Blood, Tears and Folly: An Objective Look at World War II (Other)

from C.J.Moran

To begin with an observation. This is not a history of the Second World War. It is rather an examination of many of the instances of mental myopia, wishful thinking and blind stupidity that cost both sides dearly in that conflict. Inevitably, to place these in context, there are large chunks of h...

from Schmerguls

3098 Blood, Tears and Folly: An Objective Look at World War II, by Len Deighton (read 5 Aug 1998) This is a 1993 book which looks at various aspects of that part of World War II before and at the time of Pearl Harbor. Deighton is not sparing of British folly, even though Deighton is English. He i...

from jamespurcell

Portrays WW2 from the British perspective superficially y but with rapier like penetration on some of the many faux pas that were generated by old generals and inept politicians of the Empire. The documentation for most of these egregious errors that caused many casualties is sufficient and furth...

from joeydag

The novelist is easy to read, but I think the subject is still too large for him to approach and organize. He tracks the war until the attack on Pearl Harbor. His conclusion that after the attack people felt allied victory was inevitable is neither objective nor, in my opinion, true.

from DinadansFriend

A critical look at the early stages of the world cataclysm. Such a big topic that one can easily study a segment Forever. Deighton was a child during the conflict and had first hand memories, and was intent on revising a great deal of the accepted mythology, created perhaps by Churchill's Memoir ...