History of the Second World War

Rating:
Summary: A cracking great read by a very opionated guy
Review: (by E.M. Singer, author of "Mother Flies Hurricanes") Liddell Hart was a noted tank expert and advised British military leaders during the war, so his perspective is not only of "looking back" (which any historical treatise does) but also "in the thick of things." So you get that sense of being there when you read his book. His chapter on the Battle of Britain is the best short account (about 26 pages) of this pivotal episode. Even if you read only that, it's worth the price of the book. Still, it would be hard not to read the rest of Liddell-Hart's book after reading that chapter (or to refrain from reading anything else about the Battle of Britain-go on, I dare you!). Liddell Hart is provocative and opinionated; even if you don't agree with everything he says, History of the Second World War is still a cracking great read! I consider this the second-best book about WWII; for the best book (in my humble opinion), check out the "Best Books about WWII" section of the motherflieshurricanes.con webite.

Rating:
Summary: A cracking great read by a very opionated guy
Review: (by E.M. Singer, author of "Mother Flies Hurricanes") Liddell Hart was a noted tank expert and advised British military leaders during the war, so his perspective is not only of "looking back" (which any historical treatise does) but also "in the thick of things." So you get that sense of being there when you read his book. His chapter on the Battle of Britain is the best short account (about 26 pages) of this pivotal episode. Even if you read only that, it's worth the price of the book. Still, it would be hard not to read the rest of Liddell-Hart's book after reading that chapter (or to refrain from reading anything else about the Battle of Britain-go on, I dare you!). Liddell Hart is provocative and opinionated; even if you don't agree with everything he says, History of the Second World War is still a cracking great read! I consider this the second-best book about WWII; for the best book (in my humble opinion), check out the "Best Books about WWII" section of the motherflieshurricanes.con webite.

Rating:
Summary: Read this book first
Review: As always, Liddell Hart offers a penetrating and unsentimental analysis of warfare that cuts to the essence of what is at stake, what is done, and what can be learned from this unique moment in man's history. I admire his boldness in stating that the Nazis were defeated not just because of strategy or superior American industrial strength, but because they were wrong. WWII proved again the timeless phrase, Right makes Might.

Rating:
Summary: Big book, big subject, big read, big distinction to be made
Review: From the outset a presumably simple question needs to be posed and answered, due to the attributed authoritativeness of author Sir Basil Henry Liddell Hart. Does this history of the Second World War give an exact account of the global war between the Axis Powers and The Allies from 1939 to 1945?

The answer is emphatically yes, but a distinction must be made. This book took me two months to read, taking into account its length this was not especially poor for a general history reader. But I believe the reason behind the prolongued read is precisely because it is not an account for general readership but for the reader of military history - it is in short, a military and strategist's view of the Second World War. An important categorization that I hope is understood.

This does not mean however that its worth is negated for the general reader. Liddell Hart's history is as thorough and epic in scale as the war itself, authored by an experienced military strategist who bore witness to its prosecution, it holds unique and valuable insight. Of particular value is the inclusion of German accounts of the war from interrogations and interviews made by the author.

Great eruditeness is also shown in describing the varying campaigns, invasions, battlefields, and military plans of all sides. The sheer detail he offers is immense and because of this nothing is gleaned over, of considerable use in gathering a full account of actual fighting. In addition, something of the art if essentially chaotic nature of the war and indeed warfare as a whole is infused into the reader's mind.

Yet, all this could have been achieved with much greater effect and with less long-winded and relentless detail if it had contained more frequent accounts from the protagonists involved. Indeed if the participants in the theatre of operations were taken account of at all, this history would have added a worthwhile human dimension above the confusing tactical and strategic aspects which tended to dominate the retelling.

If it had, this account would surely have become an unsurpassable tome leaving fellow historians of WWII to fight it out for the scraps of academic esoteric obscurity that is Hitler's dietary needs and "confused sexuality".

Yet despite my craving for some sort of personal narrative, which is probably unfair in view of Liddell Hart's obvious interest and authority on strategic and military matters, this book did provide me with the knowledge of the Second World War that I had sought from the outset. It is so thoroughly detailed that it covered all of the theatres of war with particular emphasis on the campaigns in North Africa, Italy and the Battle of Britain/Atlantic.

Readers from the United States may be disappointed however at the focus of the war upon British and Soviet battles in contrast to their own vital contribution to the Allied victory, namely in the Pacific Ocean, which I might point out in mitigation was one of the strongest sections imparted. But I consider that Liddell Hart has emphasized overall fairness, the Allies together defeated the Axis powers, it was not one partner exclusively, although the Soviet Union's all-important recoiling of Hitler's invasion has been given deserved focus in the book.

I would also put forward certain caution if any readers approached this conflict without any prior knowledge of its main events, you will undoubtedly lose track of any timeline, as I occasionally did. The narrative swerves from North Africa to the Russian Steppes and the Burma jungle, with no clear indication of its importance in relation to other theatres of the war.

My judgement upon this book ultimately has to be that of conflicting middle ground however. As an account of any war it has to be regarded as a classic. As a military history of the Second World War I doubt whether the understanding of Liddell Hart or his analytical brilliance shall be surpassed, and as an historian of the Twentieth Century he is rightly regarded as amongst its most esteemed.

This book however does not fully meet the requirements of modern readers to understand the Second World War beyond the concept of armies, war production figures and "losses". It rarely goes beyond a history of the conflict that is simply one of strategic/military problem and solution. Indeed, it neglects to emphasize at all that the war involved massive human taking up of arms with the resultant consequences. A history of war without human context bears no resemblance to the actual war itself and thus I believe this book is not as authoritative as it once seemed.

Rating:
Summary: Educational
Review: History has always fascinated me and in modern times, the Second World War (along with the Civil Rights movement) intrigue me most as a history major - both are periods of great social change (although thankfully one occured with much less bloodshed).

This book analyzes the numerous campaigns of the Second World War covering them very completely. If you want a detailed overview of the war this is it - it covers every level of the war - from the steppes of Russia to Pearl Harbor, from the air war to the Battle of the North Atlantic. There were a number of maps, some of which were quite helpful in following the course of battles.

I only have a few complaints with the book. The first is that Hart goes to great lengths to explain why what he would have done in certain historical situations would be better. I disliked this because hind sight is 20/20 and it seemed that Hart almost was claiming he could have ended the war quicker. While pointing out what makes a campaign (ex. Barbarossa) unsuccessful is great, injecting what you would have done is not.

The only other aspects I didn't like was the emphasis on Britain (I would have liked seeing a bit more U.S. battles in the Far East) and his writing about the Atomic Bomb - because as an earlier reviewer stated, it is entirely editorialized and doesn't attempt to look at the social mood in the Western world at the time.

Overall though a great overview, with many details that you begin to appreciate in the reading.

Rating:
Summary: A Good Read
Review: Liddell Hart was one of the great military thinkers of this century. His theories of strategy and mobile warfare influenced generals on both sides in the Second World War. In this volume, he applies his powers of strategic analysis to the events of that war to provide a coherent and compelling narrative. Liddell Hart's was the first general history of World War II that gave me a sense of the overall logic of events rather than simply a collection of battle stories.

Rating:
Summary: Good but not definitive
Review: Lidell Hart can be overrated, and this book is a good example. It gives a good review of the operations in WW2, but often in a potted manner that sounds like a (gifted) high school term paper. There's not always the necessary effort to think about what events in the war mean for the big picture. To his credit, when he DOES connect the dots, it's interesting, as in his claim that Churchill's preoccupation with the African campaign led to Singapore's being undersupported.

And where his hobbyhorse gets rocked, as most flagrantly with his factually inaccurate section on the decision to drop the A-bombs, L.H. is positively pernicious. (See Richard Frank's excellent "Downfall," which I will go review after this.) I'm also surprised, given his obvious anger that the Soviets were left with half of Europe, that he doesn't go into some depth on whether the Allies should have pushed for Berlin.

Nevertheless, its scope and analysis make this a good book to have on the shelf, particularly if you're interested in the British campaigns. There is much more attention to the sideshow in north Africa than any non-Brit could justify, tho since Liddell Hart edited Rommel's papers, this was probably to be expected.

(If anyone reading this review can suggest a superior *military* history of the war, please do!)