What books have you been reading?

[Oh_Canada]

Shoe Dog-Phil Knight.

Excellent thus far.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

"The Road to 1914–The War The Ended Peace" by Margaret MacMillan.

A stunning book.

After reading it I'm left with the feeling that if the caused of WWII could be likened to a kids puzzle of about 6 pieces, the causes of WWI would be like a puzzle of a 1,000 pieces.

So many twists and turns. And a multitude of players– far more players than the few that drove Europe into WWII.

I can't help but think that war it's offspring, WWII set Europe back for decades and doomed it to become a follower– It's leadership days long gone. Prior to WWI the pacifists were seeing Europe somewhat as it is today... Kind of one entity.

But it was the nationalists that drove the military buildup within each country. The result was no one was going to back down and IMO the alliance of France, Russia and the UK was set soon enough and said strongly enough to cause Germany to pull back on Austrio Hungary's leash.

While the assination of the Archduke set things into motion, there were about a half-dozen crisis and incidents that could have triggered a major war from 1905 on. That fuse was always there and came close to being lit more than once.

Part of the problem is that most took the idea of war as being too much of a good thing... They thought it would make their nation (fill in the name of any of the nations) and that the destruction would be limited because it would be a "short war".

Ha-ha-ha!

A few thought otherwise– they thought it would be a devasting war that would kill many and last a long time. Much of which was based on the power of then modern weapons and giving the defenders such an advantage that an offensive army would need overwhelming numbers to win– And neither side could muster that advantage for most of the war.

Those folks were few and far between. Most others thought the war would be over by Christmas 1914.

Ernest Shackleton, the explorer set off in 1914. When he came back to a whaling station in the spring of 1916 he asked who won the European was and was amazed to be told that it ws still going on.

Many of the leaders underestimated how much man-power the various nations could muster and funnel into the conflict. The result was for then, monsterous armies and countries went broke keeping those armies in the field. But still seeing how long Germany, Austro Hungary and Russia were able to "stay in the game" is eye-opeing.

Often overlooked as an igniter to the war was Germany's attack on Belgium. That pushed Great Britain over the edge and into committing. Without Belgium's stubborness at the very beginning and Great Britain jumping in, Germany may well have overwhelmed France.

I think if you were to blame one party for the war it would have been Germany. Austro-Hungary wouldn't have moved toware war with Serbia if it had not been given a "blank check" by Germany to do so.

The leaders of Germany such as the Kaiser seemed to want to play the "victim's card". "Oh we're surrounded by enemies so we need to keep our military on the readiness". "Oh we can't defend our sealanes so we need to be the equal of Great Britain's navy".

Germany was constantly itching to pitch into Russia. They, like Hitler later on, were scared of the resources Russia could muster once properly channeled. Germany felt that left unatended Russia would be too powerful to defeat by 1917 so they needed to initiate a war before then.

Germany was sneaky, with one leader hoping to persuade the United States to come in as an ally by promising Canada.

On top of this many of the participants had serious issues at home with variety of political and social issues– So the thought was a war would unite them.

What was left of Europe after 1918 was little more than tatters and enough hard feelings that another world war would be starting in 21 years.

 

[TheFinisher]

Currently reading Stalin by Edvard Radzinsky. Well researched biography that focuses mostly on his political maneuvering within the party. Can only imagine the fear of his contemporaries. An absolutely ruthless man, once he claimed power no one was safe.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

Currently reading Stalin by Edvard Radzinsky. Well researched biography that focuses mostly on his political maneuvering within the party. Can only imagine the fear of his contemporaries. An absolutely ruthless man, once he claimed power no one was safe.

Sounds like a heck of a book. Amazing we had two despots, Hitler and Stalin during the same time period and living basically next to each other. Both were responsible for an obscene number of deaths... Not too mention both thought they were better strategists than what they actually were.

When I was younger I thought Hitler was the worst person ever... Now I'm not so sure.

 

[visionary]

Sounds like a heck of a book. Amazing we had two despots, Hitler and Stalin during the same time period and living basically next to each other. Both were responsible for an obscene number of deaths... Not too mention both thought they were better strategists than what they actually were.

When I was younger I thought Hitler was the worst person ever... Now I'm not so sure.

Not even close
It's recency bias and information bias

There have been far far worse in the history of the world
One could argue there are worse right now but I don't want to make this political

 

[TheFinisher]

Sounds like a heck of a book. Amazing we had two despots, Hitler and Stalin during the same time period and living basically next to each other. Both were responsible for an obscene number of deaths... Not too mention both thought they were better strategists than what they actually were.

When I was younger I thought Hitler was the worst person ever... Now I'm not so sure.

They were very fond of each other and had reached peace agreements before Hitler ultimately got overzealous and tried to take back Soviet territories. This is where they differed, Hitler was hell bent on the expansion of the German people throughout the world, Stalin was concerned with keeping his state under an iron fist to reach the great utopia.. He learned from Lenin that terror was the most effective means of governance.

Interestingly, some of the Soviets in the party disagreed with Stalin's stance of focusing solely on the state and not expanding the Marxist doctrine throughout Europe. Ultimately they came to understand... having an opinion that contradicted the Boss meant your life.

 

[Them]

...The last book I read was last year...the Bible...cover to cover. Did I enjoy it and learn anything from it ?...yes-n-yes. Will I discuss it on this topic...no...But I will read it again.

 

[Big_D]

Currently reading 'The Tattooist of Auschwitz'.

 

[cowboyec]

just finished How 'Bout Them Cowboys? by Gary Meyers.
excellent read and some great stories I hadn't heard before.
HIGHLY recommend.

 

[JoeyBoy718]

Building Microservices, Clean Architecture, The Power of Habit, Deep Work.

 

[Melonfeud]

"Eerie Trails of the Wild Weird West"
is jam packed with about 15 vignettes/ short stories of the old west with twilight zone/slight Stephen King twist to them,,,while I've only completely read "little bordello in the meadow" & "The guns of Clay Allison",,, they were both very enjoyable reads & got down to the nitty-gritty of twisty wierd, fairly quickly,,, also,I'd like to add that the author is an esteemed fellow football fan on this very forum

 

[csirl]

just finished How 'Bout Them Cowboys? by Gary Meyers.
excellent read and some great stories I hadn't heard before.
HIGHLY recommend.

Same here. Some great stories/anecdotes. Aikman and the limo full of girls, Switzer at the SB, the white house.....

 

[csirl]

"The Road to 1914–The War The Ended Peace" by Margaret MacMillan.

A stunning book.

After reading it I'm left with the feeling that if the caused of WWII could be likened to a kids puzzle of about 6 pieces, the causes of WWI would be like a puzzle of a 1,000 pieces.

So many twists and turns. And a multitude of players– far more players than the few that drove Europe into WWII.

I can't help but think that war it's offspring, WWII set Europe back for decades and doomed it to become a follower– It's leadership days long gone. Prior to WWI the pacifists were seeing Europe somewhat as it is today... Kind of one entity.

But it was the nationalists that drove the military buildup within each country. The result was no one was going to back down and IMO the alliance of France, Russia and the UK was set soon enough and said strongly enough to cause Germany to pull back on Austrio Hungary's leash.

While the assination of the Archduke set things into motion, there were about a half-dozen crisis and incidents that could have triggered a major war from 1905 on. That fuse was always there and came close to being lit

Could also be said to have been caused by three jealous and spoilt first cousins....

 

[Rockport]

Currently reading Moby Dick.

 

[JIMMYBUFFETT]

American Psycho - Bret Easton / I wish I hadn't read it. I like dark books but this one was too much.
Texas - James Michener / I'm glad I read it but it was honestly like being back in Texas History class and got dry.
The River - Peter Heller / Loved it, one of my new favorite authors.

 

[Melonfeud]

"The Road to 1914–The War The Ended Peace" by Margaret MacMillan.

A stunning book.

After reading it I'm left with the feeling that if the caused of WWII could be likened to a kids puzzle of about 6 pieces, the causes of WWI would be like a puzzle of a 1,000 pieces.

So many twists and turns. And a multitude of players– far more players than the few that drove Europe into WWII.

I can't help but think that war it's offspring, WWII set Europe back for decades and doomed it to become a follower– It's leadership days long gone. Prior to WWI the pacifists were seeing Europe somewhat as it is today... Kind of one entity.

But it was the nationalists that drove the military buildup within each country. The result was no one was going to back down and IMO the alliance of France, Russia and the UK was set soon enough and said strongly enough to cause Germany to pull back on Austrio Hungary's leash.

While the assination of the Archduke set things into motion, there were about a half-dozen crisis and incidents that could have triggered a major war from 1905 on. That fuse was always there and came close to being lit more than once.

Part of the problem is that most took the idea of war as being too much of a good thing... They thought it would make their nation (fill in the name of any of the nations) and that the destruction would be limited because it would be a "short war".

Ha-ha-ha!

A few thought otherwise– they thought it would be a devasting war that would kill many and last a long time. Much of which was based on the power of then modern weapons and giving the defenders such an advantage that an offensive army would need overwhelming numbers to win– And neither side could muster that advantage for most of the war.

Those folks were few and far between. Most others thought the war would be over by Christmas 1914.

Ernest Shackleton, the explorer set off in 1914. When he came back to a whaling station in the spring of 1916 he asked who won the European was and was amazed to be told that it ws still going on.

Many of the leaders underestimated how much man-power the various nations could muster and funnel into the conflict. The result was for then, monsterous armies and countries went broke keeping those armies in the field. But still seeing how long Germany, Austro Hungary and Russia were able to "stay in the game" is eye-opeing.

Often overlooked as an igniter to the war was Germany's attack on Belgium. That pushed Great Britain over the edge and into committing. Without Belgium's stubborness at the very beginning and Great Britain jumping in, Germany may well have overwhelmed France.

I think if you were to blame one party for the war it would have been Germany. Austro-Hungary wouldn't have moved toware war with Serbia if it had not been given a "blank check" by Germany to do so.

The leaders of Germany such as the Kaiser seemed to want to play the "victim's card". "Oh we're surrounded by enemies so we need to keep our military on the readiness". "Oh we can't defend our sealanes so we need to be the equal of Great Britain's navy".

Germany was constantly itching to pitch into Russia. They, like Hitler later on, were scared of the resources Russia could muster once properly channeled. Germany felt that left unatended Russia would be too powerful to defeat by 1917 so they needed to initiate a war before then.

Germany was sneaky, with one leader hoping to persuade the United States to come in as an ally by promising Canada.

On top of this many of the participants had serious issues at home with variety of political and social issues– So the thought was a war would unite them.

What was left of Europe after 1918 was little more than tatters and enough hard feelings that another world war would be starting in 21 years.

Ya know? I'm still pretty awestruck by the Germans daring & effective use of the technology of the day with the submarine, I mean like the Phillips head screw was still decades away in innovative thought,yet they were building & fielding submarines armed with torpedoes capable of better than 27knots/4,000 yard range( whitehead mk 5 in 1901)

PBS aired a WW1 documentary ( ken burns produced,I think) just the other night& while I enjoyed watching it, as not taking sides in the begining early on, allowed the U.S. manufacturing base to play both ends against the middle in the supplying of raw war materials, yet,I'd caught myself yelling at the T.V. calling B.S. on what I'd deemed to be of a revisionist angled slant on several occasions

 

[MichaelWinicki]

Ya know? I'm still pretty awestruck by the Germans daring & effective use of the technology of the day with the submarine, I mean like the Phillips head screw was still decades away in innovative thought,yet they were building & fielding submarines armed with torpedoes capable of better than 27knots/4,000 yard range( whitehead mk 5 in 1901)

PBS aired a WW1 documentary ( ken burns produced,I think) just the other night& while I enjoyed watching it, as not taking sides in the begining early on, allowed the U.S. manufacturing base to play both ends against the middle in the supplying of raw war materials, yet,I'd caught myself yelling at the T.V. calling B.S. on what I'd deemed to be of a revisionist angled slant on several occasions

The more I read about the German "military machine" the more impressed I become.

They simply had an amazing military in both world wars.

The critical mistake for both wars was the two-front issue. If they hadn't dealt with two fronts, things may have turned out much different.

The second challenge they had was the slow ramp up of military hardware in WWII. Hitler & co. were banking on short campaigns and didn't focus on a full military economy until later on in the war– And by then it was too late.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

I guess no one has been reading any books! lol

Just finished "The Onion Field" by Joseph Wambaugh.

I've known about the 1963 Onion Field murder of police officer Ian Campbell for many years– But I had not read the best-selling book until now.

Bottom line it was a great book.

Heck of a sad story, but a great book.

Karl Hettinger, who was the partner of Ian Campbell and survived the night of the murder, may have suffered even more than Campbell.

The two perps had really weird relationship.

The book mainly covers the time period of March '63 until 1970 when a retrial of the two accused concluded and the two accused were put away.

While reading the book, it occurred to me how much the world changed from the time Gregory Powell shot Ian Campbell in the mouth on March 9th, 1963 and the day in 1970 when the jury returned a guilty verdict in the retrial.

10 out of 10 if you're into true crime.

 

[Vintage]

I am currently re reading The Great War for Civilization by Robert Fisk.

It’s a great read; one of my favorite books. I disagree with some of his viewpoints pretty vehemently, however, I’d recommend it if you are interested in the Middle East. Fascinating stories mixed in with his a historical recap of the region (and yes, some of it gets quite opinionated).

 

[cowboyec]

The Log of A Cowboy by Andy Adams.
excellent read.