s presence in Europe, particularly Greece.

For the invasion of the USSR, about 30 percent of the Luftwaffe and considerable land forces were kept back in Western Europe, given Britain’s continued presence in the war.

Much to Cooper’s annoyance, Churchill refused to bring about an ignoble peace with Germany. However, there could be no Allied victory without Britain staying in the war. Had Britain and the British Empire capitulated after the Fall of France, Nazi Germany could have dedicated its entire military might against the USSR. North Africa would have fallen to fascist Italy. Consequently, there would be no opening for an invasion of Italy or D-Day. Imperial Japan could have asserted greater dominance in the Far East, and the United States would have been geopolitically isolated.

In other words, the world would have been so dark—one not dare think of it. Churchill recognized this. As he broadcasted in November 1939, “If we are conquered, all will be enslaved and the United States will be left single handed to guard the rights of men.”

Churchill foresaw this, and for that, he saved civilization, standing at the epicenter of Britain’s campaign of resistance. This is why it was imperative that Britain and her Empire maintained the struggle after the Fall of France. As he said on June 17, 1940,

We have become the sole champions now in arms to defend the world cause. We shall do our best to be worthy of this high honor. We shall defend our island home, and with the British Empire we shall fight on unconquerable until the curse of Hitler is lifted from the brows of mankind. We are sure that in the end all will come right.

Cooper was also frustrated that Britain refused peace deals during “the phoney war.” Countering this is simple: Germany had already invaded Poland and had no wish to rescind their position. As such, in the words of Lord Roberts, “the original casus bellum remained.”

Churchill’s Character

According to Cooper, part of Churchill’s reasoning for fighting the Second World War was that he wanted redemption for his humiliating “performance in the First World War,” a reference to Churchill’s role in the failure of the Gallipoli campaign.

This reasoning is flawed given that Churchill’s Great War record is not confined to Gallipoli. In January 1916, Churchill enlisted as a Lieutenant Colonel in the 6th Royal Scots Fusiliers on the Western Front and heroically crossed no-man’s-land thirty times. Subsequently, Churchill re-entered office in July 1917 as minister of munitions.

Nevertheless, Cooper goes on to call Churchill a “psychopath.” Though obviously intended to provoke, the psychiatric term is difficult to square with Churchill’s highly expressive and empathetic personality, which was at odds with the prevailing stoic ideal of the Victorian aristocrat. He was a romantic and wore his heart on his sleeve. He would often get emotional, be it when observing the actions of RAF Fighter Command in the Operations Room or openly bursting into tears while reporting wartime casualties to the House of Commons.

This romantic character certainly played a part in Churchill’s brilliant oratory, which was so effective in encouraging the British public to continue the war effort, much to the dismay of the Nazis. As Hitler wrote in February 1941, “The least effect of all (as far as we can see) has been made upon the morale and will to resist of the English people.”

Cooper then asserts that Churchill was a “drunk:” “I’ve often said that a good ‘litmus test’ on whether someone has researched Churchill is the question, ‘Was he a drunk?” Though often perceived to be, he was not. Churchill had a titanic tolerance for alcohol and was rarely drunk.

As Dr. Allister Vale (Consultant Clinical Pharmacologist and Toxicologist) and Dr. John Scadding (Neurologist and former Academic Dean of the Royal Society of Medicine) concluded, on the subject of Alcohol Use Disorder, “to use the familiar lay term, [Churchill] was not an alcoholic.”

Cooper also challenges Churchill’s Zionism, using the typical antisemitic tropes of Churchill being “bankrupt” and “getting bailed out by Zionists.” Though Churchill often overspent lavishly and was in constant need of money, he was never bankrupt. I’ve covered Sir Winston Churchill’s lifelong friendship with the Jewish People in a previous piece for The National Interest. A read of that should hopefully put to bed these ludicrous antisemitic conspiracies.

Winston Churchill, of course, like any human, had flaws and blunders. Be it Gallipoli, fudging the gold standard, the abdication crisis, or the India Act. However, his actions in the Second World War forever saved civilization from Nazi and fascist tyranny. Regardless of charlatans like Cooper, this truth will always shine through in the history of mankind.

Andreas Koureas is an aspiring economist and historian. He is currently studying Political Economy at King’s College London. His main research focus is on Winston Churchill and the British Empire. He has written for publications such as The Spectator and academic institutions like Hillsdale College. He is writing a paper on the 1943 Bengal Famine for a peer-reviewed journal later this year. Follow him on X: @AndreasKoureas_.

Image: Ikonya / Shutterstock.com.