This Week’s Book Review – The Second World Wars

 

Books written about World War II fill libraries. Can anything new be said about that war, especially in an overview book? The Second World Wars: How the First Global Conflict Was Fought and Won by Victor Davis Hanson proves there is. A one-volume look at World War II, it offers surprising conclusions.

The surprises lie in Hanson’s presenting conclusions, which seem obvious once stated, but overlooked until Hanson highlights them. One example: Germany and Japan started wars they could not finish.

Germany lacked the capability to occupy Britain. After May 1940, Germany needed a seaborne invasion, which they could not do. Similarly, Germany could have occupied European Russia, but were incapable of occupying all of Russia. Japan’s situation was even worse. They could not reach the United States.

The result? All the Axis powers depended on their enemies surrendering to achieve peace. When Britain and Russia refused to make peace, Germany was stuck in a war it could not win. It could not even attack their enemies’ production centers.

The flip side is the Allied powers could strike the Axis heartland and possessed the ability to occupy enemy homelands. To make matters worse for the Axis, the Allies outproduced all the Axis powers by a ratio of 2:1. The United States’s gross domestic product by itself was larger than that of all Axis nations combined. Hansen points out even relatively minor Allied powers could outproduce the Axis. Canada alone produced more than twice as many military vehicles as Germany.

There are other similar revelations. Hanson rightly points out the second World War was actually a collection of independent wars that merged together. It was one of the few wars where the losers killed more than the victors. Three-quarters of those killed by the Allies were combatants, while three-quarters of those killed by the Axis were civilian. The Axis also depended heavily on slave labor.

Hansen provides a concise, readable and well-researched volume on World War II. It is an excellent starting point for those who know nothing about World War II, and a fresh look at the war for those knowledgeable about it.

“The Second World Wars: How the First Global Conflict Was Fought and Won,” by Victor Davis Hanson, Basic Books, 2017, 720 pages, $40

I write a weekly book review for the Daily News of Galveston County. (It is not the biggest daily newspaper in Texas, but it is the oldest.) My review normally appears Wednesdays. When it appears, I post the review on Ricochet on the following Sunday.

Published in History
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 45 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Arahant Member
    Arahant
    @Arahant

    Seawriter: the First Global Conflict

    This is the one part I don’t understand. If a conflict has wars/sub-wars/battles in North America, Europe, and Asia, is that not enough to be global? What separates WWII from the Seven Years’ War or Napoleonic Wars on being global conflicts?

    • #1
  2. Dr. Bastiat Member
    Dr. Bastiat
    @drbastiat

    Seawriter: It was one of the few wars where the losers killed more than the victors. Three-quarters of those killed by the Allies were combatants, while three-quarters of those killed by the Axis were civilian. The Axis also depended heavily on slave labor.

    Holy cats…

    • #2
  3. Seawriter Contributor
    Seawriter
    @Seawriter

    Arahant (View Comment):

    Seawriter: the First Global Conflict

    This is the one part I don’t understand. If a conflict has wars/sub-wars/battles in North America, Europe, and Asia, is that not enough to be global? What separates WWII from the Seven Years’ War or Napoleonic Wars on being global conflicts?

    Kind of what I thought. Hanson seems to ignore the 18th century completely. OTOH you can make a case for WWII being the first true global conflict with major forces committed in all of the continents. An additional argument could be that earlier “global” conflicts were not a single conflict, but a collection of independent wars. Hanson maintains WWII started as separate wars, but merged together.

    My feeling is the Wars of Austrian Succession was the first global war.

    Seawriter

    • #3
  4. Arahant Member
    Arahant
    @Arahant

    Seawriter (View Comment):
    My feeling is the Wars of Austrian Succession was the first global war.

    That one would do. I’d like to say it is because the earlier wars were colonial wars to reach anywhere outside Europe, but that was pretty much the situation with WWII.

    • #4
  5. Richard O'Shea Coolidge
    Richard O'Shea
    @RichardOShea

    I am halfway through the book. It is a slow read because I find myself rereading entire pages just to marvel at some of the insights.

    • #5
  6. Gary McVey Contributor
    Gary McVey
    @GaryMcVey

    Great review, Mark, and thanks.

    • #6
  7. Trink Coolidge
    Trink
    @Trink

    Seawriter: It is an excellent starting point for those who know nothing about World War II,

    Indeed, yes.   And we were privileged to hear him discuss his book at Hillsdale College this September.

     

    • #7
  8. Richard Easton Coolidge
    Richard Easton
    @RichardEaston

    Trink (View Comment):

    Seawriter: It is an excellent starting point for those who know nothing about World War II,

    Indeed, yes. And we were privileged to hear him discuss his book at Hillsdale College this September.

    C-SPAN aired one of his Hillsdale class lectures a few months ago.

    • #8
  9. Randy Weivoda Moderator
    Randy Weivoda
    @RandyWeivoda

    Seawriter: Canada alone produced more than twice as many military vehicles as Germany.

    That is astonishing.  Germany had several times the population of Canada and certainly had a history of manufacturing vehicles.

    • #9
  10. Trink Coolidge
    Trink
    @Trink

    Richard Easton (View Comment):

    Trink (View Comment):

    Seawriter: It is an excellent starting point for those who know nothing about World War II,

    Indeed, yes. And we were privileged to hear him discuss his book at Hillsdale College this September.

    C-SPAN aired one of his Hillsdale class lectures a few months ago.

    Found it :)  Thanks.

    C-SPAN aired one of his Hillsdale class lectures a few months ago.

     

    • #10
  11. Seawriter Contributor
    Seawriter
    @Seawriter

    Randy Weivoda (View Comment):

    Seawriter: Canada alone produced more than twice as many military vehicles as Germany.

    That is astonishing. Germany had several times the population of Canada and certainly had a history of manufacturing vehicles.

    Germany was aiming for engineering excellence. Canada sought “good enough” in mass quantities. Which would you rather have? Fifty really, really excellent five ton trucks, or 500 reliable, but average ones?

    Seawriter

    • #11
  12. GLDIII Reagan
    GLDIII
    @GLDIII

    Hey Seawriter no spoilers, I think Santa got me this book and I want the ending to be a surprise….?

    • #12
  13. Seawriter Contributor
    Seawriter
    @Seawriter

    GLDIII (View Comment):
    Hey Seawriter no spoilers, I think Santa got me this book and I want the ending to be a surprise….?

    Does that mean you are not going to “like” the review?

    Seawriter

    • #13
  14. GLDIII Reagan
    GLDIII
    @GLDIII

    So Sorry, very early on a Monday morning, where is my manners.

    Done!

    • #14
  15. Songwriter Inactive
    Songwriter
    @user_19450

    Seawriter (View Comment):

    Randy Weivoda (View Comment):

    Seawriter: Canada alone produced more than twice as many military vehicles as Germany.

    That is astonishing. Germany had several times the population of Canada and certainly had a history of manufacturing vehicles.

    Germany was aiming for engineering excellence. Canada sought “good enough” in mass quantities. Which would you rather have? Fifty really, really excellent five ton trucks, or 500 reliable, but average ones?

    Seawriter

    I imagine a fastidious German factory manager sending trucks back to be corrected because they are not absolutely perfect, while less-than-perfect bombs are dropping by the hundreds all around him.  Kind of like Phil Hartmann’s famous Anal Retentive Chef bit on SNL. Do you really want that guy cooking for an army?

    Thx for the review. I enjoy reading VDH, and this book is on my list.

    • #15
  16. Richard Easton Coolidge
    Richard Easton
    @RichardEaston

    Seawriter (View Comment):

    Randy Weivoda (View Comment):

    Seawriter: Canada alone produced more than twice as many military vehicles as Germany.

    That is astonishing. Germany had several times the population of Canada and certainly had a history of manufacturing vehicles.

    Germany was aiming for engineering excellence. Canada sought “good enough” in mass quantities. Which would you rather have? Fifty really, really excellent five ton trucks, or 500 reliable, but average ones?

    Seawriter

    Here’s a talk about the Sherman tank which elaborates on this point.

    • #16
  17. iWe Coolidge
    iWe
    @iWe

    Seawriter (View Comment):
    Germany was aiming for engineering excellence. Canada sought “good enough” in mass quantities. Which would you rather have? Fifty really, really excellent five ton trucks, or 500 reliable, but average ones?

    Viewing manufactured goods as disposable is a key insight for American supremacy. Liberty ships were terrible – but they were good enough, and much more ship for much less money. There are countless other examples.

    Engineers always want to make better products, tighter tolerances, better optimization. The management in Dilbert understands that, as much as it drives engineers crazy, getting it done faster and cheaper always trumps getting it done better.

    • #17
  18. Seawriter Contributor
    Seawriter
    @Seawriter

    iWe (View Comment):
    The management in Dilbert understands that, as much as it drives engineers crazy, getting it done faster and cheaper always trumps getting it done better.

    Only once it is good enough. It does not matter how cheap it is or how fast you get it if it burns up the first time you turn it on. (Generally engineers are bad at deciding what is good enough.)

    Seawriter

    • #18
  19. iWe Coolidge
    iWe
    @iWe

    Seawriter (View Comment):
    Only once it is good enough.

    True!

    (Generally engineers are bad at deciding what is good enough.)

    Engineers are very risk averse, and they are blind to these kinds of calls – so they think rationally about all aspects of a problem, but instinctively (and often irrationally) assign an amorphous “risk” concern that dwarfs all other considerations.

    Saying “I am willing to take the risk of saying it is ‘good enough’,” is very challenging for people who have always found that getting through life does not involve much risk – all a smart STEM person needs to do is be reasonably pleasant, and plug and chug through the workday.

     

    • #19
  20. Seawriter Contributor
    Seawriter
    @Seawriter

    iWe (View Comment):

    Seawriter (View Comment):
    Only once it is good enough.

    True!

    (Generally engineers are bad at deciding what is good enough.)

    Engineers are very risk averse, and they are blind to these kinds of calls – so they think rationally about all aspects of a problem, but instinctively (and often irrationally) assign an amorphous “risk” concern that dwarfs all other considerations.

    Saying “I am willing to take the risk of saying it is ‘good enough’,” is very challenging for people who have always found that getting through life does not involve much risk – all a smart STEM person needs to do is be reasonably pleasant, and plug and chug through the workday.

    First Rule of Wing Walking: Never let go with one hand until you have a firm grip with the other.

    Second Rule of Wing Walking: Every once in a while you have to let go with both hands, and just jump.

    Third Rule of Wing Walking: Success depends on knowing when the First Rule applies and when the Second Rule applies.

    Seawriter

    • #20
  21. OccupantCDN Coolidge
    OccupantCDN
    @OccupantCDN

    Seawriter (View Comment):

    Randy Weivoda (View Comment):

    Seawriter: Canada alone produced more than twice as many military vehicles as Germany.

    That is astonishing. Germany had several times the population of Canada and certainly had a history of manufacturing vehicles.

    Germany was aiming for engineering excellence. Canada sought “good enough” in mass quantities. Which would you rather have? Fifty really, really excellent five ton trucks, or 500 reliable, but average ones?

    Seawriter

    Hey, NOW!

    Good enough is good enough to get’er done.

    Also we should be clear that WW 2 was the beginning of Canada’s branch plant economy. Those inferior trucks that came from Mississauga or Oshawa had “GM” or “FORD” stamped on the front of them. Once you realize this you can understand the root of the inferiority complex.

    Germany still has several times Canada’s population. Canada’s population is roughly the same as California’s.

    It’s also the case, that Canada was never directly attacked during the war, while Germany had the RAF and US Army Air Corps bombing them in a round the clock campaign.

    • #21
  22. Matty Van Inactive
    Matty Van
    @MattyVan

    Seawriter:The surprises lie in Hanson’s presenting conclusions, which seem obvious once stated, but overlooked until Hanson highlights them. One example: Germany and Japan started wars they could not finish.

     

    Japan actually knew that. In negotions with the US over its war in China, it was basically given no choice but total capitulation if it wanted oil. It gambled on a short war with an America distracted by Europe. It hoped that crippling strikes into Indochina for resources and at Honolulu would be enough to convince America to sue for peace so that it could fight the war FDR really wanted to fight: in Europe. Japan pretty much knew that it would lose a long war.

    The Honolulu part of the calculation was stupidity. Japan thought – and was almost certainly mistaken in this – that America would come to the rescue of the British (and Dutch and French) in SE Asia. So it sought to make that difficult with its attack on Honolulu. But that only aroused Americans who most likely would not have been aroused by one empire overthrowing several others in SE Asia.

    • #22
  23. Seawriter Contributor
    Seawriter
    @Seawriter

    Matty Van (View Comment):

    Seawriter: One example: Germany and Japan started wars they could not finish.

    Japan actually knew that. In negotions with the US over its war in China, it was basically given no choice but total capitulation if it wanted oil. It gambled on a short war with an America distracted by Europe.

    Japan was overly influenced by the Russo-Japanese War. It was in an existential fight there. Russia gave the impression it intended to absorb Manchuria,Korea, and eventually Japan. Japan was willing to cede Manchuria, but could not allow Russia to absorb Korea. Sakhalin Island was Japanese until Russia absorbed it in the late 19th Century. Japan figured if they could not stop Russia in Korea, Russia would eventually roll into Japan.

    Japan thought they would lose a war against Russia, but figured it was better to go down fighting than wait passively for Russia to absorb them. (Sound familiar?) Japan won, but even its military and naval victories would not have been enough without covert support by Great Britain and the United States. By 1940 Japan remembered their military victories, but forgot about the boost they got from the UK and US.

    Over the last two years and through 2018 I stumbled into writing a trilogy of books about Japan’s military rise and fall: one on Rabaul (out in January) – Japan at its apogee, one on the Tsushima campaign (fall 2018) – when the Rising Sun began to rise, and a soon to be contracted one on the firebombing campaign against Japan (out in 2019) – the setting of the Rising Sun. It was fascinating to see pieces of a larger picture coming together as I did the writing.

    Seawriter

    • #23
  24. Matty Van Inactive
    Matty Van
    @MattyVan

    Seawriter (View Comment):

    Over the last two years and through 2018 I stumbled into writing a trilogy of books about Japan’s military rise and fall: one on Rabaul (out in January) – Japan at its apogee, one on the Tsushima campaign (fall 2018) – when the Rising Sun began to rise, and a soon to be contracted one on the firebombing campaign against Japan (out in 2019) – the setting of the Rising Sun. It was fascinating to see pieces of a larger picture coming together as I did the writing.

    Fascinating! Let us know, or at least let me know, when they come out. I also stumbled into a roughly similar situation, teaching a course at a Tokyo Uni on the history of US-Japanese foreign relations, so your current project is of extreme interest to me. In my case, though, unlike you, I was unqualified, and had to really work at making myself – in a hurry – at least able to give the appearance of knowledge!

    Seawriter (View Comment):

    Japan was overly influenced by the Russo-Japanese War. It was in an existential fight there. Russia gave the impression it intended to absorb Manchuria,Korea, and eventually Japan.

    It certainly was overly influenced. Victories in war tend to do that to nations. I’m not sure that Japan saw itself in an existential fight, but it certainly saw its burgeoning empire in an existential fight. Which is, as you point out, how it felt again in 1940.

    Seawriter (View Comment)

    Japan thought they would lose a war against Russia, but figured it was better to go down fighting than wait passively for Russia to absorb them. (Sound familiar?)

    Did they really think so? Probably some did, some did not. In the fight with the US, some in the army, especially ideologically driven (IE ideologically blinded) elements among young officers thought Japanese Spirit could overcome American productive capacity, but I think cooler heads at the top knew this was a war that would be lost if America became serious. They counted on America choosing to sacrifice China so that it could become serious about Europe.

    • #24
  25. Fake John/Jane Galt Coolidge
    Fake John/Jane Galt
    @FakeJohnJaneGalt

    iWe (View Comment):

    Seawriter (View Comment):
    Germany was aiming for engineering excellence. Canada sought “good enough” in mass quantities. Which would you rather have? Fifty really, really excellent five ton trucks, or 500 reliable, but average ones?

    Viewing manufactured goods as disposable is a key insight for American supremacy. Liberty ships were terrible – but they were good enough, and much more ship for much less money. There are countless other examples.

    Engineers always want to make better products, tighter tolerances, better optimization. The management in Dilbert understands that, as much as it drives engineers crazy, getting it done faster and cheaper always trumps getting it done better.

    I believe you just summed up the entire concept of agile project management in one sentence.

    • #25
  26. OccupantCDN Coolidge
    OccupantCDN
    @OccupantCDN

    Fake John/Jane Galt (View Comment):

    iWe (View Comment):

    Seawriter (View Comment):
    Germany was aiming for engineering excellence. Canada sought “good enough” in mass quantities. Which would you rather have? Fifty really, really excellent five ton trucks, or 500 reliable, but average ones?

    Viewing manufactured goods as disposable is a key insight for American supremacy. Liberty ships were terrible – but they were good enough, and much more ship for much less money. There are countless other examples.

    Engineers always want to make better products, tighter tolerances, better optimization. The management in Dilbert understands that, as much as it drives engineers crazy, getting it done faster and cheaper always trumps getting it done better.

    I believe you just summed up the entire concept of agile project management in one sentence.

    I think the key to winning the war is to realize all your materials sent into combat are disposable, and will therefore have to be replaced at a heartbreaking pace. (men more than trucks, causing the heartbreak) It just came down to a point where the axis powers couldnt replace the materials being lost in combat quickly enough. A literal war of attrition.

    I often thought of re-inventing the liberty ship for modern times – to make ships both smaller, more efficient and less expensive. Maybe something along the lines of a “HandyMax” size. With modern manufacturing techniques, mass customization could mean that a hull design could be tailored for different needs.

    • #26
  27. Arahant Member
    Arahant
    @Arahant

    OccupantCDN (View Comment):
    With modern manufacturing techniques, mass customization could mean that a hull design could be tailored for different needs.

    Kind of like my thoughts on cars.

    • #27
  28. Seawriter Contributor
    Seawriter
    @Seawriter

    Matty Van (View Comment):
    In my case, though, unlike you, I was unqualified, and had to really work at making myself – in a hurry – at least able to give the appearance of knowledge!

    Qualified?  I am completely unqualified as a historian. I have  a BS in engineering and an MBA. No college in the nation would let me teach history and no high school would permit me as a teacher in any subject because I lack certification.

    What I do have is an analytic approach, the ability to do research (thank the MBA for that) and skill in telling a compelling story. When I study a subject I have the ability to extract pertinent facts and put them together into a larger picture. I am really good at interfaces and piecing together relationships. I view each history project as an engineering exercise, and then write it up in an entertaining manner.

    Thank God I do not need to pass some qualification exam to write history books. I would never have been permitted to do so.

    Matty Van (View Comment):

    Seawriter (View Comment)

    Japan thought they would lose a war against Russia, but figured it was better to go down fighting than wait passively for Russia to absorb them. (Sound familiar?)

    Did they really think so? Probably some did, some did not.

    I would say they did – at least the senior leadership, which made the decision to go to war. You have to clear your mind of the facts accumulated since 1903 to understand why. What the Japanese saw was a Russia which had made a steady march east across Asia absorbing one neighboring state and then the next. Russia was in the process of assimilating Manchuria. It was not then the integral part of China it became in the twentieth century. Had Russia negotiated in good faith with Japan and agreed to partition spheres of influence (taking Manchuria and giving Japan Korea) Manchuria would today be thought of as another Russian province.

    Japan had been a feudal state with medieval technology only fifty years earlier. It had been modernizing, but no one saw it as essentially different than Siam or Tonkin. It was another primitive Asian state. Russia viewed them as little different than the Aleuts or Amur.

    Japan had been a vassal of China up to the First Sino-Japanese War a decade earlier. (Japan also liberated Korea during that war.) No one, including the Japanese realized how far they had come.

    As it was, they only barely won the Russo-Japanese War. Had it continued until December, Japan, despite its victories would have collapsed. It was saved by the Russian Revolution of 1905 and pressure by the US and Britain on Russia to settle the war.

    Seawriter

    • #28
  29. OccupantCDN Coolidge
    OccupantCDN
    @OccupantCDN

    Arahant (View Comment):

    OccupantCDN (View Comment):
    With modern manufacturing techniques, mass customization could mean that a hull design could be tailored for different needs.

    Kind of like my thoughts on cars.

    Yea, I think someday (soon) cars will be completely 3d printed, assembled etc without any direct labor – at regional mini plants located near the customer (to minimize transportation costs and risk of damage in transport). When I bought my car last winter – there was $2500 shipping cost on the car, and a total of $8000 in additional fees, taxes and surcharges – over the sticker price.

    • #29
  30. Matty Van Inactive
    Matty Van
    @MattyVan

    Seawriter (View Comment):

    Matty Van (View Comment):
    In my case, though, unlike you, I was unqualified,

    Qualified? I am completely unqualified as a historian.

    Ha ha. Ya coulda fooled me! And still can.

     

    Matty Van (View Comment):

    Seawriter (View Comment)

    Japan thought they would lose a war against Russia, but figured it was better to go down fighting than wait passively for Russia to absorb them. (Sound familiar?)

    Did they really think so? Probably some did, some did not.

    I would say they did – at least the senior leadership, which made the decision to go to war.

     

    I have no solid evidence off hand other than that that doesn’t fit my sense of Japanese martial confidence at the time. No one, except themselves, thought they could defeat China, either, which, on paper, had a superior, modern, western navy and a western looking army. But Japan’s navy and army were real, not simply impressive looking collections of goodies bought from the West.

    In 1903, Japan’s solid alliance with Great Britain meant many or most of its naval officers had been superbly trained in England. They knew that their own soldiers and sailors had been superbly trained at home, and likely knew that that wasn’t the case for the Russians. They also knew that maintainance of machinery and weapons were essential, and may have known the Russians were lax about that.

    Seawriter (View Comment):

    Had Russia negotiated in good faith with Japan and agreed to partition spheres of influence (taking Manchuria and giving Japan Korea) Manchuria would today be thought of as another Russian province.

    There was at least a modicum of good faith, wasn’t there? They both seemed willing to recognize a buffer zone for the other – Manchuria for Russia and the Korean Penninsula for Japan. Problem was, Japan wanted the Yalu River for a boundary, but Russian aristocrats already had logging consortiums south of the Yalu River, which they weren’t willing to give up. Therefore Russia wanted a boundary too far south for Japan’s comfort. The Korean Penninsula, as a Prussian diplomat at the time famously phrased it, was a dagger pointed at the heart of Japan.

    Seawriter (View Comment):
     

    Japan had been a feudal state with medieval technology only fifty years earlier. It had been modernizing, but no one saw it as essentially different than Siam or Tonkin. It was another primitive Asian state. Russia viewed them as little different than the Aleuts or Amur.

     

    So true. But there’s a key to their successful modernization that neither China nor any other non-European country recognized. Japan saw that western military superiority was not simply weaponary and military prowess. It saw that military strength was embedded in the entirety of western culture. Japan’s genius, therefore, was to recognize that if it wanted the strength to stand up to the West, it had to learn the entirety of western culture, which it assiduously proceeded to do.

    CONTINUED BELOW

    • #30
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.