Max Hastings on War

De: Max Hastings

Narrado por: Max Hastings

From Max Hastings comes a collection of talks and lectures exploring the wars of the 20th century with the verve, insight and originality that has made him a number one bestselling historian.

What is war like to live through, for civilian victims, especially women, as well as soldiers, sailors and fliers? Hastings has been a life-long student of warfare, a ‘chronicler of conflict’, working first as a foreign correspondent on battlefields, then as a prolific prize-winning historian of the 20th century’s greatest struggles. He has now been studying warfare for over fifty years, published thirty books, and given hundreds of talks and lectures. Here are thirteen of the best.

Addressing questions of truth versus myth and revisiting many last-generation narratives, Hastings leads us through the most important conflicts in recent times. Listen as he explores D-Day, the Dambusters raid, Churchill’s character and achievement as war leader, Vietnam, and – in his most recent book, published in 2022, the Cuban missile crisis – 13 days when we came closest to annihilation and which stands as a mirror to the grave threats the world faces today.

©2022 Max Hastings (P)2022 HarperCollins Publishers Limited

Sublime

Incisive martial insights suffused with deep erudition and a rapier sharp wit. Why didn’t France turn over to a Great Britain the 1000 Luftwaffer POW pilots?

A Career Summary of Hastings’ Work

Excellent book. Be warned this covers some of his life experiences - but most of the book is made of of essays about his previous writing. He goes through his major books in World Chronology order not the order in which the books were written. He covers the major points and themes of each book adding some personal commentary. Each essay is interesting in its own right and it has made me want to re-read some of his books again. Good stand alone book but even more enjoyable for those who have been reading his books all along.

War is hell get over it

If looking upon war, any war, as a terrible thrilling glorious adventure of the most horrific and magnificent kind, if this is your cup of tea, then Max Hastings is for you. He tells you such things as you are wrong about World War I. All that seemingly senseless brutality on a scale never before seen had a worthy end in mind. The allies saved the world for democracy. Saved us from that nincompoop Kaiser who wanted to institute the same type of draconian measures the allies eventually made such a mess of at the conclusion of the war. To Hastings, when the allies eventually did pretty much the same thing the Kaiser had been planning, except in reverse, this serves as justification for the allies actions. Come again? You spent 80% of the chapter telling us what a buffoon the Kaiser was and then justify the allies selfish and idiotic actions by claiming see, we only did to him what he would have done to us. Hastings also justifies the decision making processes of the allied commanders by asking, rhetorically, what were they supposed to do? Just stand around and let the Germans walk all over them. It was kill or be killed man. Hastings backs this idiocy up by pulling out a few (maybe one or two) reminiscences of WW I soldiers who claim it wasn't so bad as the poets claimed. We did our duty what, same as soldiers do in every war. War is hell, every war is hell, and we made it through ours without whining and belly-aching about it. Not everyone who fought the war was a shivering shaking shell-shocked coward. At least this type of perceived cowardice Hastings could tolerate. What he couldn't excuse were those who tried to shirk their duty and tried to make a run for it; if only because it must have seemed sheer madness to remain in the trenches a moment longer. Hastings, while it is not clear whether he condones the orders to shoot these deserters, claims he may have done no different had he been the one in charge. Neglecting to shoot the deserter sends a bad message to the rest of the troops. That type of bad behavior needs to be nipped in the bud before it infects others.Two things about this. One, why would one man's desertion infect all the men, if, as Hastings suggested, the cause was just and the fighting men in the ranks completely committed to it? Two, Hastings, if not exactly condoning the action of the general, does understand why this man gave the order to fire. This is war dammit! What Hastings fails to do, however, and fails miserably, is to place himself in the shoes, not of the general, but the deserter. He has no problem imagining himself commanding the troops but to imagine himself a deserter? Perish the thought. Why did this man desert? Hastings has no answer. Nor does he very much care. To Hastings, as was the case with the majority of the characters he paints, this man was no more than a caricature. A type. A type we have seen many times before. Mostly in the movies.