Get the Ricochet app
Ricochet will work fine in a browser on your mobile devices, but for the best experience please download our app.
More than any others, five men directed the flow and determined the outcome of World War II: Winston Churchill. Adolf Hitler. Joseph Stalin, Benito Mussolini, and Franklin Roosevelt. Understanding how and why World War II evolved as it did requires understanding these five.
The Strategists: Churchill, Stalin, Roosevelt, Mussolini, and Hitler--How War Made Them and How They Made War, by Phillips Payson O'Brien, examines each. It shows how their early life experiences shaped them and how they subsequently shaped World War II.
O'Brien splits the book. The first half spends ten chapters on the early lives of these men. He devotes a chapter to each man’s early life, showing how they grew to adulthood, and what influences worked on them. Roosevelt and Churchill grew up privileged, raised to take the reins of power as adults. Hitler, the son of a petty bureaucrat, rebelled against the expectation he would follow the same path. Mussolini and Stalin grew up in poverty, with brutal fathers and adoring mothers.
The following five chapters examine each man’s experiences in the years leading up to and during the First World War—and for Stalin the Russian Civil War. O’Brien shows how each man’s experiences during that war forged the beliefs that drove them during World War II.
Roosevelt and Churchill came away convinced high-technology weapons could reduce soldier casualties—trading oil for blood. Mussolini was convinced that “spirit” could carry Italy to victory. Hitler believed victory lay in German superiority, especially in terms of bigger and better weapons. Stalin learned to trust no one except those absolutely loyal to him, particularly those from his own peasant class. Killing potential rivals before they threatened you was the key to success.
O’Brien devotes the last half of the book to showing how these beliefs informed the actions of all five during World War II. He also shows how they led each leader to success and victory or defeat and ignominy. Unsurprisingly Mussolini is shown as the least successful, followed by Hitler. Surprisingly Stalin is revealed as the most successful, followed by Roosevelt and then Churchill.
The Strategists offers a new, thought-provoking view of World War II and its leaders. O’Brien presents the war as driven by the highly personal decisions of five men, rather than the result of the impersonal tides of history and technology. He shows how these tides were started and steered by these five.
“The Strategists: Churchill, Stalin, Roosevelt, Mussolini, and Hitler–How War Made Them and How They Made War,” by Phillips Payson O’Brien, Dutton, August, 2024, 544 pages, $35.00 (Hardcover), $14.99 (e-book), $24.75 (Audiobook)
This review was written by Mark Lardas, who writes at Ricochet as Seawriter. Mark Lardas, an engineer, freelance writer, historian, and model-maker, lives in League City, TX. His website is marklardas.com.
Discussion (29)
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
Another book I HAVE to buy.
Um. Nothing on the Japanese?
How lacking.
CONTRIBUTOR
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
Not really. The Japanese participated in World War II, but they were basically along for the ride. None of Japan's decisions dictated the outcome of the war. All they did was bring in the US into the war a few month's earlier than the US otherwise would have. The war was decided in Europe.
The only way for Japan to have won, maybe, would have been if Germany took down Russia. Japan did not attack Russia in 1941 because the Soviets handed the Japanese their heads two years earlier in Mongolia. Unless they attacked Russia Hitler could not have defeated Russia. Japan was too weak to attack both Russia and the US/UK simultaneously. If they went after Russia after July 1941 their armies and navies would have run out of oil in six months. So they went south and east to seize the natural resources required. Which doomed them.
So, while the Pacific War was a major conflict, from the point of view of the strategic direction of the war - which this book was discussing - it was a sideshow.
That is totally dismissing everything that happened against the Japanese.
One might as well argue that there was no way the Germany could win therefore every decision they made was pointless.
If you are going to do a book that talks about the strategic decisions that were being made by leaders in World War 2 it should include the Japanese.
Not doing so frankly smacks of racism against the Japanese.
The fight of the United States and the Pacific against Japan was a significant factor in World War 2 and affected the war in Germany. It was not a side show and I think calling it a side show is an insult to all of the Americans and the allies who died fighting in the Pacific.
It was not a strategic side show. It was critically important to how the war was prosecuted. I will stand by my statement that leaving Japan out of this an error.
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
This book looks interesting, especially the earlier experiences of the leaders it portrays. Having said that, however, insofar as the final blows that closed out the Second World War took place by reason of two atomic bombs dropped on Japanese cities in their homeland, I would think the role of Japan's militaristic politicians are an essential part of any study purporting to discuss key strategic decisions of WWII. Indeed, all of East Asia and even mainland China's post-war realities were framed by these decisions.
Perhaps the book needs a companion study, much as reading Bruce Catton's trilogy, a narrative history of the Army of the Potomac is well complimented by reading Shelby Foote's multi-volume history of the armies of the CSA.
You're seeing five of 29 comments. Sign in, or join for just $5 per month, to read them all and add your own.