| Two things that make this book preblemmatic are:
1) he has taken statements, speeches, selective quotes etc, and not given much in the way of commentary, whether to prove a point or to contextualise them. So the quotes are expected to stand alone to prove a point. However, he has made the effort to explain the fact that Churchill, Roosevelt and Hitler were all great orators who made statements that were sometimes at odds with their actions. Without putting this in context of course the their statements are going to sound bad. They were, more often than not, intended to to be used as propaganda - let the enemy know what they were thinking rather than them being blueprints for action.
2) Baker is a pacifist, his agenda is one of political pacifism, and so one should read his book in light of that. I have no problem with Pacifists - their intentions are worthy. And in the current political climate, very commendable. However, in context to the run-up to WW2, pacifism failed. Appeassment was a form of political pacifism, as Chamberlain realised that the British people would not react in the same way as they did at the outbreak of WW1.
__________________  click me |