Customer Reviews: Read 23 more reviews...
 Another excellent Hastings War book November 19, 2008
Kentspur
1 out of 1 found this review helpful
Max Hastings is not a character I instinctively take to. His bluff manner, pinstripe suits, right wing views and - most of all - strange hair leave me thinking 'okaayyy' every time he pops up as a talking head on the TV.
As a rule, I don't like 'celebrity' history books. It's easier to get published if you're a 'name' journalist, but that doesn't mean you're any good.
Hastings bucks the trend.
This book joins 'The Korean War,' Bomber Command' and 'Overlord' as top quality, popular military histories. He synthesises many sources to produce a highly readable narrative and does not shirk from ethical judgements. Why did the german army go on fighting in the West after the Bulge? The moral failure of the German generals. Were the Russians so different in their failure to help Warsaw than the Western allies were in their failure to help starving Holland?
The scale of human suffering is amazing - shocking - as Hastings reports the sinking of liners trying to get civilians away from the Russian advance. However, he does not flinch from the unpopular view that these ships were legitimate military target as they were carrying troops. Throughout the work, Hastings draws a contrast with the 'civilians in uniform' of the British and American forces and the armies of the dictatorships - German and Soviet, who fight with utter disregard for casualties.
By the end, the sheer scale of the catastrophe envelops you, but the little stories of kindness do offer a modicum of hope.
Great book.
 A compelling and sometimes preachy overview July 1, 2008
Geschichtsliebhaber (Oldenburg, Niedersachsen)
1 out of 1 found this review helpful
An impressive panoramic narrative of the battle for Germany, "Armageddon" combines a wide range of sources (including many veterans) with Hastings's sharp, often iconoclastic judgement. His criticism of the military folly of Operation Market Garden, the Ardennes offensive, and Zhukov's Oder crossing is hard-hitting, but frequently deserved. Hastings is no apologist for military failings, although he frequently gets moralistic: discussions of the justice of the allied cause or the tyranny of Stalin, which is perceived in downright Manichean terms, should not be part of a work of history. This is not to deny the reality of good and evil, or to say that tales of atrocity should not be included: of course they should, especially in a book that intends to provide a comprehensive narrative. It's just that anti-communist and anti-Nazi polemic should not be part of a work of history; it should be left to philosophers and politicians.
Apart from that criticism, Hastings provides a compellingly readable and frequently heart-wrenching account of the final months of the war, paying almost equal attention to the topics usually ignored in the west, such as the sheer magnitude and ferocity of the war on the eastern front. In "Armageddon", the catastrophic climax of the Second World War comes to life, and although we probably can't imagine accurately that awful time, Hastings comes pretty close.
Two minor criticisms. The first is that Hastings argues that the allied carpet bombing of German civilian homes is justified on the grounds that the workers who got bombed were supporting the German war effort through their labour. This is of course correct, but it's a very slippery slope. Taken to an extreme, this argument completely removes the distinction between civilian and military targets: after all, enemy women are also working and supporting their working husbands, thus contributing to the war effort, and children will grow to become enemy soldiers.
Secondly, the maps Hastings includes (e.g. pp.4-5) are extremely strange, inasmuch as they show Europe in the borders of 1937 (except for Luxemburg, which Hastings for some reason considers a part of Germany). As a consequence, Hastings's maps feature a number of countries which did not in fact exist in 1944-5, such as Austria, Czechoslovakia, or Estonia, and simply do not show several countries which did exist, such as Slovakia and Croatia. Of course, the borders of 1937 are broadly those accepted by the Western allies, but they have nothing to do with the political realities of 1944-5; Austria, for instance, was not an independent country, as "Armageddon" suggests, but an integral part of Germany. The problem is sometimes compounded in the text. What is the reader to imagine when told that a certain regiment was moved "to the Czech border"? What Czech border? The pre-1938 Czech border did not exist in 1944-5 either politically or ethnographically. Thus Hastings causes considerable confusion, as there is no clear sense where exactly the "frontiers of Germany" are, or anything else for that matter.
 Excellent Narrative June 19, 2008
Phileas Fogg
This is a superb book, and I can really appreciate the level of knowledge about the war in 1944-45, and the personal quotes and insights into the conflict at the time that he has brought into the book.
Highly recommended, especially the lesser parts of the campaign he covers, such as the annihilation of East Prussia, Pomerania and Silesia, and the moving of borders and people westwards.
I'd highly recommend anyone read this to gain insights into this tumultuous time and help them see how a modern, civilised, Western European civilisation can descend so quickly into chaos, brutality and destruction. One is left pandering for a visit to pre-war europe to see what Dresden and Warsaw used to look like.
Expected Better June 2, 2008
Mr. Nicholas W. Le Huquet (UK)
The author has obviously put a great deal of time and effort into this book and dealt with many aspects of the latter part of WW2 that tends to be overlooked, such as the suffering of Soviet prisoners, even when repatriated. Although very patchy, my biggest gripe is with Max being a tad naughty when stating German and Russian armies were excellent just about all the time, and that the American and Commonwealth armies were useless most of the time. As with Overlord (a much better book) he is particularly unimpressed by the Canadian performance, while ignoring the actual opponents and terrain. Still definetely worth reading once, just get a copy from your local library.
Brilliant May 31, 2008
R Howard (London)
0 out of 1 found this review helpful
This is Hastings at his best. He tells the story in typical gripping fashion, and his use of eyewitness accounts helps give the reader a true 'feel' for what it was like to be there. Even for someone who thinks they've read too much about WW2 (as I felt I did before I started this book), this book is recommended. Great stuff, and I really enjoyed reading it.
|
