Warlords: An Extraordinary Re-Creation of World War II Through the Eyes and Minds of Hitler, Roosevelt, Churchill, and Stalin

This is one of my favorite books of all time. The author was truly insightful and meticulous in researching this book. Historically accurate but flows like a novel. Incorporates the real correspondeces between the Warlords providing an amazing understanding of who these men really were, that you just don't get reading a text book. Must read for people interested in history, psychology, or politics.

It is a book that is very interesting to read and I would give a higher rate if it was not for something big missing. They concentrated the story on Europe, they forgot Japan and Asia. That was a World War, and not an European War. I guess the way Japan functioned during the war is not so well known so there is something important missing, who was the Japanese leader that influenced the major decisions, how he thought? What was happening inside Japan during this period of time? What kind of leadership they had? What was the role of the emperor? of General Tojo or Admiral Yamamoto? Any of them was the major war brain? In continental Asia, there was a major drama happening in China at the time, two importante leaders in world history,Mr. Chiang and Mr. Mao would unite forces to fight a foreign enemy... what roles they played, what was the interaction with the USA at the time, how this influences the USA attitudes toward China until today? If we look at the Allied powers there was two real superpowers, USA and USSR, Britain had not the resources to fight the war, but Churchill was put in the book because of his personality, without the USA he would have played a very different role in WWII. The italian leader, Mussolini was also someone to be analyzed, he was in a position similar to Churchill, with fewer resources and a weeker player, but it would complete the picture. I would add a few other questions regarding Mr. Roosevelt and his style of management...How advanced he was in concepts of Management? what concepts he applied? how good he was in identifying talented people to do the required tasks? how he motivated the whole free world to work together in the future? the depth of his vision for the future and what mission he established for the Allied powers and his mistakes... The Roosevelt administration used how many concepts of modern management theory? All my questioning above is due to the fact that I liked very much to read this book. It may not be very precise in its research, but makes you feel closer to the minds and the thinking that the major players did... I would add a companion book to this one:Why the Allies Won by Richard Overy.

Very well written book that shows the background details of Hitler, Stalin, Roosevelt and Churchill. It shows a lot of the ways that Roosevelt and Churchill butted heads and how they both dealt with Stalin and how Stalin dealt with everyone. I couldn't put this book down and found that the focus on these four and showing the war through their viewpoint was brilliant. I have loaned this book out to several people and they have all found it very enjoyable!

This extremely well written and interesting book is among the first works to examine the interaction between the four most important leaders of the Second World War: Churchill, Roosevelt, Hitler and Stalin. Authors Simon Berthon and Joanna Potts correctly identify these leaders as the last warlords of history in that they tightly controlled all aspects of warmaking in their respective countries, including the political, ecomonic and military realms. As a result, they dominated the war and decided its outcome. Of particular interest is the relationship between Churchill and Roosevelt. Other works depict this relationship as extremely close with both individuals having the same outlook on Hitler and the war. The authors show conclusively that this was not the case and that Roosevelt was not as taken with Churchill as some histories suggest. Indeed, it is clear that from the very beginning the American president dominated the relationship and this dominance grew as the United States became more and more involved in the war. At one point point Churchill and his Joint Chiefs drafted a message to Roosevelt and his Joint Chiefs concerning the the cross channel invasion of France, Operation Overlord. The Americans were pushing for the invasion, while the British were trying to delay it in order to commit Allied forces elsewhere. "All right, if you insist on being damned fools, sooner than falling out with you, which would be fatal, we shall be damned fools with you and we shall see that we perform the role of damned fools damned well!", wrote the British in one of the great communiqués of the war. At the same time that Churchill was doing his best to get America and Roosevelt in the war, Hitler was doing everything in his power to prevent U.S. participation in a European war. The German leader correctly understood America's massive industrial potential and that her involvement in the war would mean the end of the Third Reich. And though he vowed he would never engage Germany in another two-front war, Hitler went to war with Stalin to defeat Churchill and England. This, despite a Non-Aggression Pact between Germany and the Soviet Union which was mutually beneficial to both countries. Thus human relationships among the last warlords of history influenced the war as much as military strategy. It is this theme that makes this book so important.

Mr. Berthon was inspired to write this book by John Lukacs' extraordinary retelling of episodes of the war through the eyes of the leading protagonists. In the Duel, June 1941 and other works, Mr. Lukacs lends great insight to events and revives the "Great Man" theory of history single handedly. Mr. Berthon tries the same on a larger scale: telling the tale of the entire war through the eyes of four of the leaders. What the author sacrifices in detail - which had to be done to tell the story of the entire war within the pages of one book - he makes up for in breadth of coverage. You get a sense of the war that you don't find elsewhere. You also get a good sense of the strengths and weaknesses of these men. Interestingly, Stalin comes across as the best leader of the four, at least after Hitler takes advantage of his blunders and attacks. Unlike Hitler and Churchill, he does not interfere with the tactical decisions of his military and unlike Hitler and Roosevelt, he does not let his sense of reality be dominated by what he wants it to be, rather than what it really is.