Rating: 
Summary: A powerful summary of such a widely varied topic
Review: Weinberg goes to great pains to dispell the studies and writings on the Second World War, which try to apologize and explain away history. He is sharp and cutting as he relays stories of how officers of the German army had trouble with their soldiers sending pictures home to show their love ones the "accomplishments" of mass murder--he does not want to be one to follow the theory that the masses who were involved in mass murder were innocent scared people only trying to survive. His account of the war is thrilling from the first to the last page.
Rating:
Summary: Big Book With Big Picture of the Big War
Review: Weinberg has written a masterpiece with "A World At Arms."The subtitle is a concise description of the book: a global perspective of World War II. This book focuses entirely on the national strategies and the decision makers of the Allied and Axis forces at each of the stages of the war. The author examines the situation and options of each player based on information known to the decision makers at the time. This forms a picture that is probably as accurate as history can be of why decisions were made and how the patterns of decisions fit into the grand strategies for each nation. Thus, the book unfolds chronologically and focuses on the logic of campaigns, diplomacy, economics and objectives. I found this book utterly fascinating. At almost a thousand pages, it can appear daunting. However, WWII is such a large topic, that most readers will find the pace moving along swiftly with the right balance of background and detail as well as descriptions of decisions implemented and actions taken. We see the unfolding of the alliance between the allies. Often strained, and with a lack of trust between the Western allies and the Soviet Union, the alliance was, however, the crucial factor in defeating Germany. In contrast, the Axis failed to have a working alliance in anything but name only -- Italy and Germany often took great pains to "surprise" each other early in the war and technological and strategic cooperation that could have mutually benefited Japan and Germany/Italy in their wars was (fortunately) greatly lacking. Of particular interest is the role Stalin plays. First, he is an eager co-conspirator of Hitler's -- wanting to join the Tripartite Powers up to the moment of Operation Barbarossa. Then, he becomes the bulwark of the Allied effort -- tying up more German troops by far on the Eastern Front than were engaged against the West -- as he pursues first survival and then Soviet dominance in the post-war world. The American - British relationship also had its strains, though it proved to still be a remarkably cohesive and productive partnership. I was not aware of the great lengths to which the British tried to dissuade a return to France through a cross-channel invasion. Also interesting was the cabinet debate during the fall of France in 1940 regarding whether or not Britain should reach an accommodation with Germany. I had not been aware that the decision to fight on was an open question with more than a few of the key British policy makers at the time. It is chilling to read the logic of Hitler's actions and plans as they unfold early in the war. Until he bit off more than he could chew (the Soviet Union), Hitler's aggressive war making -- driven particularly by his belief in fast action -- was working as nations individually fell under German domination pretty much according to plan (the exception being of course Great Britain. However, it can be argued that a Germany occupying continental Europe in the west and at peace with the Soviet Union would potentially have remade Europe for a very long time). Japanese strategy and decision making is also explored, though not in as many pages as the events in Europe. The Japanese were perhaps dominated even more than the Germans by beliefs in their own superiority and ability to secure an empire through the some sort of "karma" or "Japanese Spirit." At least the Germans tried to develop new weapons and styles of warfare to quickly put down enemies who they knew could out produce them in a long war. The Japanese on the other hand were remarkably bereft of strategic insight when they decided to go to war over natural resources they probably could have secured through trade and intimidation. After securing raw materials in far away islands, they still had the great problem of transporting them home for use. There is evidence the Japanese knew of the great productive capabilities of America in naval tonnage vis a vis their own relatively paltry abilities to lay new keels in a warship building contest. Arguably, the Japanese could have achieved much of what they wanted by not attacking an America that did not want to go to war and forcing colonial outposts of German occupied nations to trade raw materials with them. Then, while at war they utterly failed to appreciate any offensive role for submarines (as the Germans had) and failed to provide for or protect adequately their water borne trade and movement of materials or troops. They also failed miserably in coordinating their armed forces. The army and navy pretty much had veto power over use of their own units in combined operations and no structure emerged to bind them toward a single military purpose. This focus on the big picture is as expected very light on battle analysis. Battles are mostly described only to the extent they reveal the outcomes of strategic decisions and as they impact future options and realities. Therefore, this is not a book where the reader will smell the smoke of battle or feel the cold of the Russian Steppe. The reader spends much more time in conference rooms and command centers than rifle pits as one would expect in a book examining strategy. Perhaps this explains why the book has no theater or battle maps. The only criticism of the book I would make is that a map section would help the reader who is not familiar enough with the geography of the war to make mental maps as needed. I have not come across a more richly researched or well-articulated description of the Second World War at the strategic level. This is a feast for history buffs and those who want to understand why World War II unfolded as it did. The author is to be highly commended for producing such a valuable work.
Rating:
Summary: An outstanding work...
Review: Wow. This book is extremely fascinating for a number of reasons. First Weinburg has committed 20 years or so to research so that you don't have to. It's all here, though descriptions of military tactics is done in a some what clinical fashion, he makes it a point in the introduction that this is not the focus. What IS focused on is just as intriguing. My favorite aspects are the decription of how previous conflicts, though separate events, added to the complexity of the War. I enjoyed the emphasis on the fact that most events were occurring simultaneously rather than "appendages of each other". Finally, I read the last portion related to Operation Coronet, Olympic, Zipper and the atomic bomb a number of times. It just takes a slight imagination to picture the tremendous decisions that faced the Allies in regards to ending the War.... Awesome!
| 
