The History Book Club discussion

15 views
THE SECOND WORLD WAR > 6. SECOND WW - February 23 – March 1 ~~ Book One – Chapters XIV – XV (215 – 249) - Non Spoiler

Comments Showing 1-10 of 10 (10 new)    post a comment »
dateUp arrow    newest »

message 1: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (last edited Feb 24, 2009 07:22AM) (new)

Bentley | 44291 comments Mod
This is this week's reading assignment:

February 23 – March 1 ~~ Book One – Chapters XIV – XV (215 – 249)

Hello Everyone,

The above is the assignment for this week's spotlighted thread for The Second World War - Volume One - The Gathering Storm by Winston S. Churchill.

The Second World War, Volume 1 The Gathering Storm by Winston S. Churchill

As you are aware by now, we will open up a thread for each week's reading. Please make sure to post in the particular thread dedicated to those specific chapters and page numbers to avoid spoilers. We have also opened up supplemental threads as well which are not non spoiler for those folks interested in talking about events or the book as a whole.

We look forward to your participation. Amazon and other noted on line booksellers do have copies of the book and shipment can be expedited. The book can also be obtained easily at your local library, on your Kindle or free on Google.

There is still time remaining to obtain the book and get started.

There is no rush and we are thrilled to have you join us. It is never too late to get started and/or to post. To view all of the weekly spotlighted threads, make sure to click View All and you will easily see ALL of the weekly threads starting with week one. You can add to the discussion on the appropriate weekly thread at any time.

Welcome to the discussion.

~Bentley




message 2: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (last edited Feb 25, 2009 12:12PM) (new)

Bentley | 44291 comments Mod
I don't buy what Winston Churchill is saying here. Maybe it is simply because I am younger and do not belong to his time period. Maybe he is talking about wars passed prior to World War I; what happened in the case of Japan and Italy? Did they preserve their own structure, identity and the secrecy of their archives. I did not think that this occurred in any of these cases; but I could be proven wrong. I think the problem that occurred between World War I and World War II is that Germany possibly was allowed to maintain more than it should.

I cannot recall an incident since the world wars when this has been the case?

It just could be WSC posturing again. When you think about it, who was his proofreader and what editor would challenge him in his opinions or his pontificating. I love the man; but I think he was allowed to muse as he saw fit.

Doesn't make everything he says gospel truth though.

Bentley


message 3: by Sid (new)

Sid (sidthomson) | 26 comments I thought he was referring to how WWII ended, not WWI. And this was also based on the Nuremburg trials where many internal documents were brought to light - all of which did not happen in the case of other wars.

(btw, I think I just realized I picked up a different edition, so my page numbers are a bit different).


message 4: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (last edited Feb 26, 2009 05:50AM) (new)

Bentley | 44291 comments Mod
Sid, that could be (page numbers that is); then your statement probably adds credence to what I was saying if that was the case (with the Nuremburg trials, etc); during what wars did the internal structures, identity and secrets of their archives stay in place?? My feeling was that I could not remember any; I do think that Germany was allowed too much leeway; but even then as you pointed out...much came to light. I guess the question is: do you agree with the WSC statement or not? I guess I was of the mind to think he was pontificating again and hearing himself expound. What is your take?

As far as the page numbering if you have a different edition; try to follow along with the Book and Chapter Numbers; that may be more helpful in your circumstances.

Bentley


message 5: by Sid (new)

Sid (sidthomson) | 26 comments Which chapter has that quote? I remember reading it, but can't find it again.


message 6: by Sid (new)

Sid (sidthomson) | 26 comments I completely agree about Eden - I am surprised he lasted as long as he did. Even more than different stance on armaments, just the nature of the relationship with Chamberlain would drive anyone from office I think. Not only did Eden have a different view, but Chamberlain continually went around Eden, ignoring him.
I am surprised Chamberlain kept Eden in that position when he became PM. What is the nature of that in England? I know in the US, a new president makes all new appointments - except in very rare circumstances due to difficult situation at hand (like Obama leaving in Gates as defense secretary, but even that has an understanding that at some point Obama will probably replace him). Was this typical of English politics or an abberation due to heightened tension at the time?


message 7: by Sid (new)

Sid (sidthomson) | 26 comments I have to throw in another topic here as well. About the middle of chapter 14, Churchill states that Ribbentrop had invited him to meet with Hitler twice, and he declined. He explains that this is because he would have been meeting with him as a private citizen and no good could have come from it. If he agreed with Hitler, he might have misled him, and if he disagreed, he might have offended Hitler which would have harmed relations. This alone just raised my respect for Churchill immensely.
How many politicians, senators, people running for office - not to mention celebrities - are happy and anxious to visit other country leaders just to further their own career - even if that country has less than amiable relations with the US.


message 8: by Dick (new)

Dick Wells | 10 comments It was Roosevelt's insistence on unconditional surrender that led to the complete collapse of both German and Japanese governments and the Allied forces complete control of the governments and all documents. Prior to that it was typical that upon completion of wars that something approaching the status quo ante was achieved. I think it's safe to say that revolution was more likely to capture and reveal archives more than the loss of a war.


message 9: by Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief (new)

Bentley | 44291 comments Mod
Response to Dick (message 12):

Interesting Dick. I have to agree with you on this one.


message 10: by Sarah (new)

Sarah | 67 comments Oldesq,

I would agree that this comment likely referred to Germany after WWII, not WWI. Germany was clearly forced to change their structure after WWI. Although they didn't follow all the rules put in place with them, there were certainly rules.

I would tend to disagree with WSC here. I think most of the time, after a war, the losing party is subject to change and much of the time occupation which would distroy many archives. I don't have an example at my fingertips where this wasn't the case.

Sarah


back to top