Winston's War: Churchill, 1940-1945

Hastings is an excellent write and I have enjoyed his books. I'm glad I read this one, too, but it has been one of the most depressing things I've read in a long time.

The book covers Churchill during the time that he was Prime Minister of Britain during the Second World War. You will note I didn't write Great Britain. Hastings writs with his usual balanced historical judgment, a touch of acid here and there, and no inclination whatever to pull punches: Britain was already morally exhausted before the Second World War and, except for the crucial period 1940-1941 and later as a base of operations, made a remarkably feeble contribution to defeating the Nazis.

Of course, Western historians came around to the view some time ago that Russia show more was overwhelmingly responsible for the destruction of the Wehrmacht.. Hastings argues that the British contribution to keeping Russia in the war was negligible until after the crucial period on the Eastern Front. A major theme of the work is Churchill's frustration at Britain's inability to keep even its modest promises of assistance.

Another theme of the work is that Churchill never had an Army worthy of his fighting spirit. Air Force, yes; Navy, very probably. But, according to Hastings, the Army never really fought well. Hastings has argued elsewhere that the kind of thorough indoctrination that made the German soldier such a fighter was not something we would want a liberal democracy to be capable of. He does not make this point here, perhaps because he has decided it is too feeble.

It is clear that Hastings is a great admirer of Churchill, warts and all. He is confident enough of Churchill's legacy that he is not afraid to present the lumps. Churchill would have been an extraordinarily difficult man to work for; perhaps only a Brooks could have done it so well. Brooks does not come off terribly well in this book, but then he doesn't come off terribly, either.

Other characters: Hastings thinks Montgomery was the best the British Army had, though he also obviously thinks this is damnation by faint praise. Slim was good, yes, but he was fighting the Japanese under favorably conditions. He might not have done so well in Europe. (I could wish the British had tried.) No Americans except Marshall, Roosevelt and Eisenhower get much mention, and only Roosevelt gets a lot of mention. Hastings destroys any remaining myth that the two were ever close friends; it was a shotgun marriage. Which is still a lot better than relations with Stalin.

Churchill's postwar vision was almost entirely not realized. He did not preside over the liquidation of the British Empire, but only because the British turned him out of office before the war ended. He was respected by his own people as a symbol of ferocious resistance, but not as any kind of man you'd want in charge in peacetime. Pity for the British.

Another thing that comes out of the book is just how naively admiring the British public, and to some extent the American public, were of the Russians during the war. They were not told, could not be told, the great extent to which the Russian victories were bought at the price of millions of fatalistic Russian troops more or less pushed into combat at gunpoint. All they knew was that their own armies were putzing around in the Mediterranean while the Russians were killing vast numbers of Germans, which was true as far as it went.

Depressing. But still worth two thumbs up. show less

One of the intriguing conundrums of WW2 is that it was started to save Poland from the Germans and ended with that country under Russian domination. Both Hitler and Stalin wanted to takeover Europe, clearly "Uncle Joe" had the better methodology . With absolutely no concern about how many Russians died and a few good weapons and generals, Stalin proceeded to kill Germans until Hitler literally ran out of them.

This is an outstanding look at Allied strategy and chicanery as practiced at the highest levels. Churchill had many flaws but his determination and resolution overcame inept generals, timid soldiers,a strike plagued industrial base, obsolete and inadequate weaponry to persevere. Virtually, every tactical decision he made or caused show more to be made ended in disaster With his incomparable oratory and dogged confidence in his cause, he was the living essence of the English Bulldog at its best with its back to the wall and defending its turf.

His main regret was that he failed to preserve the British Empire and most of the various and sundry monarchies that were strewn about Europe.

If the size of the book causes a pause prior to undertaking it, read Hasting's penetrating and perceptive peroration in the last five pages. Then find the time to read this well researched book about arguably the greatest statesman and war leader of the last century show less

Anyone who, like me, has Churchill on their list of People in History They Would Like to Have Dinner With would get a lot out of this book. It's really well written, has good photos and maps, and strikes a good balance between material on Churchill himself and the war.

Hastings clearly admires Churchill hugely but that doesn't stop him being very critical of many of his decisions and behaviour - but he repeatedly makes the point that in a war, mistakes are inevitable. It covers the period from 1940 -1945, and shows how fraught the alliance between Britain, the Commonwealth, the US and Russia was. It sets out the often grubby motivation for military objectives, the way Britain's military contribution dwindled in the last few years of the show more war, and how little power Birtain had within the alliance by the end - and how convinced Churchill was that he could use his huge personality to increase that power. In general, the German army comes across as a much more effective fighting machine than the Jolly Good Old Chap Brits, though there are exceptions.

Hastings is scathing about some British attitudes (not of the ordinary soldiers, but of their generals). He's also critical of the role played by SOE, the division that was responsible for stirring up resistance within Europe, and of local resistance in most countries. Roosevelt is much less likable than I'd expected, and very distant from his military chiefs, Stalin comes across as ruthless, cunning and evil, and Churchill is so complicated I can't sum him up into a few sentences. There is lots in here about the role of the media, and changing attitudes of the British public to Churchill and the war.

As the title suggests, it's heavily focused on Churchill and many of the sources are from his staff, but of course there is a lot of discussion about military operations. You don't need to know detail about battles and fronts in WW2, but it will make the book much easier if you do. There are about 100 pages on every year of the war. I found the parts about the Russian front, Poland, and France much faster to read than the chapters on the Aegean and the North African campaigns, because of previous reading - but it's all pretty readable.

So if you have a spare 10 days in your reading, and like history books, this one is well worth the effort. 5 stars. show less

A thorough explanation of the structure and functioning of the British system for management of the war, its evolution and methods of functioning. Shows the value of Churchill's constantly questioning attitudes, the response of his advisors, and his invariable acquiescence in their considered advice, albeit sometimes with minor modifications.

The book is enhanced by credible evocation of the mood of the people on both sides of the Atlantic and how that mood changed or was expressed through the war.

I am trying to increase my knowledge of the events that took place during World War II and in some ways this book was very helpful in that regard - especially the section about the evacuation at Dunkirk. However, I think that the book held a few too many political opinions for my liking in the overall aspect of report of the war.

I'll have to try to find another.

Very readable. An excellent book. I hadn't read much about Churchill before, but this book filled the gaps.

This is an enormously engrossing account of Churchill's war years.