Memoirs of the Second World War

by Winston S. Churchill

The quintessential account of the Second World War as seen by Winston Churchill, its greatest leader

As Prime Minister of Great Britain from 1940 to 1945, Winston Churchill was not only the most powerful player in World War II, but also the free world's most eloquent voice of defiance in the face of Nazi tyranny. Churchill's epic accounts of those times, remarkable for their grand sweep and incisive firsthand observations, are distilled here in a single essential volume. Memoirs of the Second World War is a vital and illuminating work that retains the drama, eyewitness details, and magisterial prose of his classic six-volume history and offers an invaluable view of pivotal events of the twentieth century.

Genres: History, Nonfiction, Biography, War, World War II, Military History, Politics

1065 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1948

About the author

Sir Winston Leonard Spencer Churchill, politician and writer, as prime minister from 1940 to 1945 and from 1951 to 1955 led Great Britain, published several works, including The Second World War from 1948 to 1953, and then won the Nobel Prize for literature.

William Maxwell Aitken, first baron Beaverbrook, held many cabinet positions during the 1940s as a confidant of Churchill.

Sir Winston Leonard Spencer-Churchill, KG, OM, CH, TD, FRS, PC (Can), served the United Kingdom again. A noted statesman, orator and strategist, Churchill also served as an officer in the Army. This prolific author "for his mastery of historical and biographical description as well as for brilliant oratory in defending exalted human values."

Out of respect for Winston_Churchill, the well-known American author, Winston S. Churchill offered to use his middle initial as an author.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winston...

Reviews

[Ted · Rating 5 out of 5]

Read this many years ago, it will certainly keep a history fan occupied for a long while. Unless you're a very fast reader.

I've seen criticisms of the work, something like the idea that Churchill sometimes implies (or even insists) that his own view of things, or his own role in bringing something about, is just a bit dismissive of other conceptions, or parts that others played.

Such criticisms are, obviously (if they have any validity) the view of historians that have studied the second World War from a rather larger distance in time; whereas the time between the events Churchill narrates, and when he actually put his thoughts on paper, was only about ten years. Be that as it may (and I had never heard these criticisms when I first read the volumes), what Churchill gives the reader is, if nothing else, an insider's view - and not only an insider, but surely one of the most influential insiders that could be imagined.

As for the writing itself, Churchill is a master at writing a historical narrative, I doubt that there would be much argument about that.

By the way, I decided to put this little review here tonight because I've decided that I'd really like to give at least the first volume (The Gathering Storm) another read. Whether that will actually come about, who knows? But it's now in that mental pile of books, instead of simply languishing on a basement bookshelf.


. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Previous review: SAGA Vol. 1
Random review: Half of a Yellow Sun
Next review: The Soccer War

Previous library review: The European Mind 1680-1715 Paul Hazard
Next library review: The Second World War John Keegan

[Matt · Rating 4 out of 5]

For quite some time I wanted to engage Winston Churchill’s extensive history and memoir of the Second World War. Before one begins the struggle with such a large-scale work, some planning is necessary, so the question was which edition it should be. Consulting Wikipedia I found that in addition to the original six-volume edition there’s also one that has twelve-volumes (same content I suppose), as well as a “condensed” edition, which appeared in a single volume (but still brings it to stately 1100+ pages). According to an old military wisdom it is usually best to attack the enemy where he is weakest, so I decided to start the battle with the latter edition. There was a most fortunate happenstance: I accidentally found the condensed/abridged edition (in German translation) on a somewhat obscure bookshelf in our house!

Before the actual battle, it makes sense to learn as much as possible about your enemy. In order to do this I made some quick recce flights over the entire enemy’s area, and found that it is necessary to fight no less than four armies, with the somewhat strange names of Milestones to Disaster, Alone, Grand Alliance, and Triumph & Tragedy. The first three of these each had 22 divisions, the fourth one 31. So I had a total of almost 100 divisions before me, each of which, as it seemed, consisted of 10-20 regiments (corresponding to the pages of the book). In addition, there is another epilogue division with about 25 more regiments, as well as a small 4-regiment preface division. All in all, I faced a pretty big force!

The preface division as well as the first four or five divisions of the “Disaster” army I was able to overrun on the first day without significant resistance. In particular, division #3, “Adolf Hitler” presented no problems at all after my recent combat experience with Mein Kampf. Even though the advance slowed down a bit after the initial “Blitz”, I managed to put 3 to 4 divisions behind me each day and achieved some more or less large gains in terrain. This changed, however, when I engaged the 18th division: “The Admiralty Task”. Here the enemy introduced a new weapon: battle images in the form of maps. In this case, there were as many as five such maps of the naval battle at the La-Plata estuary and at first I did not know at first how to fight them properly. The view, whether with or without my glasses, was extremely bad; the sense initially fogged. Fortunately, I remembered an old companion, who introduced my me to art of warcraft in my teenage years: Peter Young’s [ed.] book Atlas of the Second World War . For this book Richard Natkiel created many maps that have the following advantages over those displayed in Churchill’s book: They are colored; they are bigger and thus easier to read; they are far more detailed. Against Natkiel’s maps those of Sir Winston had no chance. I was glad I found this ally (which I had not looked at for nearly 40 years), who served me faithfully for the rest of the war.

I don’t want to bore the reader with all the details of the larger and smaller battles that took place during the seventeen days of war. Suffice to say that the enemy changed tactics now and then. For example, by introducing read barriers in the form of smaller quotes, verbatim telegrams, or even parts of speeches. Furthermore some divisions were mined using footnotes, but those were by no means as numerous or big compared to the ones I discovered in the critical edition of Mein Kampf – not really worth mentioning. Somewhat more effective were the cleverly built-in jumps in time, forward or backward, but which could only slow down the overall advance a bit but not make it stop.

In the end I managed to finished off about 6 divisions per day on average, or 66 regiments, which I consider quite satisfactory for this type of war. The final fight with the epilogue division was remarkable. Here the opponent showed, once again, full operational mission, even though, at this point, it was clear that the war was no longer to win for him. Nevertheless, I spent almost a full day on this fight. A very honorable last stand! For me, as well as for the enemy, with whom I reconciled now that the war is over.

As far as I’m concerned that’s enough war for now ... Or ever.



This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

[Mahdi Lotfi · Rating 4 out of 5]

تاریخ جنگ جهانی دوم مجموعه کتابی شش جلدی حاوی شرح وقایع جنگ جهانی دوم از دیدگاه وینستون چرچیل است که وقایع آن را از سال پایان جنگ اول جهانی تا ژوئیه ۱۹۴۵ در بر می‌گیرد.
از رهبران کشورهای عمده درگیر در جنگ دوم (هیتلر، موسولینی، استالین و روزولت) تنها چرچیل کتابی تاریخی منتشر کرده‌است. برخلاف خبرنگاران که تنها از مسایل علنی مطلع می‌شدند، چرچیل در اموری مانند مذاکرات محرمانه و طراحی‌های عملیات نظامی شرکت داشته‌است و به جزئیات مسایل و رویدادها وقوف داشته‌است؛ علاوه بر این، او به گزارشهای سازمانهای اطلاعاتی بریتانیا و خصوصاً نتایج عملیات اولترا که در مکالمات سری ارتش آلمان رخنه کرده بود دسترسی داشته و می‌توانسته تصویری روشنتر از وقایع جنگی و انگیزه‌های رهبران کشورها به دست بدهد. چرچیل از شروع جنگ، قصد داشته که کتابی تاریخی درباره آن بنویسد و از این رو به صورت هفتگی گزارشهایی از خلاصه وقایع تهیه می‌کرده و در منزلش این گزارشها را نگهداری می‌کرده‌است. برخی معتقدند نگارش کتاب تنها به دست چرچیل انجام نشده و در حقیقت کتاب نتیجه کار گروهی از محققان هست که زیر نظر چرچیل و با استفاده از نوشته‌ها و یادداشتهای او این کتاب را ایجاد کرده‌اند. در مقابل برخی نیز اعتقاد دارند که موشکافی و حساسیت چرچیل اجازه چنین کاری را نمی داده و بیشتر همکارانش، تنها در تهیه اسناد و مدارک مورد استفاده به او یاری رسانده‌اند.
اولین چاپ این مجموعه کتاب به صورت مجموعه شش جلدی بوده‌است. جلد اول با عنوان طوفان نزدیک می‌شود، ۱۹۴۸، حاوی مطالبیست که چرچیل در دهه ۳۰ نوشته بود و قصد داشت در کتابی درباره اتفاقات پس از ۱۹۱۹ چاپ کند. این کتاب در برگیرنده دیدگاههای انتقادی او درباره سیاست مماشات دولتهای بالدوین و چمبرلین می‌باشد. عنوان جلد دوم عالی‌ترین ساعت آنها، ۱۹۴۹، (به انگلیسی Their finest hours) از سخنرانی مشهور ۱۸ ژوئن ۱۹۴۰ چرچیل هست: "باشد که چنان به وظایف و مسولیتهای خود عمل کنیم که اگر امپراطوری بریتانیا و کشورهای مشترک‌المنافع هزار سال هم بر پا بمانند، همگان بگویند که این عالی‌ترین ساعت آن‌ها بوده‌است." این جلد شامل شرح پیشرویهای آلمان در غرب و دوران سخت پس از سقوط فرانسه می‌باشد که با مقاومت بریتانیا و انصراف آلمان از عملیات شیر دریایی پایان می‌باید.
جلد سوم، اتحاد بزرگ، (سال انتشار ۱۹۵۰)، شامل شرح گسترش جنگ از اروپا به بقیه جهان، از جمله حمله آلمان به شوروی و ورود آمریکا به جنگ در سال ۱۹۴۱ می‌باشد.
در مجلدهای باقی مانده، جلد چهارم چرخش سرنوشت، منتشر شده در ۱۹۵۰، جلد پنجم بسته شدن حلقه، منتشر شده در ۱۹۵۱، و پیروزی و تراژدی، منتشر شده در ۱۹۵۳، به سالهای افول قدرت ارتش هیتلر پس از شکست استالینگراد، شرکت وسیع آمریکا در عملیاتهای نظامی و تصمیم‌گیری درباره سرنوشت جنگ، تصمیم گیریهای کنفرانسهای تهران، یالتا و پتسدام، روابط با شوروی و سرنوشت آلمان، لهستان، یونان و دیگر کشورهای درگیر در جنگ پس از جنگ پرداخته می‌شود. علاوه بر دوره شش جلدی، این کتاب در دوره‌های ۱۲ جلدی و ۴ جلدی نیز منتشر شده‌است.
این کتاب را ابتدا ذبیح الله منصوری ترجمه کرد. (البته منصوری تنها هفت جلد از این کتاب را ترجمه کرد). این کتاب در دوازده جلد با ترجمه تورج فرازمند به سال ۱۳۴۷ از سوی انتشارات نیل به فارسی منتشر شده‌است.

[Markus · Rating 5 out of 5]

Churchill’s Memoirs of World War II
By Winston Churchill (1874-1965)


The present edition is an abridged version of the original, which amounts to six volumes.
It is the report from Winston Churchill, who shaped and observed history as an actor and eyewitness in the front seat.

The world has narrowly escaped a destiny which could have been shaped by Nazi Germany if they had won.

A few very fortunate circumstances made the difference.

These circumstances are outlined by the author of these memoirs,
some of which, as the most striking to me, I would like to quote hereafter.

But first, it is necessary to remember the extraordinary situation between the two wars from 1918 to 1939.

There is the incredible treachery of the Germans after the Treaty of Versailles of 1918.

Then there is the unbelievable naivety and ignorance of the neighbouring countries who did not see and would not believe that the rebuilding of the German war machine at high speed was not a bluff, but to go to war.

In March 1933 Hitler opened the first Reichstag of the Third Reich.
On March 24 the absolute majority of the Reichstag confirmed by 441 votes to 94 full emergency powers to Chancellor Hitler for four years.

Under Hitler’s orders, the German war industry was hurled into full speed.
Irrespective of any limitations set out in the Treaty of Versailles at the end of WWI.

When the British and French Government finally started to realise the danger, a Disarmament Conference was called up.

Hitler did not even trouble to study the offers presented to him.
He just withdrew from the Conference and from the League of Nations, with a gesture of disdain.
Americans remained aloof and merely shrugged their shoulders. They were to change their attitude later.

In 1931 the British government under PM Baldwin without consulting the French ally or the League of Nations made a secret agreement with Hitler allowing the Germans to build
U-boats explicitly denied in the Peace treaty!
This resulted in that, over the coming four years of war, more than fourteen and a half million tonnes of allied shipping were sunk by German U-boats alone!

It was only when Hitler unleashed his hellhounds against his nearest and weakest neighbours, 1938 Austria and 1939 Poland; Norway was invaded and in German control.
In 1940, France was invaded on a fast pace and soon ceased to fight. Marechal Petain signed the Armistice with the Germans.

The British realised that they were going to be the next target; and that they were in for trouble because ill-prepared.

Then London had its first bombing raids by German aircraft.

Now the first of the fortunate events took place.
On the 10th Mai 1940, Winston Churchill was named Minister of War and Admiralty.
He was a man with a stubborn and robust character and the necessary experience from WWI. The right man at the right place at the right time.

But Britain could not challenge Germany on its own. It needed help from America.

President Roosevelt had proposed to PM Chamberlain to set up a meeting to discuss the European situation. At first, Chamberlain had arrogantly with a wave of one hand, declined.
But soon the situation became dramatic. And the British attitude changed.

American aid shipments started to flow; arms and war material.
Throughout the war, these shipments were most dramatically sabotaged by German submarines, sinking countless ships.

In December 1941 the other, for Europe, “fortunate event” happened: Pearl Harbour!
And three days later, Germany declared war on America.

The Japanese bombing of the US harbour of Pearl Harbour and the German declaration of war gave President Roosevelt the decisive argument to obtain from Congress the green light to officially declare war on Japan and join WWII against Hitler.

Europe did not have the means of winning the war against Germany without the intervention of the American Navy, Airforce and Army.
This was demonstrated by the historic D-Day landing on the beaches of Normandy in Northern France in June 1944.

The unimaginable size of American War Industry came into full operation.
Roosevelt called to produce 45,000 combat aircraft, 45,000 tanks, 20,000 anti-aircraft guns, 14,900 anti-tank guns and 500,000 machine guns.
These figures were surpassed in 1943.
1942 shipping tonnage built 5,339,000 tons
1943 shipping tonnage built 12,384,000 tons

Then Hitler made the same mistake Napoleon made in 1812.

In June 1941 he declared war on Russia, underestimating the sheer endless size of Russian territory, the unbearable cold and snow of winter, and the formidable size and fighting will-power of the Red Army. Russian arms and munitions were outdated, but this was soon to change.

Throughout 1942 and 1943 British navy dispatched 40 convoys over the Arctic waters with much-needed supplies to Russia, to help against the German aggression.
Amounting to a total worth of 428,000,000 pounds of material, including 5000 tanks and over 7000 aircraft.
The Royal Navy paid a heavy price: Two cruisers and seventeen other warships were sunk by German U-boats. 1840 officers and men died.

It would make this review too long if I went into more military and political details, like the battles in North Africa, and Italy, the political disasters of the Balkan states and about the war in Asia against Japan and the Atomic bomb there.

In the last chapter of this book, ‘Triumph and Tragedy.’ Churchill writes about his disappointment with the outcome after the demise of Germany.

The much too hasty withdrawal of the American Army from halfway across Germany, leaving enormous territories to be recovered by Russia and setting the conditions for the Iron Curtain.
Contrary to all agreements signed with Moscow, the Communist occupants of the Eastern countries refused any Western observers to enter and see the conditions of Elections and Governments established.

The other fortunate event worth mentioning is that in the end, the victory for the Allies came none too soon.
If the war had, for any reason dragged on much longer, the outcome might still have been in favour of the Germans.

Even though against the end, they were running out of raw materials, like gasoline, steel and rubber, their progress in developing new weapons was continuous and frightening.

Germany’s advanced weapons in 1944 were among others, the V2 rocket or flying bombs – New high-speed U-boats – Jet propulsion aeroplanes.
How close the German research had come close to the A-bomb is a controversy still under discussion.

This abridged version does not mention the Concentration camps of Auschwitz or others.
Nor does it report on the Nürnberg War Tribunal where the German Generals were condemned to death by hanging. Hitler had ended his life by suicide.

At the end of the book, Churchill provides his thoughts for the future of Europe.

“…I am now going to say something that will astonish you. The first step in the re-creation of the European family must be a partnership between France and Germany. In this way only can France recover the moral leadership of Europe. There can be no revival of Europe without a spiritually great France and a spiritually great Germany. The structure of the United States of Europe, if well and truly built it, will be such as to make the material strength of a single state less important. (…) if we are to form the United States of Europe or whatever name or form it may take, we must begin now.” (1946).

This abridged edition may give enough details of this historical period for the average reader.
But for a history nerd like me, I look forward to reading the full set of six, which I was fortunate enough in finding a good 1948 edition.

In 1953 Churchill was honoured with the Nobel Prize of Literature for this work.
Enjoy your reading!

[Creighton · Rating 5 out of 5]

First, let me say I wish I could give this book a 100 star rating, because it has truly taken the place in my library of one of the best books ever written on the Second World War. Perhaps it is the best book I have ever read. A lot of the books I have read this year and last year have been great and/or informative, but this book has been the icing of the cake for 2021. I recommend this book to everyone who calls themselves a World War Two aficionado, because this book not only explains the actions taken, but why they were done, and why the world fought against Hitler. I had an awakening from this book on why the war was fought, and just how important it was that the United States got involved in the war itself. God Bless Winston Churchill and FDR for all they did to fight against tyranny. Going into this book, I thought it would take me 10-12 days, but I ended up spending a month on it, because it was so good, and I wished to savor each moment I had with it. I would like to read the six volume series that this was an abridgement of in the future.

I am a big fan of Winston Churchill; I read and listen to his speeches, I look to him for inspiration, and I see in him one of the greatest politicians that ever lived. After reading this book, I think he is a contender for one of the best writers in the English language; his skill and command of the written word is truly astounding, and kept me reading each and every line. When I see how people today are trying to drag Churchill into the mud, I see people who take for granted the fact he saved Britain itself from the tyranny of Adolf Hitler. I would rather live in a corrupt, free, western democracy, ran by elites, than a oppressive, dictatorship with anti-Semitism, and no freedoms.

So many people want to portray Churchill as a warmonger, but guess who remilitarized the Rhineland, Guess who used violence to get into power, Guess who sent people to concentration camps? Guess who tried to exterminate the Jewish and slavic races? Hitler. It seems so many neo-nazis are trying to make Hitler out to be a man of peace, but he never was, he only wanted to fool the world, but Churchill saw through him.

While I still am critical of the current government I live under, I am brought back to reality on why I shouldn't take for granted the cause the western allies fought for.

The World Wars were both avoidable, and it is my opinion they should've been avoided. So many people died, so many lost their youthfulness, and so many people who probably could've made an astounding impact on the world were killed.

After reading this book, I believe my next plan is to study Churchills life, and the First World War.

[Olethros · Rating 4 out of 5]

-Cuando la imparcialidad es innecesaria por múltiples razones que la superan.-

Género. Ensayo.

Lo que nos cuenta. El libro La Segunda Guerra Mundial (publicación original: The Second World War, 1959) es la compilación que realizó Denis Kelly sobre los seis libros que, al respecto, escribió Churchill entre 1940 y 1945, más el epílogo que escribió el autor en 1957, y que nos hablan de los rescoldos de la Gran Guerra, las convulsiones políticas, sociales y económicas del periodo de entreguerras, el ascenso de los fascismos, la hostilidad de la Alemania nazi y, por supuesto, los desarrollos de la Segunda Guerra Mundial (con él mismo, eso sí, como figura omnipresente).

¿Quiere saber más de este libro, sin spoilers? Visite:

http://librosdeolethros.blogspot.com/...

[Marijan Šiško · Rating 5 out of 5]

Stari lisac je tako znao baratati perom, da je čak i djelo u šest tomova gušt čitati.

[Alex · Rating 4 out of 5]

Churchill is one of the most written about men in history, and this the most written about of his works. This is therefore less of a review and more of a logbook of what stands tall in memory a few days after closing the book.

- This abridgement focuses mostly on Churchill's meetings and travels, so if you're more interested in the personal account rather than the military movements, this volume is a phenomenal alternative to the full six-book series. (And the amount of traveling he did during the war was staggering to discover.)

- If you do take up and read, then read it realizing it is indeed a personal account and therefore offers only one perspective—which is of course why we read it! But as I jumped from scene to scene, one thought was everpresent in my mind: What would others say happened here?

- I found his encounters with Stalin to be the most fascinating part of the whole thing. Churchill wrote in a completely wistful manner about him. There is one scene where Stalin invites Churchill up to his apartment for a drink and a meal. He stays long into the night, laughing and making merry with "Joe". Later, he writes of another encounter out on a patio after a meeting. The language Churchill uses is almost romantic. He talks about them gazing into each other's eyes. It's somewhat surreal.

- How did I not know Italy was a monarchy through WWII??

- This is a crushing passage. Churchill is later very complimentary of Truman, but at this moment, when the issue of postwar peace in Europe hung in the balance, it seems impossible that one could read these words without giving into the sense of futile wonder at what might have been.

"We can now see the deadly hiatus which existed between the fading of President Roosevelt's strength and the growth of President Truman's grip of the vast world problem. In this melancholy void one President could not act and the other could not know...The indispensable political direction was lacking at the moment when it was most needed. The United States stood on the scene of victory, master of world fortunes, but without a true and coherent design. Britain, though still very powerful, could not act decisively alone...Thus this climax of apparently measureless success was to me a most unhappy time. I moved amid cheering crowds, or sat at a table adorned with congratulations and blessings from every part of the Grand Alliance, with an aching heart and a mind oppressed by forebodings."

[Ana · Rating 5 out of 5]

Mais um livro para o top das melhores leituras do ano.

Esta é uma edição condensada dos seis volumes que compõem a obra original The Second World War. A tradução, brasileira, é bastante boa, embora as designações geográficas (Moscou, Teerã, Cingapura) me tenham feito bastante confusão :D

Ao longo de mais de 1000 páginas, Churchill leva-nos através da nossa história recente, numa prosa fluente e apurada, que nos fornece os detalhes necessários para compreender como a guerra começou e progrediu, incluindo transcrições de telegramas, memorandos e discursos. A escrita é de tal forma boa, que nos deixa literalmente agarrados não só às descrições de batalhas decisivas, como ao desenrolar dos acontecimentos políticos, como se estivéssemos a assistir a um filme.

Um livro cheio de lições que bem poderiam/deveriam ser tidas em conta para o futuro, se ao menos os nossos líderes políticos se dessem ao trabalho de ler livros e estudar história…

Ao terminar, dei comigo a pensar, Obrigada, Mr. Churchill.

[John · Rating 3 out of 5]

I really admire Churchill as a war leader. He was exactly the right man in the right job for the time. But if you want accurate history, go elsewhere. Since millions of documents have been declassified, especially the existence of ULTRA, any WWII history released before 1980 is by definition, woefully incomplete. Like Eisenhower's war memoir, Churchill's is intended to secure his place in history, not at all to tell an accurate story. (Additionally, the main reason Churchill wrote these books is for the money. He was broke.)

But this book has value none-the-less for Churchill's powerful point of view.

[Felix =] · Rating 4 out of 5]

Halleluja😂

[Anne Clare · Rating 5 out of 5]

I hadn't picked up a serious history book in years. I got Churchill's Memoirs from the library for WW2 research, but I honestly wasn't certain if I'd finish the book.
I shouldn't have worried.
Churchill's eloquent, dramatic prose, brought the many details and theaters of WW2 to life.
Without delving into different events and controversies of the war, I'll simply say that this is one man's perspective, although he includes correspondence with other important figures such as Roosevelt, Stalin, and even documents from the German government, discovered after the war.
As a sweeping overview of the war and interesting insight into one of its great leaders, this book is an excellent read.

[José António Borges · Rating 5 out of 5]

Magistral e indispensável.

[Clark · Rating 5 out of 5]

It took me several weeks to read this book of over 1000 pages, but it was well worth it. Perhaps the best book I have ever read, both for enlightenment and educational value. For me, Winston Churchill is the greatest man to have lived during my lifetime.

Some things I learned reading this book:

• Amazed to learn about the effect of the U-boats in WWII. Of the total fleet of 250, close to 100 were in U.S. waters at one time during 1942 & 1943. In 68 months of fighting 781 German U-boats were lost, but over 14 million tons of Allied shipping were sunk by U-boats

• Learned that Churchill was constantly travelling during the war and preferred face-to-face meetings to communicate. As Prime Minister from 1940 to 1945, he made at least twenty-five trips outside Britain, some ranging over several continents, including several to the U.S. to meet with President Roosevelt.

• He also liked to be close to the battlefield. He visited Normandy 4 days after D-Day and had lunch in a tent 3 miles from the actual enemy lines. He was with Field Marshall Montgomery when the British Army crossed the Rhine on March 23, 1945, and watched as four divisions crossed the river.

• Churchill supported 100% the dropping of the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, primarily because the Japanese power was in the hands of the military, which were determined to commit the nation to mass suicide rather than accept defeat. Both he and Truman felt over one million U.S. soldiers and one-half million British would have been killed if it were necessary to invade Japan to gain their surrender.

[Victor Oliveira · Rating 5 out of 5]

Espetacular.
Por se tratar de uma edição especial que reúne os seis volumes originais em dois grandes volumes, a leitura demanda certo tempo, porém é recompensada com uma narrativa muito rica em detalhes e do ponto de vista de uma das mentes mais brilhantes da humanidade, Churchill.
É interessante entender o papel decisivo da Inglaterra, que muitas vezes é negligenciado nos livros de história, e como a omissão das potências mundiais fez eclodir o conflito armado e o crescimento do comunismo logo após o término da guerra.
Minha edição tem alguns problemas de tradução e de impressão, com algumas páginas (poucas) com letras mais claras do que o normal.

[han_man · Rating 5 out of 5]

"Taschenbuch" ist ein bizarrer Euphemismus.

[Alan Johnson · Rating 5 out of 5]

Winston Churchill had a long career in and out of the British government. He served in many governmental positions, including first lord of the admiralty (the political head of the British navy) from 1911 to 1915 and, at the outbreak of World War II, from September 1939 to May 1940. He was prime minister from May 1940 until July 1945 (during World War II) and, again, from 1951 to 1955. For further information about his personal and professional life, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winston....

During such a lengthy political career, Churchill, of course, made some mistakes, especially in his earlier years. In my view, his greatest governmental achievements were during his tenure as prime minister in World War II. After the war, he wrote a six-volume work titled The Second World War, in which, among other things, he detailed his speech and actions as prime minister. A journalist and historian during his years outside of government, Churchill quoted from many primary sources (including his own written memoranda and communications) in this multivolume classic.

I read the entire six volumes of Churchill's The Second World War in paperback during the 1970s. I am currently rereading portions of it on Kindle. It is an excellent work, showing in detail how Churchill thought and acted as first lord of the admiralty and, later, prime minister during the war. I have always been struck with the clarity, brilliance, and historical accuracy of Churchill's prose as well as his illuminating explanations of the reasons for his decisions and actions.

The day after Churchill died on January 24, 1965, political science professor Leo Strauss said the following in a class on political philosophy at the University of Chicago:

The death of Churchill is a healthy reminder to academic students of political science of their limitations, the limitations of their craft.

The tyrant [Hitler] stood at the pinnacle of his power [in 1940, when Churchill became prime minister]. The contrast between the indomitable and magnanimous statesman and the insane tyrant—this spectacle in its clear simplicity was one of the greatest lessons which men can learn, at any time. No less enlightening is the lesson conveyed by Churchill’s failure, which is too great to be called tragedy. I mean the fact that Churchill’s heroic action on behalf of human freedom against Hitler only contributed, through no fault of Churchill’s, to increasing the threat to freedom which is posed by Stalin or his successors. Churchill did the utmost that a man could do to counter that threat—publicly and most visibly in Greece and [in his 1946 Iron Curtain speech] in Fulton, Missouri. Not a whit less important than his deeds and speeches are his writings, above all his Marlborough, the greatest historical work written in our century, an inexhaustible mine of political wisdom and understanding which should be required reading for every student of political science.

The death of Churchill reminds us of the limitations of our craft and therewith of our duty. We have no higher duty and no more pressing duty than to remind ourselves and our students of political greatness, human greatness, of the peaks of human excellence. For we are supposed to train ourselves and others in seeing things as they are, and this means above all in seeing their greatness and their misery, their excellence and their vileness, their nobility and their baseness, and therefore never to mistake mediocrity, however brilliant, for true greatness. In our age this duty demands of us in the first place that we liberate ourselves from the supposition that value statements cannot be factual statements. (Leo Strauss, Leo Strauss on Political Philosophy: Responding to the Challenge of Positivism and Historicism [The Leo Strauss Transcript Series] [Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2018], 123 [editorial notes omitted], Kindle)

Winston Churchill was controversial in his time and remains controversial today. His stance on British colonialism was never accepted by U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt, his friend and international colleague during World War II, and is not generally accepted today. Many of his decisions during his long career as a British governmental official have been questioned. However this may be, I think Strauss’s above-quoted statement about Churchill’s response to Hitler is entirely correct.

[Janet · Rating 4 out of 5]

A fascinating personal narrative, as opposed to a history, of WWII. WSC believed in the British Empire and a special relationship among all "English-speaking people." The first half of the abridged version of his six-volume memoirs is stronger; as the war drags on he focuses on the many conferences of the "Big Three" FDR, WSC and Stalin. If everyone had just heeded all his warnings and had implemented his strategies all would be well, or at least better. As Germany is collapsing toward surrender, WSC never mentions the Nazi death camps and seems more concerned about the Polish borders. Still it's amazing he was voted out of office at the end of July 1945 and didn't have the opportunity to stand up to the Russians in the immediate post-war period.

[Matias Salimbene · Rating 5 out of 5]

Me pongo de pie y me saco el sombrero para saludar a este gran hombre, al que tanto le debemos en todo el mundo occidental. Y más allá también. La Segunda Guerra mundial narrada en primera persona por Winston Churchill es un texto apasionante sobre los hechos políticos y militares que tuvieron lugar entre 1939 y 1945, y que dieron forma al mundo de posguerra. En gran medida el mundo en que vivimos actualmente. Si hemos vivido en un contexto de relativa paz hasta el momento, lo debemos en buena parte, a las acciones de este gran hombre que fue Winston S. Churchill.

[Tomasz · Rating 5 out of 5]

To be honest, it took me over 6 years to read Churchill’s “Second World War”. The six tomes can be a bit overwhelming due to their breadth and detail, so I preferred to limit myself to one tome each year rather than risk oversaturation. Still, I can’t recommend the book enough to anyone who has serious interest in WW2.

Churchill’s opus magnum is not a history book, which analyses given events using accumulated knowledge and consensus of researchers on how these should be viewed and interpreted and hence giving us the distilled version of history. It is a vivid memoir of a leader of one of the main participants in the conflict, which shows his state of mind, his fears and beliefs (even if sometimes misguided) as the events he describes were unfolding.

Reading Churchill helped me understand at least a little bit the immense challenge of managing a country, in fact an empire with global interests, during a prolonged international crisis. You follow the British Prime Minister as he negotiated and imposed his war policies, while balancing different groups of interests within his administration, the army, the coalition government, the Commonwealth and finally among his allies. The responsibility was immense. As a leader Churchill was the only person within the United Kingdom who could not limit himself to the comfort zone of a tunnel vision on any given matter, but needed to encompass the whole thing and make difficult choices. Should you send your scare resources to two different theatres which can at best create a stalemate or should you risk starving one front in order to gamble for a breakthrough on the other? These pressures were Churchill’s daily bread. He also needed to constantly follow and comprehend all the major problems that are normally managed during the war and keep in check his own apparatus to avoid inertia, which always tends to build up within any big organization.

One thing, which gave me much joy when reading the book was its language. It is no wonder that Churchill received a Nobel price in literature. Furthermore, even his numerous telegrams and official letters quoted in the book are a marvel to read. They show a unique ability to convey complicated ideas and opinions in a concise way and with clarity. I mention this point, since I work myself in the government administration and I fear that the art of writing concise, well thought analysis where each word carries weight has been lost somehow, somewhere.

The book is mainly the British account and therefore cannot be considered a comprehensive history of WW2. Churchill talks with a lot of detail about all Commonwealth troops operations against Rommel in Africa or even about his idea to mine the Rheine with time-fuse bombs. On the other hand, the story of the entire Russian Front is given fewer pages than the description of the British involvement for a political settlement in the liberated Greece. By the end of the account the descriptions of military operations are becoming more and more rushed. Relatively little is said about how operation Overlord developed and operation Market Garden only gets a short mention without even using its codename. This may be because, as Americans got fully involved in the war, the Britain was relegated to the back seat and Churchill’s personal influence on the military operations decreased considerably. In fact, you might find a hint of bitterness and criticism towards the Americans in the later phase of the war. For example, despite all the words to the opposite, Churchill seemed to view the campaign in Italy as a failure due to American decision to withdraw some troops from the Italian front and use them for an unnecessary, amphibious landing in Southern France (operation Anvil). As a consequence, the German army in northern Italy held till April 1945 and Western Allies lost the chance to enter Vienna before the Russians. Churchill’s gradual, decreasing focus on military operations may also be caused by the fact, that his attention shifted towards a new, emerging challenge in Europe, namely the Soviet Union.

As much as I enjoyed reading Churchill’s account one needs to approach the book with a certain caution. After all, it was written not by a disinterested researcher but by an active politician at the time when he was still competing for power and influence in his country. The book has a political role to play. It sets a narrative, which underlines Britain’s and Churchill’s role in winning the war. You will therefore not find many words of self-criticism or criticism toward other decision makers with whom Churchill had cooperated. This is understandable, many of them were still active in politics and military when the book was written and the author didn’t want to create controversies or enemies, as this could hurt his political career. What Churchill offers us is a version of history that all countries of the Commonwealth would like to see, underlining their honor, bravery and selflessness in the face of a great danger. There is no soul-searching regarding such incidents as the Dieppe landing or bombardment of Dresden. One can also notice, that the book was written by a man of his times, which is reflected in his views on Indian liberation movement and somewhat disparaging opinions towards China.

On a personal level, there is one thing in the book that I find a bit bothering. It’s the author's attitude towards Poland (I am a Pole myself). Churchill often underlines, that Britain entered the war because of Poland and is bound by honor to defend Polish interests and independence. In the end of his account he often relates his negotiations regarding the future government of Poland and its borders (which may be a way to exonerate himself, in the view of later developments in Eastern Europe). And yet he doesn't seem to regard his Polish allies too highly. During talks in Teheran he emphasizes that Poles shouldn't be consulted about their borders since they are never satisfied anyway. He sometimes criticizes them for being quarrelsome and deplores the foolishness of the Polish government in exile. He also hardly shows any recognition nor gratitude due to the fact, that by the end of the war a Polish army of around 150-180 thousand men (his own estimates) is fighting under British command. At the same time he is often full of praise for Australian and New Zealand soldiers. I understand that this may be partly due to political reasons. The book was supposed to extoll the effort of Britain and the Commonwealth in the war and there was only that much limelight to go around.

Depite all its shortcomings I consider “Second World War” a monumental book, that strongly influenced my thinking about many aspects of the conflict. And I strongly believe that Churchill, again, despite all his shortcomings, remains one of the great statesmen of the twentieth century.

[Hunter Fairchild · Rating 5 out of 5]

Fantastic. Dives into Churchill’s mind from start to finish of WWII and adds context to many of the challenging strategic avenues faced by the Allied powers. Also gives a glimpse into some of the childlike tendencies of Churchill, who braved scenarios where the risk didn’t quite equal the reward. Highly recommend.

[Andre · Rating 3 out of 5]

Mamita el fascismo!

[Preetam Chatterjee · Rating 3 out of 5]

Both my English teacher of Class IX and my history instructor would eat my head off about this book. They were in awe of Churchill’s English. And why not? This tome, spread across six imposing volumes, is less a history than a “self-authored epic,” a leather-bound mirror in which the author sees himself reflected as prophet, sentinel, Cassandra, and saviour of civilisation.

To read it is to enter a world where sentences march like regiments, commas are deployed with military precision, and the English language—under Churchill’s command—achieves a muscular majesty few writers before or since have matched.

This is history written with a cigar clenched between its teeth, convinced of its own destiny.

Let’s say this upfront: ‘‘as English prose, this work is outrageous in the best possible way’’. Churchill does not merely narrate events; he ‘stages’ them.

Paragraphs swell, clauses pivot, and adjectives arrive dressed for a state occasion.

Even logistics feel operatic. Supply chains sound heroic. Cabinet minutes read like scenes from a Shakespearean history play. You don’t “turn pages”; you advance through them, banners flying.

And yet—ah, here comes the roast—this is also ‘‘history seen from the balcony of power’’, viewed through monocles polished by empire, privilege, and an unshakeable belief that Great Men not only make history but ‘are’ history.

The books are luminous, yes—but also ‘‘blinkered, selective, aristocratic, and occasionally breathtakingly myopic.’’ The brilliance dazzles; the blind spots glare.

Churchill writes as a man fully convinced that the axis on which the world turns runs through Westminster, Whitehall, and—on particularly glorious days—himself.

The war becomes a morality play in which Britain stands alone, noble and resolute, while others orbit around this moral sun.

The Soviet Union is tolerated, America is wooed, the colonies are barely footnotes, and the millions who suffered beyond Europe’s immediate theatre fade into abstraction.

If the war were a map, Churchill’s version would be richly detailed in the North Atlantic and strangely blank elsewhere.

Yet—and this is where the review must remain honest—’’the power of the narrative is undeniable’’. Churchill understood, perhaps better than any statesman-writer in history, that wars are not won by matériel alone but by morale, by story, and by the capacity to convince people that endurance has meaning.

His volumes are an extension of the wartime speeches: the long form of the same rhetorical mission. He is not merely recording events; he is ‘‘securing the memory of them.’’

The first volume, ‘The Gathering Storm,’ reads like a vindication decades in the making. Churchill positions himself as the lone voice crying in the wilderness, warning against appeasement while the political establishment slumbers.

The tone is elegiac, faintly wounded, but also triumphant: history, at last, has caught up with him. There is a quiet satisfaction in the prose, a sense of “I told you so” delivered with the courtesy of an Edwardian dinner guest—but make no mistake, it is ‘there.’

This is Churchill reclaiming narrative authority, sculpting memory with the chisel of hindsight.

And how well he sculpts. He has an uncanny ability to make complexity feel inevitable.

Diplomatic blunders acquire tragic dignity; miscalculations become acts of tragic necessity. One finishes passages thinking: ‘Of course it had to be this way’—which is precisely the danger.

Churchill’s mastery lies not just in what he includes but in how he frames causality. The past becomes orderly, almost destined, cleansed of contingency and chaos.

But history is messy. And Churchill tidies it up like a butler preparing the drawing room for guests.

As the volumes progress—‘Their Finest Hour,’ ‘The Grand Alliance,’ ‘The Hinge of Fate,’ ‘Closing the Ring,’ and ‘Triumph and Tragedy’—the pattern intensifies.

Churchill is always at the centre: negotiating, persuading, warning, and rallying. Others appear as supporting cast.

Roosevelt is genial but needs nudging. Stalin is grim, suspicious, occasionally admirable, but fundamentally alien.

Smaller nations flicker into view only when strategically relevant. The suffering of civilians is acknowledged, but rarely dwelt upon unless it reinforces the moral case of Britain’s struggle.

What’s striking is not cruelty but ‘‘distance’’. Churchill does not write from the trenches or the factories or the famine-stricken hinterlands of empire. He writes from war rooms, conferences, cables, and memoranda. His war is fought in telegrams as much as on battlefields.

This gives the work its grandeur—and its chill. The human cost is subsumed under the grandeur of strategy. Decisions that cost millions of lives are discussed with a gravity that borders on aesthetic restraint.

Nowhere is this more troubling than in what is ‘not’ fully seen. India, for instance, exists primarily as a logistical concern or a political inconvenience.

The Bengal famine—concurrent with the war—barely disturbs the narrative’s surface. Colonial troops are praised in passing but never allowed narrative centrality. The empire supplies men and resources, but its suffering does not rise to the level of tragic meditation. For Churchill, empire is backdrop, not subject.

This is not accidental; it is ideological.

And here the aristocratic worldview becomes unavoidable. Churchill’s moral universe is hierarchical. Nations, like people, have ranks. Britain leads. Others assist. Some obey.

The war is framed as a defence of civilisation—but civilisation, in Churchill’s telling, looks suspiciously like the preservation of British global authority.

The irony, of course, is that the war accelerates the empire’s dissolution, a fact Churchill acknowledges only reluctantly, almost mournfully, in the final volume.

Still, to dismiss the work as mere propaganda would be lazy—and frankly unfair. Churchill was not lying; he was ‘‘curating’’. He selected, emphasised, arranged. Like all powerful narratives, the danger lies not in falsehood but in ‘‘persuasion’’.

He convinces you not by distortion but by eloquence, by confidence, by the sheer weight of his voice.

The books don’t shout; they ‘assume’. And assumption, when beautifully phrased, can be more dangerous than deception.

One cannot ignore, either, Churchill’s astonishing command of archival material. He had access others did not, memory others lacked, and the political instinct to know which documents mattered.

The work is a goldmine for understanding the internal logic of Allied leadership. As a primary source dressed as a secondary one, it is invaluable.

You are not just reading about decisions; you are watching how a statesman justifies them—to himself and to posterity.

The style deserves another bow. Churchill’s sentences are architectural. He builds paragraphs the way cathedrals are built: arches of subordination, pillars of emphasis, a roof of moral certainty.

He understands cadence instinctively. He knows when to let a sentence swell and when to strike like a gavel. Even when you disagree with him—and you often should—you cannot deny the pleasure of being carried along.

Yet pleasure, again, is the trap.

For all its rhetorical splendour, ‘The Second World War’ struggles with empathy beyond its chosen circle. The war becomes a test of leadership rather than a catastrophe of humanity. Civilians appear as numbers. Bombings are “necessary”.

Suffering is regrettable but unavoidable. There is little space for doubt that does not eventually resolve into affirmation.

Churchill allows himself moments of melancholy, but never paralysis. Regret is present, remorse rarely so.

And yet—this is important—the books also contain moments of genuine moral gravity. Churchill does not trivialise the stakes. He understands that something profound was at risk: the collapse of democratic possibility, the triumph of barbarism, the end of a certain idea of Europe.

His fear of Nazism is not rhetorical; it is existential. When he writes of resistance, of endurance, of the refusal to surrender, it is not posturing. It is belief forged under pressure.

This is why the work endures despite its limitations. It is flawed, yes—but it is also ‘‘alive with conviction’’.

Churchill believed in history as a moral enterprise. He believed words mattered. He believed leadership carried ethical weight. In an age of technocratic neutrality, that belief itself feels almost shocking.
Reading these volumes today is a double education. Why?

1) You learn about the war—and you learn about how power wants to remember itself.

2) You learn how empires narrate decline without admitting it.

3) You learn how eloquence can sanctify decision-making.

4) And you learn, crucially, that no history written by a participant can ever be complete, no matter how confident its tone.

So how should we read ‘The Second World War’ now?

With admiration ‘‘and’’ resistance. With pleasure ‘‘and’’ suspicion. With gratitude for the language ‘‘and’’ vigilance against the worldview it carries. It should be read alongside voices Churchill did not hear—or chose not to amplify: colonial histories, civilian testimonies, dissenting strategists, post-war reckonings.

Only then does the full picture emerge.

In the end, Churchill’s six volumes are like a grand imperial palace: breathtaking façade, exquisite interiors, and a foundation laid on unequal ground.

You walk through in awe. You marvel at the craftsmanship. And then, if you’re paying attention, you start asking who built it, who was excluded, and who paid the price.

Praise him for the prose. Roast him for the blinkers. Salute the statesman. Question the aristocrat. Read him—but never alone.

History deserves better than a single voice, no matter how beautifully it speaks.

[Kaizad · Rating 5 out of 5]

The following is a note I wrote on FB about it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finished reading today "Memoirs of the second World War" by Winston S. Churchill.

Magnificent 1000 pages.

Most of the times you will be awed by the greatness of the man, you will see how mankind fell to its its own follies. You will see how easy is it to give in, but above all there are some principles which should always adhere to.

When your actions and decisions would affect freedom of all the people of the world and alter the course human civilisation, how would you conduct yourself. There are times when things look dangerously bleak and the world (literally) strikes you off. What do you do, left alone to face your mortal enemy outnumbering you in quality and quantity?

There are principles which we must all adhere to even in the face of gravest dangers. And if you waver from the basic principles of war and humanity it will ultimately spell you doom.

In the meantime we see the ridiculous efficiency with which the first Great Britain and henceforth allies conducted their war machine. How a nation so divided in times of peace comes together in the hour of peril, you see that sacrifice, bravery, solidarity, comradeship, loyalty and all these principles really do matter.

Lots of excellent managerial lessons for aspiring managers.

How much is dependent on luck, in a span of minutes the Battle of Britain was decided, without firing a single shot the domination in the pacific.

Why couldn't germans cross the English Channel but the British could do so, was it just brute force, no it was fore-sight and proper planning. How most of our lives are wasted worrying about things that never happen, and so much is dependent on luck that we cannot hope to do anything else but do our best.

You will be filled by anguish as you see the rush for the spoils again, you will shake your head a hundred times, and you would realise that world could have been a far different place. And it would have been far worse if some people did not stand up for what they believed in.

[David · Rating 4 out of 5]

Originally read this book 20+ years ago and am re-reading and skimming portions in Fall 2013 to provide context for my reading of Ciano's diary.

These memoirs are a good lesson or reminder of just how close our civilization came to utter destruction!

Everyone should read Churchill for the spirit of the thing. He was a very fine writer as well as one heck of a poliotician and leader. This abridged version probably leaves out some of the color, but one gets the idea.

My edition seems to be an exact copy of the hardback . . . I think that's how the Quality Paperbook Book Club operated.

[Don Stanton · Rating 4 out of 5]

Clearly an essential book to read, especially if there is an interest on how Great Britain survived the years of war prior to the American full involvement. The details of desperate decisions, know that his decision would cost more British lives, but for the greater good. I could see the transformation from a gentle soul to what he was called later, 'the Lion,'or the "Great Lion." How must it have felt that the future of his nation hung on his every word.

[RomRos · Rating 5 out of 5]

S. 1027
Präsident Roosevelt drängte jetzt auf Beendigung der Debatte. "Polen", bemerkte er, "ist seit über fünfhundert Jahren ein Unruheherd gewesen." - "Um so mehr müssen wir unser möglichstes tun, um dieser Unruhe ein Ende zu bereiten", antwortete ich. [Churchill]
S. 1032
"Es gibt einige sehr gute Leute unter den Polen" antwortete Stalin. "Sie sind gute Soldaten, und sie haben einige gute Wissenschaftler und Musiker hervorgebracht, aber sie sind sehr streitsüchtig."

[Scottie]

Although I was vaguely aware that the Second World War encompassed more than Germany and Russia, I had no idea of the vast expanses in the war's theatre. The campaign across North Africa was particularly compelling for me insofar as I had an uncle who fought in that campaign. Churchill's abridged memoirs run well past 1000+ pages, often laborious readings, but straight from the horse's mouth.

[Chris Gingrich · Rating 5 out of 5]

I read this many years ago and someday I may have ample time to read the unabridged volumes. This is an excellent account of Churchill's philosophy and decision making as he led his nation and at times the world through these tumultuous years. His power with the English language and the clarity of his resolve are evident.

[Chris · Rating 5 out of 5]

Remember he was a politician during the war, so to be generous, this is in no way a definitive history of the war; or accurate in light of new research. Prose is spellbinding, especially with regards to appeasement.