I don't know if it's because I'm particularly well versed on this period of history, but I found this not in the least controversial. My dad was the occupying British Army in postwar Europe and told a few stories, at least one which, remembering it brings tears to my eyes. So he was aware to some extent of the suffering of the German civilian population. But I'm not sure he knew just how horrific it was, or the scale of the suffering. Peter Hitchens is a journalist and commentator. He has a weekly column in the Mail on Sunday and is the author of several books, including The Abolition of Britain; The Cameron Delusion; The Rage Against God and The War We Never Fought.

Review of the Controversial New WWII book: The Phoney Victory A Review of the Controversial New WWII book: The Phoney Victory

Similarly, he is flying in the face of many years of research by German historians when he claims that the German armed forces in the war were fighting for military objectives that would have been regarded as legitimate by the democratic governments of the Weimar Republic that pre-ceded Hitler’s rise to power: it is very doubtful indeed whether Weimar’s foreign minister, Gustav Stresemann, would have approved the invasion of France, Denmark, Norway or even Czechoslovakia, let alone the Soviet Union. I have some disagreements with the author's analysis. I think that Churchill should have accepted Adolf Hitler's offer of peace in 1940 if only to buy us more time. While I agree that Britain did not officially enter the war to save the Jews of Europe, I do wonder if the author gave enough consideration to Jewish agitation for a war with Germany prior to September 1939. I mention this point because the likes of Sir Oswald Mosley complained at the time that the Jews were doing this very thing. Nevertheless, I agree with Mr Hitchens that it is a fundamental mistake to think that we fought the war to stop the Holocaust. First as to England and France waiting to confront Germany, I disagree. Time was not at their side. Germany's incredible improvement in military technology staggers the imagination. Jet warplanes, ballistic missiles, super tanks, infrared scopes, helicopters, submarines with advance air systems etc. etc. .. were just a few years away for Germany. The price of delay would have made a bad situation worse. Unless of course Germany, immediately after conquering Poland, invaded the Soviet Union without engaging the West. Hitchens devotes much of his indictment to the war at sea, arguing that the Navy had been starved of resources between the wars and was ill-equipped to fight the all-important Battle of the Atlantic against the Nazi U-boat fleet. He regales the reader with touching stories from his days at boarding school, when he and his friends built plastic models of warships.

pho•ny

Hitchens makes the point that; ‘We went to war in 1939 to present ourselves as a great power in Europe- at the end of the war we were not a great power in Europe or anywhere else in the world’ He feels that bankruptcy equals defeat. Peter Hitchens is, by his own admission, a “scribbler” and not a historian. He omits to broach the geopolitical implications that could have emerged from not declaring war against Nazi Germany in 1939. Giving Nazi Germany a free hand in continental Europe would have meant a larger demotion of the geopolitical position of the United Kingdom than the one that the country suffered as a result of the outcome of World War Two. I was born in 1948 -just after the end of World War II in which my parents' generation had fought and died in a battle against intolerance, monstrous extremism and an inhuman attempt to exterminate the Jewish population of Europe"

The Phoney War - Britains Start to WW2 | Imperial War Museums

I'd heard this book was somewhat controversial as it attempts to dispel some of the heroic myths the British have bestowed on WW2. Anyone that reads this book will realise that no such relationship exists, the Americans ‘screwed us’ for all of the war and afterwards, the gold that they took for lend lease, was not just bullion but ancient gold in doubloons, pieces of eight etc, which made much of it about three times its value, the US would only gave the ‘daily rate’ at the time, which was a ‘rip off.’ We colluded deeply with the Americans to produce the Atom Bomb, we were shut out of that scheme in mid- 1945 and told ‘Go make your own’ Ernest Bevan objected to this treatment and was shouted out of the US Defence secretary’s office! There are many other instances that readers can take from the book. Britain knew from 1934 of the Nazi persecution of German Jews, indeed Britain took young Jewish children from Germany to the UK in ‘Kinder transports’ They were rail transports that left the parents on the platforms to be collected up and sent to the camps. I don’t know what Hitchens wanted to do further than this, but I can’t imagine the Germans allowing us to take away their adults? Perhaps it was a visa problem however Hitchens does not elaborate. Peter Hitchens has long been one who has not shied away from unpopular truths, and this book is iconoclastic even by his standards. While many "bulldog patriots" find it impossible to imagine a patriotic right-wing commentator criticising Britain's role in World War II, Mr Hitchens shatters the myth that only crazy SJWs or professional race-baiters can be critical of Winston Churchill et al. Admittedly, this book is not a work of original scholarship, yet nor is it a work of propaganda. The author summarises the arguments of established historians in this challenging synthesis. Using Peter Hitchens’s inept metaphor, he might as well claim that Britain has, "like a hyena", “dismembered” Channel Islands by taking them from Nazi Germany.

The title ‘Phony Victory’ is at times is a ‘tongue in cheek’ expression by Hitchens, though he makes his points strongly, the reader does not have to agree to his arguments. His main point is that the war was badly fought by Great Britain to the effect that it cost us greatly in men, materials, ships aircraft and the closing down of the British Empire, which in some of our colonies was to become quite a bloody affair

The Phoney Victory | Army Rumour Service The Phoney Victory | Army Rumour Service

Mr Hitchens is also unaware that in some cases, Czechoslovakian authorities actually insisted that the Polish Army enters Zaolzie (e.g. the date of annexing Bogumin was changed because Czechoslovakia was afraid that it will be taken by Germans), or that Poland was only annexing territories with ethnic Polish majority (that’s why after its annexation of Morawka village, Poland returned it to Czechoslovakia, having ensured that it would not be occupied by Nazi Germany). Hitchens has elected with this book to challenge the "myths" of the conflict. These include the moral case for defending the territorial integrity of a nation that was far from democratic (Poland), when a far more democratic nation in Czechoslovakia was allowed to be broken up and dismembered by opportunistic rivals (including Poland!). He examines the idea that the UK population's attitude towards German occupation of the Sudetenland was more aggressive than that of it's government, and dismisses the romantic notion of the Special Relationship in favour of a narrative involving an opportunistic foreign government taking advantage of a beleaguered UK to vastly improve it's own wealth and prestige - and at the same time simultaneously bringing a rival to it's knees. From September 1939 to May 1940, apart from a few brief skirmishes, both sides were content to remain behind their defences. This contrast with the blitzkrieg ('lightning war') tactics of the Polish campaign resulted in the war being labelled as the 'sitzkrieg' and the 'Bore War'. While the USSR were fighting for survival Hitchens remarks that ‘We in Britain knew nothing of the fighting on the Russian Front’ and that for almost four years of the war we did little and that the most of our army were training in England’ … REALLY!! I mention The Burma Campaign, the Desert War, Italy Sicily, Dieppe, Crete, the Malta Convoys, Murmansk Convoys, The War in the Atlantic…Also what few people know, is that eleven Royal Navy manned Carriers were placed with the US Fleet in the Pacific. The Yanks won’t tell you this, nor will they say that a total of 400 British and Australian fighter pilots took part in the battle for Iwo Jima (Britain withdrew Carriers from Europe after realising their vulnerability due to the Malta Convoys. Peter Hitchens has been very brave to write this book. I have personally experienced the type arguments and reactions questioning the myths of WWII has amongst my country man. I consider myself a patriot, but like Peter Hitchens, I do not think that means 'my country right or wrong'. There are many things I disagree with Peter Hitchens but with this book he has risen even further in my already high estimation. The man is a national treasure.

-phony

I had never really thought about it before but Britain fought Germany in Europe and were routed leading to Dunkirk and we never fought the Germans again in Europe until 6 years later. Author overopensights Views 897 First release 1 Oct 2018 Last update 1 Oct 2018 Rating 0.00 star(s) These are now abandoned in favour of the metric system" - laments Mr Hitchens - "which was used by our enemies" (ibidem) - I'm not sure if he is aware that the first proposal of a global decimal measurement system came from Britain: James Watt proposed it in 1783 because he had difficulties in communicating with German scientists. Peter Hitchens examines many myths about the second world war starting with a quote from a speech from the Prince of Wales in 2016 Or maybe I wouldn't have. Maybe he'd have found it too sad and upsetting. I found it sad and upsetting, and I was born in the sixties.

Peter Hitchensâ?Ts Eurosceptic take on the Second World War

Was Hitler ever going to invade Great Britain? Perhaps not. Did the RAF save England? Maybe less that we might want to believe. Historians, and I am not one, will debate this contrarian take. He writes: “In 1939, it was not the martyred hero nation, champion of freedom, justice and democracy, of propaganda myth.” Peter Hitchens expresses his concerns that myths of WWII are used as justifications for wars and military actions. In this he echoes Pat Buchanan's book on Churchill. I've read Pat Buchanan's book, and much of it was a disturbing revelation to me. Peter Hitchens mentions Buchanan's book, and although Hitchens states he rejects many of the conclusions Buchanan drew Hitchens writes he was very much influenced by the book.whited sepulcher, whited sepulchre - a person who is inwardly evil but outwardly professes to be virtuous You are here: Home / DC Authors / A Review of the Controversial New WWII book: The Phoney Victory A Review of the Controversial New WWII book: The Phoney Victory