Most of us rally around the glory of the Allies' victory over the Nazis in World War II. The story is often told of how the good fight was won by an astonishing array of manpower and stunning tactics. However; what is often overlooked is how the intersection between Adolf Hitler's influential personality and his military strategy was critical in causing Germany to lose the war.With an acute eye for detail and his use of clear prose; acclaimed military historian Bevin Alexander goes beyond counterfactual "What if?" history and explores for the first time just how close the Allies were to losing the war. Using beautifully detailed; newly designed maps; How Hitler Could Have Won World War II exquisitely illustrates the important battles and how certain key movements and mistakes by Germany were crucial in determining the war's outcome. Alexander's harrowing study shows how only minor tactical changes in Hitler's military approach could have changed the world we live in today. How Hitler Could Have Won World War II untangles some of the war's most confounding strategic questions; such as: Why didn't the Nazis concentrate their enormous military power on the only three beaches upon which the Allies could launch their attack into Europe? Why did the terrifying German panzers; on the brink of driving the British army into the sea in May 1940; halt their advance and allow the British to regroup and evacuate at Dunkirk?With the chance to cut off the Soviet lifeline of oil; and therefore any hope of Allied victory from the east; why did Hitler insist on dividing and weakening his army; which ultimately led to the horrible battle of Stalingrad?Ultimately; Alexander probes deeply into the crucial intersection between Hitler's psyche and military strategy and how his paranoia fatally overwhelmed his acute political shrewdness to answer the most terrifying question: Just how close were the Nazis to victory? Why did Hitler insist on terror bombing London in the late summer of 1940; when the German air force was on the verge of destroying all of the RAF sector stations; England's last defense?With the opportunity to drive the British out of Egypt and the Suez Canal and occupy all of the Middle East; therefore opening a Nazi door to the vast oil resources of the region; why did Hitler fail to move in just a few panzer divisions to handle such an easy but crucial maneuver?On the verge of a last monumental effort and concentration of German power to seize Moscow and end Stalin's grip over the Eastern front; why did the Nazis divert their strength to bring about the far less important surrender of Kiev; thereby destroying any chance of ever conquering the Soviets?From the Hardcover edition.
#3290908 in Books 2003-02-20Original language:English 9.00 x .83 x 6.00l; #File Name: 0595268404330 pages
Review
4 of 5 people found the following review helpful. Another Neo-Confederate anti-Lincoln screed...By H.G. MooreI bought this book for what I hoped would be an enjoyable (and scholarly) read about my home state's trials during the War of the Rebellion; and a reference for the units from what is now West Virginia that fought for the Confederacy. Admittedly; the state's history is difficult to understand; so it is important to look at it from both sides.Unfortunately; the first forty-four pages of the book are nothing more than a Neo-Confederate apologia and anti-Lincoln screed of the type usually written by League of the South members and modern supporters of the Confederacy's Lost Cause movement. The author; Harlan H. Hinkle; is listed as a native of West Virginia; a graduate of West Virginia University; and a veteran of the US Air Force who wants to "set the record straight" about West Virginia's role in the Civil War. However; he clearly says that his book is "unapologetically partisan"; perhaps this is the only truth contained within this book. His use of the phrases "War for Southern Independence" and "War of Northern Aggression" are redolent of The Lost Cause.After slogging through more of the same typical slipshod efforts to paint the Union and the North as the devil incarnate ("...wrong and unjustified...unholy crusade was premeditated; destructive; evil and hypocritical") he goes on to purport that the Union's victory was "a victory for consolidated tyranny and unbridled materialism that haunts the national consciousness even to this day." Yawn...Not only does Mr. Hinkle then go on to try to justify secession (wonder of wonders...); he also goes after John Brown; the abolitionists; atheists; the German "Communists" of 1848; and Lincoln's sexuality and the Log Cabin Republicans ("Lincoln's perverted sexual nature...sodomite lifestyle..."). Indeed; Mr. Hinkle's attempts to denigrate Lincoln--by labeling him a "perverted" homosexual--along with the modern Republican Party's Log Cabin "Club" is nothing more than a common evangelical Christian tirade instead of an attempt at genuine historical analysis.The gist of the book includes lists of the Civil War military units; separated by county; that contained men from West Virginia who fought for the Confederacy. These units include the Virginia Militia; Virginia State Line; guerilla companies; and actual line companies and regiments of the Confederate States Army. While the list does indeed look comprehensive; I wonder whether the author's "research" in this area is any more unbiased than in the first part of the book. However; it does look like most of his footnotes are based upon H.E. Howard's fine Virginia Regimental History Series so hopefully there'll be no surprises with Hinkle's detailed lists. Also; Mr. Hinkle provides a chapter detailing Confederate personnel from West Virginia along with some more interesting anecdotes occurring in The Mountain State during the war. The end of the book contains a section dedicated to damning the carpetbaggers who bought the state's natural resources after the Civil War and again crying that West Virginia was not a product of its own citizens' will but forced upon them by the Vandal North.Another thing that stood out was the huge amount of spelling errors located in the text. These are mostly incorrect verb tense but also included such wonders as "sharps shooting riflemen" rather than "sharpshooting riflemen." Since the context was describing the Virginia frontiersmen of the colonial era we know that this was not a reference to the Sharps rifle of the Civil War era. It appears that the book was perhaps self-edited; if so; the publisher needs to rectify that egregious problem.Altogether; this book was a disappointment from a genuine historical viewpoint. While it may satisfy some from the Neo-Confederate movement; those who are looking for a scholarly work will probably end up being unsatisfied. I gave it one star because I couldn't give it zero. Caveat Emptor.1 of 1 people found the following review helpful. WV historyBy John M. Johnsona little known part of the war of the rebellion
