Brilliant video as always really enjoy them, a few video's ago i think you did the medal ribbon bar for Piearce Brosnan's James Bond, as a big 007 i was watching `You only live twice last night' and i think Sean Connery's 007 has more medals on his ribbon bar, i was wondering (sorry) if you could do this one or `M's ribbon bar as it looked quite extensive with many medals there. Thank in advance and once again love the video's. Dave
My great grandfather Thomas Joseph canny was was awarded the Gallipoli campaign medal and victoria Cross and the palenstine clasp medal and Beersheba campaign medal and medal of gallantry medal
At 16:42, you'll notice that there's a cross after his campaign medals. This is the red cross of military merit and was awarded for "courage, actions, deeds or service during an armed conflict or military operations that involve or may involve the use of armed force and may require significant military or command skills" He earned this distinction in Cuba whilst serving with the Spanish in 1895.
Churchill went to Cuba as a military observer, not as a combatant. According to the International Churchill Society, "he was instructed by the Director of Military Intelligence to collect information and statistics on various points, and in particular to look into a new rifle round the Spanish were using, gave his visit a quasi-official designation, one that might even enhance his military career." He came under insurgent fire several times but I can't find any records of him firing back and he left Cuba after a few weeks.
@@dlxmarks, Granted my source is the New York Times, but the article from December 5th 1895 states: "In the reports of the battle received here especial mention is made of the valorous conduct of the English officers, Lieut. Wins- ton Churchill, son of the late Lord Ran- dolph Churchill, and Lieut. Barnes, both of the Fourth Hussars of the British Army, who recently joined the Spanish forces in Cuba." What happened is not entirely clear, but it seems likely that he was shot back too. Though I have altered the main comment to be a little less definite
At roughly 16:43 the medal on the left, in the most senior position, is the King George V Coronation Medal of 1911. It took a while to figure this out since the picture, for whatever reason, shows light colors as dark and vice versa. As far as I can tell it should be worn after his campaign ribbons but before any foreign awards. The most likely explanation for it being out of position is expediency. If the medals are sewn to his uniform it is much easier to just add a new one at the end instead of removing the last two and adding the new one in its rightful place. Even if the medals are on a bar it can still be a pain to remove them and add a new one. During the midst of WWII you can see ribbons out of order, upside down and even duplicated as men who had far more important things to do updated their uniforms. Nowadays, during peacetime, this would not be tolerated.
Actually, they are correctly placed for the time period. It was only after the First World War that campaign medals were given greater precedence than coronation medals.
I know this has nothing to do with the medals but I would love to know what a psychiatric evalution would think of Churchill. I'm not rebuking his gallantry but I believe he was working on another platform. I honestly believe if he could have gone on commando missions during WWII he would be standing ready with Tommy gun and Fairburn Sykes waiting for the off
Churchill,the Dardanelles campaign,and many other debarcles then WWII the Singapore reinforcements then the Burmah effort,throwing thousands of "Colonial "troops into captivity and death. Odd he never visited Australia after the axis surrender.🤨
Churchill also conceived the Norway invasion which led to German intervention. Ironically, that debacle brought down Chamberlain & led to Churchill becoming PM.
Military leaders and politicians can adopt two approaches; either safe and conservative, in which case the outcome is unlikely to be spectacular either way, namely military stalemate or political stagnation. That's probably the safe but dull way I would play things. The alternative is to take risks, military leaders can plan risky campaigns that if they work will win a war, but they have a 50:50 chance of failing. Likewise politicians who take risks can plan worthwhile sweeping economic reforms, but they might not be popular in the short term and that might lose them an election. Churchill was very much the latter sort of leader, it takes more guts than I have to be that sort of person.
@@redcat9436 Churchill was an admirer of Hitler during the 1930’s - until his massive debts were paid off by wealthy businessmen who belonged to a certain religion. Prior to that, Churchill described Hitler as ‘a great man who has pulled his nation up by its bootstraps’.
