|
The New Dealers' War: FDR and the War Within World War II |  | Author: Thomas Fleming
Publisher: Basic Books
Category: Book
List Price: $24.95
Buy Used: $2.28
as of 7/30/2010 23:08 MDT details
You Save: $22.67 (91%)
New (25) Used (37) Collectible (2) from $2.28
Seller: noah74
Rating:  67 reviews
Sales Rank: 586924
Media: Paperback
Pages: 624
Number Of Items: 1
Shipping Weight (lbs): 2.4
Dimensions (in): 9 x 6.2 x 1.9
ISBN: 0465024653
Dewey Decimal Number: 973
EAN: 9780465024650
ASIN: 0465024653
Publication Date: June 2002
Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days
| |
| Also Available In:
|
| Similar Items:
| |
| Editorial Reviews:
Amazon.com Review
Always fiercely contested on matters of domestic policy, Franklin Roosevelt faced even more opposition when it came to international relations. His first two terms in office coincided with the rise of a powerful isolationist movement that urged the government not to involve itself in foreign entanglements. That movement, coupled with strongly anti-British sentiment that owed much to America's large Irish and German populations, hampered Roosevelt's efforts to set the nation on the side of England when it became apparent in the late 1930s that a European war loomed. To placate his opposition, Thomas Fleming charges in The New Dealers' War, Roosevelt promised "that he would never send American soldiers to fight beyond America's shores." Yet, Fleming continues, on December 4, 1941, the Chicago Tribune revealed the existence of elaborate war plans involving the landing of an American force 5 million strong in Europe by 1943. The revelation gave isolationists fits, of course, but their criticism was effectively silenced three days later when a Japanese force attacked Hawaii. In declaring war on Japan and its allies, Roosevelt's New Deal administration imposed what Fleming considers to have been an unreasonable demand for the unconditional surrender of the Axis powers. That demand, he believes, compromised internal resistance to the enemy regimes. Its prosecution also legitimized the use of what Fleming calls "hateful tactics" such as the bombing of civilian targets and the use of nuclear weapons. Fleming's revisionist study will be of greatest interest to those already inclined to the view that Franklin Roosevelt tricked his country into fighting Fascism. Other readers may take issue with his ad hominem, ideological arguments. Either way, his provocative thesis is sure to promote debate. --Gregory McNamee
Product Description
Acclaimed historian Thomas Fleming brings to life a flawed and troubled FDR struggling to manage World War II. Starting with the leak to the press of Roosevelt's famous Rainbow Plan, then spiraling back to FDR's inept prewar diplomacy with Japan and his various attempts to lure Japan into an attack on the U.S. Fleet in the Pacific, Fleming takes the reader on a journey through the incredibly fractious struggles and debates that went on in Washington, the nation, and the world as the New Dealers strove to impose their will on the conduct of the War. In bold contrast to the familiar, idealized FDR of other biographies, Fleming's Roosevelt is a man in remorseless decline, battered by ideological forces and primitive hatreds that he could not handle and frequently failed to understand some of them leading to unimaginable catastrophe. Among FDR's most dismaying policies, Fleming argues, is his insistence on "unconditional surrender" for Germany (a policy that perhaps prolonged the war by as much as two years, leaving millions more dead) and his often-uncritical embrace of and acquiescence to Stalin and the Soviets as an ally. The New Dealers' War is one of those rare books that force readers to rethink what they think they know about a pivotal event in the American past.
|
| Customer Reviews:
Showing reviews 1-5 of 67
 Deceit that haunts us to this day March 10, 2010
Efrem Sepulveda (Tempe, AZ)
1 out of 2 found this review helpful
Thomas Fleming's book on FDR's wartime administration is a tour de force of intrigue and facts that puts a light on sad events that have repercussions to this day. The book's 561 pages start with the events leading up to the attack on Pearl Harbor and end after the return of servicemen from war and the elections of 1946.
The main things that I learned about in this book was FDR's desire to get us involved in the conflict by prodding Japan into attacking us as evidenced in the Rainbow Five plan which called for, among other things, the denial of vital materials for its war effort. Roosevelt also covered up events like the Katyn Forest massacre for the purpose of holding on to the Polish-American vote in the 1944 elections; he also committed blatant human rights violation by interning Japanese-Americans. Roosevelt also committed the fatal error of thinking that he could handle Stalin. His performances at Teheran and Yalta have put this fiction to rest for decades. Of course it goes without saying that the doctrines of unconditional surrender and terror bombing of Japan and, to a lesser extent, Germany needlessly extended this war to the cost of hundreds of thousands of lives.
Now almost 70 years removed from the events of that time, one could honestly ask "Could FDR and Stalin have also been put on trial at Nuremberg for crimes against humanity?"
Five stars.
 Fleming: Hack Historian and Teabagger? February 22, 2010
M. Leonard (Sunset Beach, NC)
1 out of 10 found this review helpful
Allegedly a prominent historian of the American Revolution, Thomas Fleming's works on America's involvement in the World Wars of the 20th Century show an appalling ignorance of the subject matter. This book is particularly offensive to anyone whose parents lived through the 1930s and 40s. Who besides Fleming would have thought that cutting a deal with Hitler and Nazi Germany was a good idea? Or is it simply a case of senility on his part? "New Dealers' War" could have been written by George Will, Amity Shlaes, or any other contemporary well-fed apologist for the far right and the wealthy elites who brought the country the misery of the Great Depression. Fleming's assertions are preposterous and were discredited years ago, but fit the mindset of an elderly reactionary and neo-isolationist. No doubt he is a big supporter of the current "Tea Party" movement of anti-government protesters, racists, and activists who pretend they're merely in favor of fiscal responsibility. One can only wonder why they were asleep for so much of the past decade.
 Other points of view are welcome November 18, 2009
Eddie Wood (Portland, Or)
0 out of 2 found this review helpful
There are dozens of interesting books written about FDR that are worth reading, all with their own perspective and point of view, which only proves as Bernard malamud famously said "ultimately, all biography is fiction." Fleming obviously is not attempting to be an objective historian, and has a thesis to prove, but is not one of the right-wingers from Regernry either. He makes many salient points and I totally agree it doesn't serve FDR's legacy well to view him as a saint. For anyone with an open mind, read Conrad Black's book on FDR, in my opinion, the best overall book written (so far) on FDR. Black is a conservative, and has written a highly respected biography of Richard Nixon, so he has no "liberal agenda."
Brilliantly written; thoroughly researched; provocatively argued March 15, 2009
Richard M. Rollo Jr. (Montebello, CA USA)
1 out of 1 found this review helpful
Thomas Fleming writes history incredibly well. His point of view is hostile to FDR only in comparison to those written by historians who were avowed leftists or who later became Democrat party activists. Since, their point of view was well represented in state approved social studies textbooks for decades, the arguments and facts reported here deserve a full airing.
I am astonished to learn how widespread the opposition among the leadership---including Eisenhower and George C. Marshall--- was to FDR's unconditional surrender terms for the Axis. It seems the only one who agreed with him was Stalin. Of course, as the war grew more vicious, the public came to strongly support the idea.
I don't entirely agree with some of Fleming's argument about the effect the unconditional surrender had on the various anti-Hitler plots in Germany. I don't think the plots of Admiral Canaris and the others had any chance of success, even assuming they had gotten lucky. Most Germans would have considered the murder of Hitler to have been an act of treason. The fate the plotters suffered would have been more public in the event that they had achieved their goal. As the events transpired, with the surrender by Jodl, I don't think it would have been too much different if the plotters had succeeded. I don't think the Nazi's would have lost control of Germany.
But, I do agree with Fleming that the anti-Nazi plotters in Germany should have been encouraged and supported. Why not? The main risk of those activities was born by the plotters. Fleming argues that FDR's hatred of all things German blinded him to alternatives that would have shortened the war. I also agree that had Roosevelt lived and the Morgenthau plan had been put into effect in an attempt to permanently destroy Germany, it would have been a monumental disaster. These were men who learned nothing from World War I and its aftermath.
Arthur Schlesinger, Jr.'s, highly favorable multi volume history of the New Deal ends with the 1936 election. He completed it at the end of 1959 before he hit the campaign trail in 1960, first on behalf of Adlai Stevenson, and later on behalf of John F. Kennedy. He never finished his side of the story.
Fleming begins his story with the Chicago Tribune leak of the war plans, as other reviewers here have noted, and then backtracks to the court packing debacle after the 1936 election. Fleming describes it as an act of hubris at the pinnacle of his political success and a turning point in the political and physical decline of the President.
I think this a great book, which should provoke a much needed debate about these issues. I'm all in favor of the politically correct having their say, but theirs should not be the only say.
Massively interesting, challenging and infuriating book January 27, 2009
Francis Meyrick (LA, USA)
4 out of 5 found this review helpful
(Note: I own and have READ the whole book - twice) (...)
(561 pages)
(Disclaimer: I see a lot of ANGER in some of the negative reviews! I'm not trying to upset anybody - all this simple fellow wants to do is to try and understand what has happened, in the 1930's, and what IS happening, today, in 2009...)
Short review: Fascinating. Disturbing. Tragic. Infuriating. Heart breaking. Brilliantly written. Excellent prose. Detailed references and notes.
Long review: Covers roughly the period 1932 to 1946, and really pretty well, I hate to say it, "slaughters" FDR and the New Dealers. Exposes the whole sorry mess. I first read this years ago, shortly after its publication, and was quickly fascinated. Fleming writes brilliant prose, acidic and witty, very gripping and entertaining. Despite all the many hundreds of names, dates, and places, and the convolutions within the intrigues and the ebb and flow of 'soaring idealism' versus 'ugly realism', vanity, and brute power politics, you can in fact almost read it as a novel. Such smooth prose. I did that on the first read. Then I recently went back, read it more slowly, and started looking up his references, especially on the more controversial topics, such as the identity of the party responsible for leaking "Rainbow Five". There is a massive "notes" section in the back, and if you start delving into that, well, you will be busy for months.
It always seem to me a pity when people refuse to even read a book based on ideology. That's way too EASY, folks. Some "reviewers" here have NOT read the book. They make ZERO reference to specific contents. It's like they just took their cue from other negative reviewers, stuck a label on it, ("It's against FDR! SHAME!")and declared it unworthy. Come now. Fleming poses us all a challenge, no matter where our sympathies may lie: "read this, and tell me where I'm wrong". He even ENABLES HIS CRITICS, he meticulously names his sources, and objectively announces when he conjectures.
I like and respect that. He never - that I can see- presents his own hunches as "historical fact". Several negative reviewers claim as much, but I honestly -after a careful read times two- see no evidence of that at all.
I saw some areas I thought I disagreed on, but when I checked his references, (thank you, Mr Fleming) I understood his conclusions better.
What more can you ask for? A FDR critic who is clear, well documented, and who unselfishly points you to his sources. If you are going to disagree, then that's your privilege, but PLEASE do so by detailed references to the text, not by vague, generalized howls of outrage, that somebody could have had the AUDACITY to wag a finger at the greatest president that ever strutted the corridors of power...
This book will always be furiously hated by many. It's that biting. Yes, it minces FDR, his policies, his personal integrity, and many of his appointees, and spits out the little pieces. His war mongering, his scheming, and the endless lies he told the American people (who overwhelmingly showed little appetite for entering WW2) , typified with his historic promise (p.78) to the mothers and fathers of America: "Your boys are not going to be sent into any foreign wars".
A public promise that denied the "secret commitments" (p.79) to Great Britain?
Controversial indeed is this passage, pages (80 to 81).
And here's one of many challenges for FDR lovers and New Deal lovers: examine this, and refute it. Tell us innocent ones why you think it's wrong and misleading...?
"Apparently FDR saw himself and his New Dealers not merely as America's rulers for another four years, but as her saviors from a domestic fascist takeover. The putsch rhetoric suggests FDR believed the enemy was not only beyond the oceans. They were in the midst of the nation, and they had an alarming grip on the souls of the American people. That would explain why it was necessary - and morally permissible- to lie and evade and deceive to lead the people into war against Germany."
Strong stuff, eh? Let's hear a reasoned, calm, rebuttal from you negative reviewers.
There are many, many interesting one-liners in this book, and much food for quiet reflection for us simple folk, the ignorant plebs, the cannon fodder, trying now, in January 2009, to get some kind of a handle of where our new, seemingly very idealistic leader is going to take us with the "New New Deal". And his web version of the "Fireside chats"...
(p.55) "The trouble is,", Roosevelt replied, "We seldom know six weeks in advance what we are going to do."
(p.66) "Thus did the New Dealers", exacerbated by their failure to revive the American economy, drift into declaring war on capitalism".
(p.87) "Entrance into the European War will be the next great New Deal experiment."
Many critics maintain that FDR's grasp of History, compared to that of Churchill, never even came within a mile of the playing field. I kind of... sense that as well. Just one example; FDR's insistence on "Unconditional Surrender" (Churchill was aghast) is pretty convincingly shown to be the poorly thought out babbling of an uninformed, arrogant, uncaring ideological zealot.
Tragic words, a stubborn mindset, that cost... countless (millions of?)lives. A Shakespearian tragedy, bathed in blood, forgotten and/or ignored by FDR apologists today.
(page 209) "The policy of unconditional surrender, applied to Italy, had been based on the premise that it would enable the Allies to preserve their moral integrity without sacrificing military expediency. Its actual result was the loss of both."
The Italians hesitations to accept "unconditional surrender" allowed the Germans to pour in reinforcements, and pick the best defensive lines. The result?
(page 209) "So began a war of attrition, that would kill or wound 201,180 American and British soldiers, and leave Italy devastated. It was the first taste of the bitter fruit of unconditional surrender."
Marvelous book. You know, I have tried, and I am still trying, and I will always try, to poke holes in his reasoning, his arguments, and his conclusions. I'm finding that part... tough going. If you are inclined to think FDR was a left wing ideologue, a bumbling power mogul, haughty and egotistical, an economic ignoramus, totally outmaneuvered by Stalin, cynical beyond words towards the Poles, ignorant about the Katyn massacre, and that he ran an administration riddled with no less than 325 (confirmed by Venona transcripts) Soviet spies then you will be comfortably at home in this book. Put your feet up and enjoy. On the other hand, if you think FDR was a great president, an awesomely inspiring war leader, a crusader for world peace, and that the New Deal was successful, and should be copied and serve as a role model for Mr Obama, then you should buy this book and use it as target practice. Its 561 pages of text (and 67 pages of notes and sources) will make a good backstop; or,joking aside, it certainly WILL GIVE YOU, in one place, a powerful, masterful onslaught on everything you hold dear. When you are finished reading all its lies and distortions, then I hope you will write "The Myth - of the New Dealers War" as an antidote. Please dedicate it to simple bumpkins like myself, who are being grievously misled by Mr Thomas Fleming, acclaimed Historian, and author of 40 (presumably all misleading) books.
I'll buy a copy of any book that is reasoned, calm, well thought out, and explains WHY Mr Fleming is a bonehead. But you will NOT convince me with some of these empty negative reviews that do not not quote the text. I'm always interested in the polar opposite view...
Peace. Happy reading. Be nice.
PS: Please 'comment' constructively if you feel I am missing the point somewhere, or if you feel you can point me to further useful reading material to broaden my understanding of this time period, or to correct flawed reasoning - thanks...
Showing reviews 1-5 of 67
|
|
|
Contact Military Topix
Privacy and Legal CERTAIN CONTENT THAT APPEARS ON THIS SITE COMES FROM AMAZON SERVICES LLC. THIS CONTENT IS PROVIDED ‘AS IS’ AND IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE OR REMOVAL AT ANY TIME. Powered by Associate-O-Matic
| |
