Quote:
Originally Posted by bristol scout
I can't remember in Bungays book 'The Most Dangerous Enemy'--which is about the Battle of Britain any references to Dresden
Dave.
|
Whilst Stephen Bungay's book is for the most part
focused around the Battle of Britain, the book's title references the threat to long range European politics and
not the Germans, who are not the titular 'most dangerous enemy'. Much of it examines the decision to engage the Germans rather than appease them, and the reasons for doing so; appeasement being something a good many short-sighted people in the UK were in favour of in 1939. Not choosing appeasement, thus kicking off the Battle of France and then the Battle of Britain, was a risky strategy at the time, because of inter war disarmament and Britain's unpreparedness, as demonstrated by the loss of the Battle of France, which for the most part was an attempted delaying action.
Nevertheless, because many, including Churchill, suspected that the Germans would probably lose a war against the Russians, which is where Germany's ultimate empire goals lay, in doing so, defeat would give the Russians free reign to make inroads deep into Europe, thus the strategy of challenging Hitler was chosen rather than the much easier choice of appeasing Hitler, because we know Hitler was not keen on the idea of fighting Britain and hoped to make peace with her when Britain pulled out of France, leaving him free to turn towards Russia.
Therefore, Bungay's book is not really about the Battle of Britain, but rather why it happened, and the morality and causes for the Second World War which led to it, since 'the most dangerous enemy' is a reference to the Russians and the ultimate threat they would pose in the 1950s if they had fought Germany alone and won in Europe. That was the brilliance of Churchill, which is still not recognised by many, even today.
In adopting the strategy to challenge the Nazis, Churchill knew that it would eventually bankrupt the country and probably be a catalyst for the end of the British Empire, but he regarded that as the price to pay for defeating National Socialism on more favourable terms for Europe and more importantly, to prevent a huge Communist Bloc European mainland, from which, the UK would almost certainly have also capitulated.
If you missed that point, and the further way in which it examines the morality of other issues including bombing of cities and such, which Churchill instigated during the Battle of Britain with a raid on Berlin, then you missed the point of the book, and indeed why it is so good.
Al