World War 2

[Saranne H]

I am studing WW2 in detail. Anyone know of any good books, DVD's or websites etc that could be useful?

I am looking at:
Holocaust
Politics
Nazi's
Hitler
Japan
Russia
America
Evacuation (GB)

I suppose you could say every thing I can get my hands on.

 

[Cjwinnit]

Willian Shirer's "The rise and fall of the third reich". This book is indispensable.

 

[Agrippa]

The best TV series on the Second World War is World At War. It just came out on DVD, but unless your willing to put forward a hundred dollars for it, it'd recommend trying to borrow it from a library. That's where I got it from.

As for books, John Keegan's The Second World War is an excellent introductory book. Another interesting book is J. Ready's World War II: Nation by Nation that describes in brief detail how every nation in the world dealth with the war, including neutrals like Switzerland. It's woefully inadequate for places like the US or Germany, but for Brazil, Sweden, and Egypt, it provides an excellent synopsis. It also features fairly accurate casualty figures for each nation. Winston Churchill's series on the war is good, if daunting for a casual reader. Another good series is the one put out by Time Life. Don't get the abridged single volume! If you're library has it, read the series of about 30 books. It's a fairly easy read and is separated into major topics (like Barbarossa, North Africa) so you can pick and choose the topics you're interested in. Each book is self contained, so you can read one without having to read the others. Finally, Richard Overy's Why the Allies Won also makes a number of good arguments, but I would only look at this book after you've read something like Keegan's book and have an understanding of the general outline of the war.

For a good look at the Nazi's, I second Cjwinnit's recommendation.

It's difficult to get a single good book describing the contributions of major participants like the Soviet Union, Germany, and the US. Richard Overy had a good book on the Red Army, but I can't think of the name right now. Omer Bartov's work, Hitler's Army gives an excellent look at the Wehrmacht, but it's a little dull.

I don't know what you mean by evacuation? I assume GB refers to Great Britain. Are you talking about the Dunkirk evacuation or the evacuation of children to the countryside or something else entirely?

 

[Bounty Hunter7]

Saving private ryan is good for d-day, or fat man and little boy for the two bombs, windtalkers for the indian code. Lots of great movies. Thats just to name a few.

 

[Cjwinnit]

Saving private ryan is good for d-day,.

You could well end up thinking that the entire operation was american. I never once heard Britain or Canada mentioned.

 

[NiemandheißtBoshaftigkeit]

Well, I'm kinda surprised nobody said this, but both volumes of Mein Kampf (yes, there are two of them). I think it will give you very important insight relating to the Holocaust, Hitler, Politics, and the NAZI's, since those were all on your list. They are long, about 600 pages each if I remember, but I think they will be invaluable in your understanding of many things.

***Just a note, Hitler kinda wrote like me, jumping from idea to idea.***

 

[Agrippa]

You could well end up thinking that the entire operation was american. I never once heard Britain or Canada mentioned.

Where were the Canadians and British on Omaha Beach? They were on Sword, Gold, and Juno.

 

[Cjwinnit]

Where were the Canadians and British on Omaha Beach? They were on Sword, Gold, and Juno.

Exactly. You might end up reading it and come with a good history of Omaha beach, but D-day was a combined operation.

 

[TScott]

Here are 2 of my favorite sites:

http://www.combinedfleet.com/kaigun.htm
http://holocaust.hklaw.com/

 

[Agrippa]

Exactly. You might end up reading it and come with a good history of Omaha beach, but D-day was a combined operation.

I see; I thought you were saying that the movie was designed to show the picture of the entire operation, rather than one small part of it.

 

[MatthewG215]

Ghostbusters is one of my favorite movies.

 

[Key Peninsula Redneck]

I'd recommend Fleets of World War 2 for any information about any ship.

Also, I'd recommend Dirty Little Secrets of World War 2, that's just random trivia stuff that is interesting. Another interesting book is Victory at Sea I believe it's called. I believe that it's written by the same authors as Dirty Little Secrets.

 

[Glaz]

Try 'An Army At Dawn' By Rick Atkinson. Its about the North Africa Campaign from Operation Torch on, focus is on the American role but there's plenty of reference to the British, German, Italian, Free French and Vichy French roles as well. One of the most interesting books I have read about world war 2, this is no USA fanboy account, the theme is the Americans were bad, very bad, to start the Operation, but also shows how we managed to improve gradually into the force that help the allies win the war.

 

[jhollas]

Get "Hitler's War" by Heinz Magenheimer.
It basically analyses whether Hitler could have won the war or not, and where it went wrong. Very, very good!

 

[Swart]

You could well end up thinking that the entire operation was american. I never once heard Britain or Canada mentioned.

Especially since the American's had only two beaches, whilst the Birtish had 2.5 (Canada having the other 0.5).

It's interesting that Monty commented during the invasion "I wish we had that Australian 9th division today."

Actually, your perspective of the war depends upon where your coming from. From the US perspective, WWII was fought in the Pacific Islands and to a lesser extent in Franec and Germany. For Britain it was mainly a series of Naval & Aerial battles and commando raids. For Australia it was fought in Africa and in New Guinea, Malaysia, Burma and Borneo.

However, I think WWII was won and lost in Russia. The battles on the German Eastern front were the bloodiest and the most decisive. They make anything on the western front and in the pacific pale in comparison. Particularly the battle for Stalingrad.

 

[jhollas]

Actually, your perspective of the war depends upon where your coming from. From the US perspective, WWII was fought in the Pacific Islands and to a lesser extent in Franec and Germany. For Britain it was mainly a series of Naval & Aerial battles and commando raids. For Australia it was fought in Africa and in New Guinea, Malaysia, Burma and Borneo.

I would argue that this is only partly true. You're forgetting the North Africa Campaign, and the Italian invasion. But yes, I would agree that it depends on where you are educated. Honestly, British schools that teach World War II really do put an emphasis on, "Britain stood alone for a long, long time, but when push came to shove, we were not alone." However, in American schools, kids are taught that the Americans won the war.
And like you said:

However, I think WWII was won and lost in Russia. The battles on the German Eastern front were the bloodiest and the most decisive. They make anything on the western front and in the pacific pale in comparison. Particularly the battle for Stalingrad.

Agreed. And this was even before America entered the war. (Fine, we could discuss the legitimacy of America's "non-entrance" into the war, due to their financial aid, but let's not. We'll stick to man power for the time being!)

 

[albigensi]

yes: as a starting point, these -

K.D. Bracher: 'The German Dictatorship: The Origins, Structure & Consequences of National Socialism'
Alan Bullock: 'Hitler and Stalin', 'Hitler and the Origins of the Second World War'
GItta Sereny: 'Into That Darkness', and 'Albert Speer: His Battle With Truth'
N. Henderson: 'The Failure of a Mission'
J. L. Snell: 'The Outbreak of the Second World War'
S. Friedlander: 'Prelude to Downfall'
G. Wright: 'The Ordeal of Total War'

if you have any german or french-language requirements, let me know & i can post a whole lot of foreign language sources. if there's any particular area - specifically with regards to germany, russia or eastern europe - that you want a more detailed bibliography for, just let me know!

 

[TScott]

Especially since the American's had only two beaches, whilst the Birtish had 2.5 (Canada having the other 0.5).

None of the beaches would compare to Omaha.

It's interesting that Monty commented during the invasion "I wish we had that Australian 9th division today."

More ironic than interesting. After the British abandoned the Australians, basically turning their backs on them at their greatest time of need, all the Australian divisions were needed in their own defence.

Actually, your perspective of the war depends upon where your coming from. From the US perspective, WWII was fought in the Pacific Islands and to a lesser extent in Franec and Germany. For Britain it was mainly a series of Naval & Aerial battles and commando raids. For Australia it was fought in Africa and in New Guinea, Malaysia, Burma and Borneo.

The US had invested many more men in Europe than they did in the Pacific. With the exception of Australia, we were pretty much on our own in the Pacific, but in terms of manpower and material, Europe took center stage. It was a policy known as "Europe First." It drove the Navy nuts. Australia was also heavily involved in the defence of Java as a member of ABDA, as well as the Guadalcanal operation, in which she lost the Sydney.

However, I think WWII was won and lost in Russia. The battles on the German Eastern front were the bloodiest and the most decisive. They make anything on the western front and in the pacific pale in comparison. Particularly the battle for Stalingrad.

I can't argue with you there, however I think it should be qualified that the European war was faught chiefly in Russia. The European war and the Pacific wars had nothing in common except that they were fought at the same time. Had the Axis coordinated their activities, it is likely that Germany could have defeated the USSR.

 

[jayem]

WW2 is a huge topic, and there's a lifetime of material on it. If you're from the UK, one of the very best general narratives was written by Winston Churchill, his six volume "History of the Second World War." It's somewhat written from the British perspective, but it's a very accurate and comprehensive account of history, written by the man who made it.

 

[TScott]

I believe the best war historian from the British perspective was Basil Henry Liddell Hart. Churchill made some poor decisions during the war, and his writings tend to put his slant on them. His decision, for example, to send the new battleship Prince of Wales and the Repulse to Singapore without air protection.