AH book club

[Joker312]

I just finished reading Michael Korda's book "With Wings Like Eagles"

It wasn't terrible but I cant say I would recommend it. For instance, his questionable praise of Chamberlain's appeasement policy with regard to Germany and his subsequent claim that Chamberlains plan was to buy time so England could rearm is a stretch, as are a few other of his personal opinions of the political leadership of that time.

The book is more of a political review of the major players involved and less of a study of the battle.

The first red flag for me was on the very 1st page after you flip the cover, a page titled "Praise for With Wings Like Eagles",
at the bottom of the page and I quote, "A gripping tale, brilliantly told of-as Michael Korda so rightly puts it- the greatest battle of the 20th century, and possibly, given the stakes, of all history."  -Winston S. Churchill

Apart from the "all of history" part is the fact that Mr. Churchill had been dead for over 4 decades before this book was 1st published. I don't know how an error like that got past the proof readers.

Another is that Mr. Korda was Editor-in-Chief at Simon and Schuster where he worked for more than 40 years but this book was published by Harper and Collins. Why?

There are many better books to choose from IMO.

[Joker312]

I just realized that the Churchill that praised the book is the grandson that passed in 2010.

I stupidly jumped to the wrong conclusion.

My apologies.

I still can't recommend the book.

[Rich46yo]

Just read "Dumb But Lucky" written by a P-51 pilot who mostly flew out of Italy. I liked the book cause it was written by a self described blue collar fighter pilot who got thrown in a P-51 with only about 30 hours of training flight time. Eventually, of course, the new Mustang Pilots required 200 hrs and weeks of Indoc flying with their squadrons.

He spoke well of the P-51B and how much the Pilots liked it.

[JVboob]

Dumb but Lucky is a good one! Alost i cant recall the aurther but "Soldier in the cockpit" is about a typhoon pilot and its a good read. I keep forgetting to post my mini library on here maybe ill remember in the morning this time. <S> 49Boob

[Scherf]

Hey all,

Just finished reading "The big show" for the second time. ...Can anyone reccomend a really good WWII biography that will better this?

"Terror in the Starboard Seat" (I think also published as Mosquito Intruder), by Dave McIntosh. Navigator-turned-journalist's war memoir, incomparably good. With one exception, I've been able to trace the most notable incidents he mentions, true to life.

[Guppy35]

"Terror in the Starboard Seat" (I think also published as Mosquito Intruder), by Dave McIntosh. Navigator-turned-journalist's war memoir, incomparably good. With one exception, I've been able to trace the most notable incidents he mentions, true to life.

I've had that one on the shelf since it first came out.  The RCAF version of "Nanette".  If you love Mossies that one is hard to beat.

[JVboob]

Soldier in the Cockpit: From rifles to typhoons in WWII by Rown W. Pottinger
Aces High: The Heroic Saga of the Two Top-Scoring American Aces of World War II by Bill Yenne
 Ace of the Eighth: An American Fighter Pilot's Air War in Europe by Norman "Bud" Fortier
Baa Baa Blacksheep by Grogory Boyington                  (Pappy hiself)


theres one other that i cant recall

Roll me Over (Cant recall the author) is a good infantry read.
 Im currently reading Final Flight by Stephen Coonts

<S> 49Boob

[MrKrabs]

I just finished Part One of "Inside The Thrid Reich"

The question it left me at the end was "where was Hitler's logic? Was it that shrouded in meglomania?"

[FBKampfer]

I just finished Part One of "Inside The Thrid Reich"

The question it left me at the end was "where was Hitler's logic? Was it that shrouded in meglomania?"

Anger and resentment at the other nations for WWI, Jews for his mother and a scape goat for WWI that doesn't state Germany got in over her head.

Its clear he really had begun to convince himself of the propaganda his party was spewing forth, and after Germany had rearmed, there was some truth to the thought that they could conquer Europe. Their success prior to Barbarossa shows as much.

However, with success, Hitler grew ever more entrenched in the idea of the German Übermenschen, the Herrenvolk. Combined with his dislike of Commies and Slavs, and you get the Eastern front, and the ultimate downfall of Germany.

Was he mentally fragile and unstable to begin with? Probably. It would account for his seemingly pathological need to deny the reality of Germany's loss in WWI. But starting from this point, the logic (or rather insane machinations) is quite clear.

[MrKrabs]

Anger and resentment at the other nations for WWI, Jews for his mother and a scape goat for WWI that doesn't state Germany got in over her head.

Its clear he really had begun to convince himself of the propaganda his party was spewing forth, and after Germany had rearmed, there was some truth to the thought that they could conquer Europe. Their success prior to Barbarossa shows as much.

However, with success, Hitler grew ever more entrenched in the idea of the German Übermenschen, the Herrenvolk. Combined with his dislike of Commies and Slavs, and you get the Eastern front, and the ultimate downfall of Germany.

Was he mentally fragile and unstable to begin with? Probably. It would account for his seemingly pathological need to deny the reality of Germany's loss in WWI. But starting from this point, the logic (or rather insane machinations) is quite clear.

Probably not to begin with... Just a loony with resentment... What probably tipped it over was his lousey health and thus rushed everything possible while demanding the impossible. Goering was even more of a animal.

[Changeup]

Probably not to begin with... Just a loony with resentment... What probably tipped it over was his lousey health and thus rushed everything possible while demanding the impossible. Goering was even more of a animal.

There was some special on the Military Channel years ago that ran a parallel result assuming Hitler had simply waited in France and not gone forward with Barbarossa.  A 3-5 year pause resulted in London falling due to the German Wehrmacht growing quickly because of the numerical losses that never occurred on the Eastern Front.  The special indicated once Hitler had Europe, he would have spent 7 years on Russia and won and by 1960, had all of N Africa and Turkey. 

Interesting.

[FBKampfer]

I think that, had Hitler consolidated, he could have built up and improved his special weapons projects, many of which had much promise to mature into devastating weapons.

Beyond that, Germany was more than capable of producing a nuclear weapon. Combined with their quite advanced rocket technology, or proper maturation of one of their jet bomber designs, and it would have put Germany right up there with the USA in terms of its capacity to wage war.

[MrKrabs]

I think that, had Hitler consolidated, he could have built up and improved his special weapons projects, many of which had much promise to mature into devastating weapons.

Beyond that, Germany was more than capable of producing a nuclear weapon. Combined with their quite advanced rocket technology, or proper maturation of one of their jet bomber designs, and it would have put Germany right up there with the USA in terms of its capacity to wage war.

It wasn't even as complicated as that... Just foresight in general would have made a much more drastic difference... The U-boat program for example... He thought about it, thought it was a good idea but it hampered his glorious timeline of prestige. Then the same can be sai about the Russian campaign. It wasn't just supplies for his armies but the foresight that people like Speer had to bolster the railroad first and get that repaired before any advances could be made.

Nuclear technology was possible too, however by the time and Cyclotron production was even considered they wouldn't have had any nuclear device until 1947.

There are a lot of what-ifs period of how history could have been different and that in itself makes it fascinating. Imagine if Hitler put his ego aside and enveloped himself members of his entourage with higher education and not monsters like Goering and Boremann.

[RufusLeaking]

I just finished reading Michael Korda's book "With Wings Like Eagles"

It wasn't terrible but I cant say I would recommend it. For instance, his questionable praise of Chamberlain's appeasement policy with regard to Germany and his subsequent claim that Chamberlains plan was to buy time so England could rearm is a stretch, as are a few other of his personal opinions of the political leadership of that time.

It may be a stretch, but it was the first time that I had heard that claim. Most history attributes "Peace in our time" to cowardice. As it turned out, the RAF was just getting Mark Is to the units for the Battle of Britain.

Political, yes, but there seems to be something about Dowding that the author left out. I am not sure what.

The book offers up (to me) a fresh perspective, as opposed to more of the same old ...

I think that, had Hitler consolidated, he could have built up and improved his special weapons projects, many of which had much promise to mature into devastating weapons.

Beyond that, Germany was more than capable of producing a nuclear weapon. Combined with their quite advanced rocket technology, or proper maturation of one of their jet bomber designs, and it would have put Germany right up there with the USA in terms of its capacity to wage war.

Germany was doomed to lose World War II from the start. Period.

The US had 30% of the worlds manufacturing capacity, even at the end of the Great Depression. It is an odd but too common fantasy to have the Nazis win the war. It would have never happened.

Get over it.

See Dunnigan's book:

[Motherland]

"If grandma had a dick, she'd be grandpa"

All of these silly 'what if the Germans would have won' scenarios hinge on Germany's leadership doing everything exactly right throughout the whole war, and the Allies making all of the same mistakes (or more).
What if France hadn't let Germany remilitarize the Rheinland?
What if Stalin hadn't gutted the Soviet military leadership in the late 30s?
What if Ribbentrop and Molotov hadn't signed the non-aggression pact in 1939?
What if France was prepared for the war and invaded Germany while the latter was bogged down in Poland?
What if France hadn't invested all of those resources in the Maginot line and hadn't fallen for the Werhmacht's outmaneuvering and diversions?

For every scenario where Germany wins, there are like four where WWII lasts two weeks. The question 'what if Hitler hadn't invaded the Soviet Union' is ridiculous, giving the 'Uebermenschen' 'Lebensraum' was his whole thing. "What if everything about the Nazi's policies were completely different?"
"What if Hitler hadn't invaded the Soviet Union?" is about as intellectually stimulating a question as "What if Hitler had just gone to art school?"

The First and the Last by Adolf Galland is an interesting read. Gives you an impression of how hopeless the air war was for the Luftwaffe, and a unique perspective from the commander of the Jagdwaffe.