RPag said:
I certainly agree that it was well written but the main issue for me was that it did not really provide any new information. Who really disagrees that without WW1 there would have been no Hitler? Or that Churchill absolutely loved war and conflict? His strongest point for me was why should Britain give a guarantee to Poland when they are incapable of backing it up?
The parts about the Holocaust were fantastically distorted and just plain false.
I didn't see his assertion that without ww1 there would be no Hitler as the main point, rather I enjoyed the view that British foreign policy in the early 20th century effectively brought upon what they were trying to prevent, the death of the British empire. That while Churchill is seen as some heroic figure fighting to preserve the empire, he actually was th knife that sliced their throat. I haven't read it in a few years but that was the main point i came away with