Camicie Nere Posted July 9, 2002 Share Posted July 9, 2002 Someone mentioned "Why the Allies Won" by Richard Overy and I must wholeheartedly second that endorsement. Having read everything I have ever been able to get my hands on about the subject, I think that work stands out in terms of getting at the essential reasons and turning points (and thus by definition providing a lot of insight into alternate possibilities.) A tremendous, tremendous work of "alternate history" can be found in Kenneth Macksey's "Invasion," which follows a German execution of Raeder's proposed "early Sea Lion" operating on a narrow front in July 1940. Although most "alternate history" is useless tripe, this Macksey character is Al Kesselring's biographer and definitely knows his you-know-what. Macksey has sketched out a rather convincing hypothetical under which the Germans could have succeeded. The key points being a lack of the Chain Home Low radar (which came in JUST in time for the actual Battle of Britain) and the fact that the Brits had next to NOTHING in the way of mobile land forces available in July. (Something like 100 Matildas on the whole island and little else.) Thus, even the very limited German forces that could have been logistically supported may well have been able to run riot. Anyway, I just thought I would throw in my two RMs and pimp a couple of favorites from the several hundred WWII books I have read! P.S. Better put in something about that Chain Home Low, Hubert! NOW! SCHNELL!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Holyman Posted July 9, 2002 Share Posted July 9, 2002 yeah and what about this one: Hitlers secret life. The guy is said to be gay! hehehe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randell Daigre Posted July 10, 2002 Share Posted July 10, 2002 I don't trust Liddel-Hart. In the process of doing an English-language translation of Heinz Guderian's "Panzer Leader", he inserted a paragraph giving himself credit for partially inspiring the ideas expressed in the book. The original author was not amused, and the paragraph was removed from susequent editions of the book. For a good look at early armored-warfare theory, try Guderian's "Achtung-Panzer!" (which was finally translated into English in 1992), keeping in mind that the theories put forward there are based solely on the limited use of tanks in WW I. (Sorry, should have put this on page one) [ July 09, 2002, 11:08 PM: Message edited by: Randell Daigre ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Straha Posted July 10, 2002 Share Posted July 10, 2002 Liddel-Hart was vain ... well, like so many. He really pushed it with the Guderian issue, and when it comes to strategy, he makes the distinct impression of a "know-it-all". But OTOH that doesn´t mean that everything he wrote is made up. I can only advise to read him like any other author: in perspective. Straha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randell Daigre Posted July 10, 2002 Share Posted July 10, 2002 Good point. Many of the most famous Generals of WW II (MacArthur comes to mind) were famous, not only for brilliance, but as the result of shameless self-promotion. This does not, however, lessen their accomplishments. (It just sets off my B.S. detector) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts