What Book Are You Reading at the moment?

[redcoat]

During the lockdown I spent some time looking at my Dad’s old stamp collection. I thought it was rather interesting and so I found out more about stamp collecting and expanded the collection quite a bit. I found the following book really useful because it is for beginners and people with only a basic knowledge of philately:




The World Encyclopedia of Stamps & Stamp Collecting: The Ultimate Illustrated Reference to Over 3000 of the World's Best Stamps, and a Professional Guide to Starting and Perfecting a Spectacular Collection

[Edorf]

I’m currently reading Finland at War: The Winter War 1939-40 by Vesa Nenye and co authors. I also have the companion volume, The Continuation and Lapland Wars 1941-45
Both books are recommended.

[johnnyy]

In the middle of rereading LotR. Just finished the first half of The Two Towers. It's been a long time since I've reread them and I've been enjoying rediscovering details I forgot.

[Grotius]

Chickenboy, I loved "Fire in the Sky." How is the "Eagle" book?

I'm reading the illustrated Harry Potter series, now on book 3. The illustrations are awesome! Makes for a heavy book, though.

I also just finished "Making Comics," by Scott McCloud.

[OldSarge]

I found this interesting read over at the U.S. Naval War College site. Caffrey, Matthew B. Jr., "On Wargaming" (2019).

He even mentions Matrix and Slytherin (SIC) in Appendix C. I imagine Slitherine will ask for a correction. [:D]

[splashell]

Finished Castles of Steel a while ago, covering developments in naval warfare, ship design and the great naval arms race just from the pre-20th century till the end of WW1. It also covers every detail of every naval battle during WW1 involving Britain (and Germany), although with more heavier emphasis on the British point of view and how fleet/ship design philosophies between Tirpitz and Fisher differed. It also covers much details on decision making on both sides and what influenced them. Especially interesting is the whole Gallpoli campaign debacle, which if succeeded, could have potentially driven the Ottomans out of the war and kept Russia in the war for quite a bit longer, opening a decent supply route through the Dardanalles/Bosphorus/Black Sea. E.g. one of the big problems the Russians had was purely the lack of rifles and ammunition. Or what if the British fleet succeeded in ferrying Russian troops from Petrograd into North Germany for a march on Berlin?

Fun fact - albeit WW1 officially ended in late 1918, the last casualties of the war occurred in fact during the scuttling of the remaining German fleet interned at Scapa Flow in June 1919, just a few days before the peace settlement was supposed to be published. The Germans of course feared most of all that the fleet would end up as war prizes for the French. Almost every other nations had to pretty much mothball most of their existing fleets anyway and some where silently relieved that the problem of the German fleet "disappeared".

https://www.amazon.com/Castles-Steel-Br ... 0345408780

[warspite1]

[&:]

Still nothing grabbing me at the moment in the time available so am continuing to pick up previously read books and re-read specific chapters from time to time.

Vichy France (Old Guard and New Order) 1940-44 (Paxton)
War In Italy (A Brutal Story) 1943-1945 (Lamb)

Are two that have been revisited in the last few weeks.

I need Seaforth Publishing to bring out something special!

[RFalvo69]

I just started "The Blitzkrieg Legend", by Karl-Heinz Friezer. It is about the key moments of Germany's campaign in the West and the idea that the concept of "Blitzkrieg" wasn't actually part of Germany's military thinking. The author makes a case for the fact that Germany was simply overwhelmingly strong in Poland and exceptionally lucky in France. The Allies then "invented" the whole blitzkrieg theory in Summer 1940 to explain the dire defeats they suffered in the first part of the war.

It is worth mentioning how "the Blitzkrieg" was never an official war doctrine during the war, and the word was almost exclusively used for propaganda purposes. Guderian never uses the word "Blitzkrieg" in his seminal work "Achtung Panzers!", and only once in his memoirs "Panzer Leader" - just to point out how it was their adversaries who coined it to explain Germany's "lightning victories" in the first half of the war.

A dry book, but for sure a thought-provoking one.

[RangerJoe]

I thought that the "Blitz" part came from the speed that was issued to the German soldiers.

[RFalvo69]

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

I thought that the "Blitz" part came from the speed that was issued to the German soldiers.

For sure Guderian understood how the technological progresses of the tank and the airplane could be used to develop a new kind of warfare - but the correct term should be "the dawn of combined arms." Also, Guderian was the first to admit that he developed organically ideas coming from him and military thinkers like De Gaulle, Tukhachevsky and Liddel-Hart (*). His seminal work, "Achtung Panzers!" was not a secret document of the German high-command: it was available in any common library! Just think about this: if you were a French General in 1936 and wondered what you could face in a war with Germany you only had to walk into a library...

Then in June 1940 you had to deal with characters like Rommel, who basically led a single-division parallel war with his romp across France - and almost paying an high price for it at Arras. But, of course, if you win you are right.

Anyway, a proof of Guderian genius (his ability to develop the new doctrine further than anyone else) was the understanding that your "speed" is limited by the speed of your supply train. Not only the troops but also the supplies were able to race across France. The German tanks often had barrels of fuel welded on them; the French tanks had both smaller fuel tanks and an abstruse logistic train: many a counterattack failed because the tanks were in one place and the fuel in another (usually on a train). While other "modern" military theories had also reached the idea of using these new "combined arms tactics" to breakthrough and roam in the immediate rear, only Guderian showed that you could breakthrough and then go on, and on, and on. It's no wonder that when the race for the Channel was on the German High Command almost had a collective heart attack.

(*) While Liddel-Hart in considered one of the proposers of this new theory, some say that the friendship he developed with Guderian after the war led the latter to be a little more complimentary towards Hart than his merit deserved. But this is not a can of worms I'm interested in.

[pkpowers]

the "Kaisers Pirates" about the German WW1 merchant raiders

[NukaBoy]

Currently reading the SW Republic Commando books again. Their story always sucks me in, this is I think the third time I'm reading them now [:D]

[gamer78]

'Sultanın Korsanları: Osmanlı Akdenizi’nde Gazâ, Yağma ve Esaret, 1500-1700'. A book about Turkish historian using Spanish, Italian, Latin, Catalan, French, Portuguese and Ottoman archives about Ottoman pirates in Mediterranean in 1500-1700. Interesting facts are slaves or hired rowers in galleys (kadırga) are multi national and change religion frequently when they are hired by different country. Ex: Italian rowers working for Ottoman become Muslim could be target for church
Inquisition. Or serfs with no land being pirate.

[warspite1]

I've just found my Christmas present - out this November - can't wait for this [:)]

[warspite1]

I am currently reading

Mussolini Unleashed 1939-1941 Politics and Strategy in Fascist Italy's Last War (Knox)

I wasn't sure about buying this, but Martin Gilbert gave it a good review so thought it must have something going for it. I am about three chapters in (they are long chapters) and I would thoroughly recommend this to anyone interested in the European Theatre.

I bought it due to the "Staff Study" Curtis Lemay brought up in the "The question to ask about The Italians" thread.

I must admit, I thought I knew something about Mussolini and Italy in the build-up to, and the first years of, the Second World War but this book brings out so many things I wasn't aware of - and really brings out just how absurd the idea that Mussolini and Italy were Germany's puppets upon entry into the war really is.

I knew Ciano was against the war but wasn't aware of much of what he actually did to try and keep things that way. I knew that Mussolini blew hot and cold over his relations with the Germans, but wasn't aware of the extent to which he was prepared to betray the Germans e.g. tipping off the Dutch and Belgians about, the then, imminent Germany attack in early 1940.

This book is packed full of stats that evidence the dire state that the Italians found themselves in as Mussolini recovered from his anti-German stance and, in 1940, worked towards war despite the fact that the Italians were in no way ready.....

[RangerJoe]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

I am currently reading

Mussolini Unleashed 1939-1941 Politics and Strategy in Fascist Italy's Last War (Knox)

I wasn't sure about buying this, but Martin Gilbert gave it a good review so thought it must have something going for it. I am about three chapters in (they are long chapters) and I would thoroughly recommend this to anyone interested in the European Theatre.

I bought it due to the "Staff Study" Curtis Lemay brought up in the "The question to ask about The Italians" thread.

I must admit, I thought I knew something about Mussolini and Italy in the build-up to, and the first years of, the Second World War but this book brings out so many things I wasn't aware of - and really brings out just how absurd the idea that Mussolini and Italy were Germany's puppets upon entry into the war really is.

I knew Ciano was against the war but wasn't aware of much of what he actually did to try and keep things that way. I knew that Mussolini blew hot and cold over his relations with the Germans, but wasn't aware of the extent to which he was prepared to betray the Germans e.g. tipping off the Dutch and Belgians about, the then, imminent Germany attack in early 1940.

This book is packed full of stats that evidence the dire state that the Italians found themselves in as Mussolini recovered from his anti-German stance and, in 1940, worked towards war despite the fact that the Italians were in no way ready.....

I could see where if the Germans would have stuck to their original plans and the French and British would have crushed the German armies, that Little Bennie would have decided to attack Germany instead.

[UP844]

ORIGINAL: warspite1
I bought it due to the "Staff Study" Curtis Lemay brought up in the "The question to ask about The Italians" thread.

For the same reason, I purchased and I am reading "The Wages of Destruction" by Adam Tooze [:D].

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe
I could see where if the Germans would have stuck to their original plans and the French and British would have crushed the German armies, that Little Bennie would have decided to attack Germany instead.

I can easily figure Mussolini speaking from Palazzo Venezia about the long historical enmity between Germans and Italians, from the Teutoburgerwald to Caporetto [:D].

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: UP844

ORIGINAL: warspite1
I bought it due to the "Staff Study" Curtis Lemay brought up in the "The question to ask about The Italians" thread.

For the same reason, I purchased and I am reading "The Wages of Destruction" by Adam Tooze [:D].

warspite1

Me too [:)] - and is next on the list after Mussolini, although if Taranto turns up I may have to read that one first [:)]

[loki100]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

I am currently reading

Mussolini Unleashed 1939-1941 Politics and Strategy in Fascist Italy's Last War (Knox)

I wasn't sure about buying this, but Martin Gilbert gave it a good review so thought it must have something going for it. I am about three chapters in (they are long chapters) and I would thoroughly recommend this to anyone interested in the European Theatre.

I bought it due to the "Staff Study" Curtis Lemay brought up in the "The question to ask about The Italians" thread.

I must admit, I thought I knew something about Mussolini and Italy in the build-up to, and the first years of, the Second World War but this book brings out so many things I wasn't aware of - and really brings out just how absurd the idea that Mussolini and Italy were Germany's puppets upon entry into the war really is.

I knew Ciano was against the war but wasn't aware of much of what he actually did to try and keep things that way. I knew that Mussolini blew hot and cold over his relations with the Germans, but wasn't aware of the extent to which he was prepared to betray the Germans e.g. tipping off the Dutch and Belgians about, the then, imminent Germany attack in early 1940.

This book is packed full of stats that evidence the dire state that the Italians found themselves in as Mussolini recovered from his anti-German stance and, in 1940, worked towards war despite the fact that the Italians were in no way ready.....

grabbed it, looks interesting and that thread has made me very aware of my marginal understanding of Italian foreign policy pre war. Blame learning modern Italian history in the context of the PCI's standard presentation (in effect not a period /focus they paid any real attention to)

so that is two serious books ordered in one week after a long gap in such purchases, the other is The Habsburg Monarchy, 1618–1815 which is readable, fascinating and again a slightly odd perspective on early modern Europe (where the norm is anglo or Franco centric or the Rise of Prussia?)

[UP844]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

Me too [:)]

[Conspiracy Mode ON]

What if Curtis LeMay actually were the sales promoter for Alan Tooze's books?

[Conspiracy Mode OFF]