A World at Arms: A Global History of World War II 2nd Edition

One Big History of the World War
I have been reading books about the World War for nearly 50 years. This book is one of a kind. But it's not written for everyone. First I will point out some limitations of this book. Then I will list some of the strengths that make this book unique.
Limitations.
Weinberg is a clear writer, but not flashy. The material is carefully organized but it moves at a deliberate pace. Put simply, this is not exciting reading, especially at 900 pages!
If you loved Ambrose, McCullough, or D'Este, you may dislike Weinberg.
Weinberg believes in a form of historical writing that downplays the role of individuals. Roosevelt, Hitler, Stalin, Rommel, Churchill, Mussolini, Chang Kai Shek, Hirohito are all in attendance, but their personalities, their quirks, and their
habits , hardly enter into the story. Instead, these men represent movements, states, ideologies, etc.
Weinberg never uses direct, pithy quotes. That takes something out, compared to other popular history.
Weinberg doesn't say anything he can't back up. Many chapters contain 200 footnotes or more. Those footnotes
could drive you crazy.
Weinberg does not present the War as simply a clash of Good versus Evil. He sees a much more complex picture of motives and actions at play. Few parties to the conflict emerge with their honor wholly intact.
Weinberg does not write much about leaders, battles, etc.
Don't get me wrong. The leaders and battles are there, but
W is only interested in the big picture aspects of battles, not
in leaders, heroes, clever tactics, etc.
I don't see these limitations as very important. A reader can
get all that exciting stuff from popular books. Instead, Weinberg has produced a book that mainly appeals to World War addicts and scholars. I'm not sure I would recommend this book to readers who don't already have a good general grasp of the War.
Now the strengths:
Weinberg organized his material in such a way as to show the War in an integrated whole. He covers the whole World, Asia,
Europe, Mediterranean, even Africa and South America. In doing so he shows many interconnections that I had never previously considered. For instance, the book shows the close relationship between Japan and Germany.
His writing is very tight. He discusses his topics systematically, thoroughly, and logically. He likes to set out lists of considerations, or reasons that I find illuminating.
For example, why did Hitler consistently reject offers of additional collaboration from Vichy France?
Weinberg is realistic in his judgments. Although his overall viewpoint about the morality of the War is rather conventional, he's unafraid of making harsh judgments. For instance, W shows how the neutrals; Ireland, Sweden, Switzerland, Portugal, Spain, Turkey, etc acted in greedy and self-interested ways, looking for war profits, wanting territorial gains, desparate to keep their independence.
W is not given to moralizing. As I stated, his own views are clear, not hidden. But he does NOT find many instances where moral or ethical considerations carried much weight with the combatants or occupied nations. He's a believer in "RealPolitik" like Kissinger.
W is not a military man, but he's writing about military operations. His grasp of those operations is satisfactory, although he must avoid details. He's excellent at showing how military operations relate to the larger war situation. For example, he shows how Germany sent 200,000 troops to Tunisia just when Germany needed them more at Stalingrad.
Weinberg reaches some controversial conclusions about perennial "hot" issues:
· Most Germans supported Hitler straight through. It's not
realistic to talk about a German resistance.
· Many adult Germans knew enough about the treatment of Jews, captives, and slave labor to understand the horrific nature of their government. They acquiesced.
· Hitler's overall plans for the future of Europe were much
more radical than most people understand -- even today.
· With a few exceptions, populations in the occupied countries did not mount serious resistance efforts. They willingly collaborated. (ex. Yugoslavia, Poland, USSR).
· The Wehrmacht knew fully about the Jews, the slave
labor, the crimes against occupied countries. It's no good
to argue that "we didn't know."
· The Western Allies knew about the Genocide by 1942. They did not act because there was little they could do, and, in the US especially, the government did not want to get into a political situation where the opposition could label it "A War to Save Jews." Anti-Semitism was still strong in US.
etc etc etc.
To sum up, this book represents a terrific achievement. It represents a huge body of research. He must have taken 10 years to write it, with the help of 10 assistants. None of the other books to take on the Whole Enchilada come close. It will probably stand as the "standard" treatment for 50 years, until many more closed archives are finally opened.

This is truly the most comprehensive monograph written as an overview of the war as an ongoing event in world history. Time and again Weinberg amazes us with his grasp and understanding of the connections and influences within and among the many theaters of war. This, then, is a massively documented and carefully researched one volume comprehensive history of World War Two as a world war quite unlike the one that preceded it. He traces its origins in the events and consequences flowing from the first world war, and then demonstrates quite handily that the political fate and will of one man, Adolph Hitler, literally forced the war into being. He analyzes the events professionally and dispassionately, and ties together the events in all their horror to the nature of the world conflict. While one can certainly argue that most of what he says is not new, it is also the case that he links the observations of others with his own insights in a way that is much more learned, better organized, and comprehensive in its results. Some of the statistics tying the various theaters of conflict together are dizzying, such as the fact that the numbers of divisions (over two hundred) deployed by Hitler on the eastern front, for example, both dwarf and doom the troops (just fifty divisions)available for the defense of the western wall of Europe. He estimates the total number of deaths due directly to the war at over sixty million, and cites the various sources for such a catastrophic figure. Likewise, you see how the Japanese situation of being overextended in Asia fighting defensive struggles against the Chinese, British, Australians, etc from India to Burma has consequences for its sumultaneous defense against assembled naval activities and the island-by-island hopping and isolation strategy of the Allied forces. This book is immensely readable, but is so literally packed with details and connections, so is often difficult to read both because of its subject matter and the details he includes. His overview, for example, of Hitler's criuel and inhumane eugenics activities against his own people, especially the mentally ill, defective, and the infirm even before the war is both nauseating and revealing. Likewise, his argument that the "Final Solution" of total extermination of all European Jews was more the result of desperation, logistics, and the rush of historical circumstance than a long-standing and well-thought out policy decision is quite interesting to read. It was only after the massive displacements of Polish Jews into a single sector that feeding and maintaining this large population clearly became the chief argument for the mass extermination of all Jews. On the other hand, the war against the Russians was always intended to be a war of extermination, one in which the armies and occupants of the areas conquered were to be savagely and brutally used for slave labor and then eliminated. This is truly a masterwork in the sense of being the single best attempt to date to write the complete overview of the Second World War as an event in world history. Buy it, read it slowly, and enjoy!