And the casus belli which had been sufficient to drive England to war against Germany applied more to Stalin at the end of the war than it had to Hitler at the start. The deaths of millions had bought less than nothing. Finally, England's share of responsibility for the catastrophe is not less than Germany's, and it may well be greater. The scholarship is deep, the material is exceptionally well organized, the writing is lively and clear, and the thesis is convincingly argued. This is the very best of contrarian history -- new at least to me , shocking, and compelling.
One hopes our leaders are thoroughly conversant with its thesis, that we may avoid other such "Good Wars" down the road. View 2 comments. Sep 04, Kerry rated it did not like it. For me, it didn't quite register until part way through reading this that it was Pat Buchanan, oh, that Pat Buchanan, that odious creature from CNN's Crossfire. It all makes a little more sense after getting that. His basic premise is that Churchill was a warmongering fanatic you can just feel Buchanan's hatred of Churchill in every word in this book while everybody else was just trying to run their countries and empires in the best way they could and didn't want any trouble.
If it hadn't be For me, it didn't quite register until part way through reading this that it was Pat Buchanan, oh, that Pat Buchanan, that odious creature from CNN's Crossfire. Or perhaps the Kaiser would have just conquered France and left it at that and everything would have been fine. Or, I'm not really sure, I only made it through a few chapters before abandoning this book.
The whole chain of events leading to the two wars, which Buchanan seem to be saying that changing one thing Churchill's warmongering would have prevented all the future events just seems too tidy and unrealistic. He probably goes on to say a lot more but I'll have to leave that to somebody who is willing to make it through the entire book.
View 1 comment. May 07, David R. This one can't help but be immensely controversial. What Buchanan is arguing is that Winston Churchill screwed up the world. The initial mistake was England's getting into WW1 -- which Buchanan asserts was the real unnecessary war. His conception is that Germany was only acting to secure the classical balance of power in Europe, that England would have stayed clear had Churchill not acted strenuously to beat down the Kaiser.
This of course led to a humiliated Germany that found its redemption in This one can't help but be immensely controversial. This of course led to a humiliated Germany that found its redemption in Nazism. Which Buchanan thinks was unpleasant but permissible. For in his conception Germany would have only duked it out with isolated USSR had not Churchill goaded British politicians into a series of policy blunders, first with Italy, and then Japan, and then Poland.
And now he asserts the British Empire was lost, that the West was lost to the communist bloc, and all due to Churchill.
It's hard to swallow. I for one can't accept that Hitler's "Final Solution" was merely a spiteful response to military pressure on the western front. Nor can I accept a thesis that Churchill was consistently foolish and so powerful he singlehandedly botched two world wars. Generations of historians have reached different conclusions. This one must be taken as a curious and unfortunate outlier. The author maybe knows history of Western Europe but know nothing about history of Central Europe.
Before Versailles, the town had never belonged to Poland. Are you joking or what?
ISBN 13: 9780307405166
Find a map of Poland from the period before Partition and see where is Gdansk Danzig and see the corridor dividing Prussia from Eastern Prussia. Germans negotiated wit The author maybe knows history of Western Europe but know nothing about history of Central Europe. Germans negotiated with Russians? You must be kidding. Casablanca conference took place on January , war ended on May , that means two and a half year after the conference.
So without demand for an unconditional surrender when could have it ended? On February ?
I can't recommend this book to anyone, but you can read this book if you are looking for justification of Hitler's ambitions and deeds. Dec 17, Don rated it really liked it Shelves: history. Well argued case that British actions between the two world wars resulted in their fall to a second rate power.
- Site Navigation.
- Death of the West – Leather Edition.
- Divide and Rule!
- Challenging the cult of Churchill.
This is not a flattering portrail of Churchill. He is shown to have failed to see the perils of using the Soviet Union to defeat the Nazis.
How Britain Lost Its Empire and the West Lost the World
Buchanan's view is that Britian should have never allied with Poland. By doing so Poland stood up to Hitler instead of accepting overtures of alliance. Buchanan shows that Hitler had no designs on the west was an admirer of England. If P Well argued case that British actions between the two world wars resulted in their fall to a second rate power. If Poland would have negotiated with Germany, war with the west could have been avoided. There would likely still have been a war with Germany and the Soviet Union, but looking at what happened to Eastern Europe after WWII, Buchanan argues that having Germany defeat communism would have been a good thing - Nazism has not been exportable to other nations like communism and communists killed many more people that the Nazis did.
I recommend this to anyone that would like to see an argument for a isolationist policy. Jun 12, Stephanie rated it did not like it Shelves: couldn-t-finish-it , unendurable , gave-up. I find this book to be an insult to every person who survived the Holocaust and even more egregious to the memories of those who didn't survive. Jun 18, John rated it it was amazing Shelves: history. This book should be a real eye-opener for those who have accepted the conventional wisdom regarding WWII.
Buchanan delineates the series of diplomatic mistakes from Versailes to Danzig which led to the war. As in Human Smoke, Winston Churchill is shown to be the driving force behind the disaster, though Buchanan is easier on Roosevelt than Nicholas Baker is in his book. Buchanan convincingly refutes the various arguments which oppenents to this theory of "an unnecessary war" raise. The book is clear and convincing. Human Smoke has the same theme, but presents more of a collage of historical vignettes.
Reading the two concurrently would be a good idea. Feb 24, Flob rated it it was ok Shelves: history. So when was the necessary war?
Well there were mistakes that is certain. And with hindsight things should have been done differently and the century ended up being pretty messed up. This book lays too much of the blame onto Britain and you must wonder at the author's prejudice. About half way through the book you start to feel sorry for poor old misunderstood Hitler.
The author hates the thought but the Nazi's had to be stopped. Stalin could not have done this alone, almost certainly Russia woul So when was the necessary war? Stalin could not have done this alone, almost certainly Russia would have fallen. You can't help feeling that the author would have preferred a world with the nazis threatening rather than the soviets - and what technology could the nazis have developed, what rockets, what planes?
After the collapse of Russia Hitler would have neutralized Britain by force or threat. It was crazy, courageous and necessary that Britain stood alone and only Churchill made that possible. The USA waited and then came out of it as the victors.go
CEEOL - Article Detail
Britain was one of the many losers. That much is true. The difficulty I had was to put aside my own beliefs here. I acknowledge many of the facts. But in the end the analysis is all badly wrong. So I'd advise those who were convinced by this to search the web and read some of the criticisms of this book. Jul 16, Bethany rated it it was amazing Shelves: non-fiction , history-politics-war. I bought this book on a whim largely because I'd been criticizing it ever since I first heard about it and thought if I actually read it, I could rip it apart all the better.
But then something shocking occurred. I actually agreed with the vast majority of it! Basically he says that WWI should never have happened; the settlement of WWI should've been a lot better t I bought this book on a whim largely because I'd been criticizing it ever since I first heard about it and thought if I actually read it, I could rip it apart all the better.
- On Holy Matrimony: Understanding Marriage and Marital Dysfunction.
- How Britain Lost Its Empire and the West Lost the World and The Unnecessary War Churchill Hitler.
- Little Bird (German Edition).
- One Dog Night!
- An Unnecessary War? – Patrick J. Buchanan – Official Website;
Related Churchill, Hitler, and The Unnecessary War: How Britain Lost Its Empire and the West Lost the World
Copyright 2019 - All Right Reserved