The Fall of Berlin 1945

Rating:
Summary: What a piece of crap.
Review: Beevor lost his positive image of a historian. Completely.

Rating:
Summary: Great Introduction
Review: I have always been a big fan of World War 2 books, I used to read one or two every month. I have also read this authors book Leningrad, which was just a wonderful book. With this said I was very excited to dig into the authors latest offering. I read the book and came away a bit disappointed. The writing was very good, but it seamed to me that it lacked some of the detail that the Leningrad book went into. Then again the author took a slightly different approach to the two books. Here the author needed to tell a larger story with Russian advances into Northern Germany so he could not dig into the real gritty details that Leningrad had so many of. He also chose not to make the book another recap of the last days in the bunker, probably figuring that that story had been told enough times.

Overall the book was good and it gives the reader a good understanding of the overall last few breaths of the Nazis. I just felt that some of the zip or raw emotion that the author had so wonderfully detailed out in Leningrad was missing from this book. Also if you are looking for just the detail of the last days in the bunker there are a number of better books out there that detail it down to the hour. The author does a good job and the book is very readable. It acts as a great introduction to this particular section of the war and could easily push the reader to more in depth studies of the end in Berlin. I just felt the author slipped a bit.

Rating:
Summary: After Stalingrad, All Roads Lead to Berlin
Review: There is little doubt that one of pivotal events of the Second World War was the capture of the German Sixth Army in Stalingrad. It was here that Hitler's maniacal plans truly collapsed. His army was routed and the Soviet Union began the process of driving his forces all the way back to Berlin.

Beevor captures much of the depravity of war. How ordinary soldiers became beasts and how civilian populations were trampled by all those under arms. Beevor describes all with great clarity.

However, from a literary point of view, it is inevitable that Beevor's "Stalingrad" will be compared with his "Berlin". In this regard, "Stalingrad" triumphs as it deals with the great battle in detail without losing the reader in its arcane intricacies. "Berlin", by contrast, seems overloaded with the miseries inflicted upon the civilian population without satisfactorily explaining the military movements that created the civilian miseries in the first place.

Although I am firmly of the view that "Stalingrad" is the better read, this should not put off readers from delving into "Berlin". To understand the eastern front in World War II helps in understanding subsequent political changes in Europe. So, just as the battle for Stalingrad begat the fall of Berlin, so the fall of Berlin begat the emergence of Churchill's iron curtain and the creation of the Soviet bloc.

Rating:
Summary: Dark Victory
Review: Once upon a time, there was a horrific war between two tyrants, named Hitler and Stalin, who each wanted to dominate Europe. After four years of horrific warfare in which millions died on both sides, the armies of Stalin stormed Hitler's capital in Berlin. In a final fury of destruction, the armies of Stalin demonstrated the brutality and terror that were inherent in Communism. Antony Beevor's The Fall of Berlin 1945 is a patchwork dramatization of this climatic downfall of Fascism and triumph of Communism. While The Fall of Berlin is certainly not a military history, it does provide insight into military issues, as well as emphasis on social and political events.

Beevor is effective in putting a human face on the final weeks of Nazi Germany, but is less sure in his moral footing. Although Beevor is relentless in cataloging the misbehavior of Soviet troops and the perfidy of Communist leaders, he fails to note that there was very little to distinguish between the systems of Hitler and Stalin. The "heroic" Red Army soldiers were certainly not seen as liberators in Poland - a country they had helped Hitler dismember six years earlier. Indeed, the list of Stalin's prior aggressions against Poland, Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Romania make it hard to depict these rampaging Soviet hordes as a heroic "band of brothers." Nor does Beevor mention that unlike the Allies, the Soviet Union annexed land from the defeated Germany - Konigsberg became Kaliningrad (still part of Russia even today). The result of the Soviet victory was the imposition of a communist police state on Eastern Europe for four decades. While there is little doubt that Nazi Germany deserved its fate, Beevor's book - while relatively impartial - tends to paint the fall of Berlin as the Soviet Union's finest hour.

On the military side, Beevor's book is useful for several things. First, the exposition of Marshal Zhukov's numerous mistakes and clumsy handling of the final offensive reinforces other research by David Glantz about Zhukov's mistakes in 1941-1942. Taken together, the picture that emerges of Zhukov is not "the general who never lost a battle" but rather, the general who needlessly sacrificed tens of thousands of his soldiers' lives. A second and related issue is the widespread brutality of Soviet troops as they entered German territory, which only stiffened German resolve to fight to the death and increased Soviet losses. Beevor mentions heavy Soviet casualties in the drive to Berlin, but he fails to note that the Soviets suffered about 300,000 dead in the advance from Warsaw to Berlin, while the Anglo-Americans lost only about 60,000 in the last five months of the war. Furthermore, Soviet brutality in Eastern Europe helped to engender a fear and mistrust in Western Europe that would enable the creation of NATO a few years later. Thus, for the sake of revenge the Soviets suffered five times as many casualties as the Allies, and for the sake of political orthodoxy in occupied territory they facilitated the creation of a united front against the Soviet Union.

Probably one of the best parts of Beevor's book is his focus on the escape of parts of the German 9th Army from the Oder-Neisse line to the Elbe River and the counterattack by Wenck's 12th Army eastward to facilitate this withdrawal. Few accounts on Berlin spend much time on the fate of the German forces outside Berlin but this anabasis of 80,000 soldiers across Soviet-occupied Germany makes for fascinating reading (about 25,000 made it to the Elbe and American captivity). Beevor also does a good job commenting on German armor units in the final battles (he was an armor officer in the British Army) and given the scarcity of fuel, it is amazing that the Germans were able to keep any King Tigers moving in the Berlin pocket as late as 30 April 1945. Beevor tends to denigrate most German units as ad hoc groups of old men and boys, but he does not often acknowledge the residual fighting power of this defeated army; in the last five months of the war, the Soviets admitted losing 8,700 tanks and 5,000 SP guns. Not bad for old men and boys with panzerfausts! In fact, the Red Army had not truly digested all the lessons of combined arms warfare and were prone to charge into urban areas without sufficient infantry, as Beevor notes at Poznan. Furthermore, the Red Army suffered terribly from fratricide, particularly when too many forces were packed into small areas.

There is also a bit more detail on the defenses of Berlin in Beevor's account, than earlier accounts by Ryan and Toland. In Beevor's account, it is clear that very little effort was made to erect defenses outside Berlin, and that the defenders consisted primarily of the survivors of the 56th Panzer Corps that retreated into the city, augmented by about 40,000 Volksturm. Given the fight that these beat-up units put up, one could imagine how much tougher this battle would have gone if Hitler had pulled all his SS units back from Hungary to defend the capital. In the end however, the Soviet victory - accomplished clumsily and at great cost - was a dark victory of one totalitarian system over another, and a victory that would take decades for the people of Eastern Europe to recover.

Rating:
Summary: The Underside of War
Review: This is not a typical analysis of a military campaign. While there is some of the "why" behind specific operations, this actually is more of a social analysis. In fact, with Beevor's extensive use of interviews, published and unpublished historical records, and personal memoirs, it has the feel of an oral history.

The text reads easily. The maps are adequate, but certainly could have been better. They were light on topography, contained almost no detail on militarily significant features actual and potential, and suffered from lack of operational detail such as depictions of rates of advance. A detailed order of battle would have been great, as would an appendix with relevant bios of key commanders and leaders. As is, the reader must construct these along the way. Granted this is not meant to be a tactical or operational analysis, but they would have been most helpful nonetheless.

Beevor does not glorify war - just the opposite. More than anything I've read in quite a while, Beevor depicts the brutality, horror, and suffering of whole populations caught up in a savage military conflict - one that for the Germans, military and civilian alike, had passed completely out of their control.

After what the Soviet Union endured during the Axis campaigns and occupation in 1941-1944, the capture of Berlin was the capstone of a "payback" campaign that was unparalleled in its ferocity and cost to both sides. Reduced to barbaric living conditions, trying to maintain some sense of normalcy (perhaps as a defense mechanism) while their world daily crumbled around them, fearful of the approaching Red Army but prevented by their own fanatics from escaping, the eastern Germans were caught in a caldron of their leaders' making.

Some feel that Beevor dwells too much on Red Army rape and brigandage, but that's a necessary backdrop without which the book would lose its purpose. How else to explain the German citizenry's visceral dread of the Red Army's approach? The Red Army's conduct (which included acts of integrity and mercy as well), while generally horrific, was not surprising. You can't get a feel for the depths to which both sides had sunk without understanding these passions.

Still, one is left with a question. Why did the Germans (civilians, Wehrmacht, Kriegsmarine, and Luftwaffe, if not the SS, Gestapo, and senior Nazi Party officials) fight so doggedly in the end when the outcome at this point should have been crystal clear? Was it the effectiveness of Goebbels' propaganda - the waning hope that either Hitler would pull off a miracle of some kind, or the Western Allies really would eventually wake up to the Red menace? Was it racial hatred? Was it Hitler's grip on their collective psyche, or did cultural egotism cloud their judgment? To some extent it was all of these, but even more so it was born of fear. Beevor doesn't address this question, at least not directly. I liken it to a drowning man grasping at anything that might keep him afloat. The skein of fear that ran through the Nazi government's rank and file, the Wehrmacht, and the German people drove them to believe that if they fought hard enough, if they carried on with their daily lives as much as possible, if they just believed deeply enough, that salvation might yet be at hand and the horror would go away. Of course, it wasn't to be.

Let me add that there is more to the book. He provides some sense of the strategic considerations on the part of the Soviets and the US and Great Britain in the final days of the war in Europe. Also, Beevor touches on the Byzantine machinations of the two totalitarian regimes by his descriptions of the power plays and internal politics within Hitler's and Stalin's elites. This isn't surprising on the Soviet side, as final victory and a post-war landscape loomed large. It's problematic with the Nazis, where bureaucratic infighting and competition were in full swing right up to the end, well beyond the point where the demands of party and personal survival should have completely crowded out these urges. Go figure.

In sum, Beevor masterfully brings out the human side of war with grim pathos, desperate heroism, and the innate desire for survival. This is a sobering read, highly recommended for what it says about the Eastern Front in World War II, war in general, and the human mystery.

Rating:
Summary: Tremendous parallels with the invasion of Baghdad
Review: If you read Beevor's book and then some news stories from Iraq it will be deja vu all over again. Weapons of Mass Destruction? The Soviets were convinced that the Germans had them and trained in gas masks. When the Red Army showed up, however, no chemical weapons could be found. Looting? They had it down to a science in 1945. Grand rhetoric from the leaders who were about to be rolled over by enemy tanks? Check.

Rating:
Summary: Very nice book. Gripping
Review: Books that focus on what ordinary troops do have one flaw: they don't explain the strategies and directions that make the troops do what they do. This book suffers from that flaw. It also seems to try to replicate "Stalingrad"'s success through the same tactic: shock. I've got a bit sick of reading about death, depravity, inhumanity, cruelty, barbarism. We all know after rewading Beevor's "Stalingrad" that both Nazis and Soviet commies were led by monsters, and we know from the same book that ordinary soldiers were vengeful and savage in their own right.

Still, the book is so darned gripping that you'll probably read it in a few days because you won't want to put it down.

Rating:
Summary: Excellent companion piece to "Stalingrad"
Review: I have now read both Stalingrad and Berlin and have very much relished the opportunity to think about the horror, sadness and chaos these two episodes caused. As a baby-boomer American living in England, looking at the sometimes foolishness of both Roosevelt and Churchill in dealing with the threat of Stalin's ambitions was an eye-opener. The utter deviousness of Stalin and the inability of so many to see what he had in mind was a sorry episode for us all. The daily life of civilians and soldiers was vividly portrayed including the helplessness of women at the mercy of Soviet troops. Beevor does bring out brief examples of humanity and honour but, overall, I can't decide whom he loathes more - Hitler or Stalin.

Stalingrad was a more elegaic work and moved me very much when I read it. Berlin angered me and made me realise that some issues are never dead.

I am interested in military history, albeit of a much earlier era (Wellington and the Peninsula). I do think this book was let down by the maps which I found annoying and difficult to interpret. Also, the selection of photographs was frustrating - I wished for pictures of the key figures in the story.

A good read and worthwhile although I feel Stalingrad was better all round.

Rating:
Summary: Pathetic tyrants squabble -millions of brave people die.....
Review: Such a work as this constantly begs the question is it balanced?

The story of the totalitarian Soviet state defeating the totalitarian German state is one littered with cruelty and barbarity of insane proportions, where those in charge care nothing for those that are their subordinates or for those that are their enemies. After a while the numbers senselessly killed and maimed become so huge that they are baffling. Stalin and Hitler both share the same response to any setback, which is to blame the generals and the " cowardice" of their own troops- never to blame themselves for their own tactical shortcomings or the opposition for being well placed or superior in number and formation.
Stalin and Hitler and those dedicated to supporting their regimes, whether it is the SS or the NKVD are pretty much interchangeable. The bravery of the Red army and of the German army cannot be doubted and Beevor makes this fact abundantly clear.

Reading negative critical reviews of this book, I see that the fact that Beevor is not black and white on the issue of the conduct of the two armies is one that some find hard to take. Beevor is accused of being unduly harsh on the Red army and easy on the German army. I think he accurately acknowledges the bravery and the brutality common to any group of people; people fight for their country whether the cause is just or not.

Beevor broaches the subject of rape by the Red army. He tries to discuss it and gives reasons as to why it happened on such a vast scale. He doesn't give any definitive answers, but then I wouldn't want any, because such blanket answers cannot be given. He again and again mentions the subject, according to another reviewer it is 102 times. I would like to thank him for doing so- for bringing forth a subject that is taboo to talk about- for allowing us to talk about and think about this terrible crime openly. I find the level of negative criticism about his discussion of rape disturbing- people seem to think that the Red army should be seen purely as liberators and that any crimes that they committed should be ignored (Sounds a bit like the world of Uncle Joe there.) Beevor does not mention rapes committed by the German army in this book, that is because they were in retreat on their own soil, he certainly mentions their rapes in his book Stalingrad however.

This book allows the normal person to taste the dust and to hear the deafening noise of the battles for Berlin through a series of incisive quotes and anecdotes. It grips you and makes accessible the inaccessible. How can it be possible to comprehend the scale of these battles? One gets a feeling for the breakdown of Germany and the feelings of the red army soldiers. More over it gives us an insight into the lunacy of the Nazi hierarchy- as Berlin burns all around they drink and dance and plan future glories with futile and doomed counter attacks that cost more and more lives. On the other side of the asylum we have Stalin viewing everyone through his own moral standards and plotting to purge successful generals and soldiers after the war so that they cannot become too powerful.

If you want to appreciate this book, then Poland is the perfect place to look. Initially divided between Stalin and Hitler and then fought over and abused by the two. The people who live there are only there to be used and enslaved, literally- no one there is ever to be trusted and purges on grand scales are the norm. In one part of Poland only 7% of the population are still left there at the end of the war!

A horrible book that is well presented and accessible. You will finish this book realising how fragile the hold on democracy is and how we must fight to prevent the erosion of any civil liberties.

Rating:
Summary: The Final Year
Review: This is a book about the last year of the war, 1945 and it gets into great detail about the major battles and the people involved in the decision making of those battles. There is a great deal about Zhukov, Hitler, Stalin and even something about the Western Allies and their leaders. This book mainly concentrates on the Eastern front. It's a very long book and it is true that if you are not really into the subject that it will be a long read. If you commint yourself though, you will find it enjoyable.

One of the problems with the books is that it's not as good as his other book, "Stalingrad" and I think that is why people are somewhat disapointed with it. It's a great book but I don't think that the Russians will ever be willing to open up there files and let the world know what happened in those last few months. Specially in East Prussia and Berlin. And I think the book lacks the great quotes and extensive insight that made his "Stalingrad" book so great. In other words, we were spolied.

Without looking at his last book though, this is a solid book that gives a lot of information and great maps, even though they are at the begining and you have to flip back a lot in order to get your bearings straight.

You at times sit back and think at how life was in those terrible times. The only thing that mattered was staying alive. The women were the ones who did miracles in order for there children to survive. One great quote says that they looked down "at what 'man' had become" since most men looked weak and defenless to them. That sums up a lot about this book. There is a lot about Hitler and his last few days, his reactions to the war, his thoughts and his outbrakes. How every one deserted him but it was too late as Germany suffered to what some say what was it deserved. Unfourtunatly though, it was the innoccent, the women, children, old people, who paid not just with there lives, that was the easy way out but they paid with suffering, tears and mental breakdowns. The rituals to surviving day to day, the fear of the night and the drunk Russians.

Beevors thesis works well; that few things reveal more about political leaders and there systems, than the manner of there downfall. Read the book to know more.