The Official True Story of World War II

[Scorpiоn]

World War II began on September 1st, 1939 when Germany's evil Nazis invaded Poland.  Although the Nazi Germans were strong enough to invade on their own, they divied it up with Russia.  England and France promised to help, but sat on their bums.  Anyway, Nazi Germany invaded France and then they fought Britain.  The Brits fought back with everything they could, but at least they held the line.  Then Nazi Germany invaded North Africa and then Russia.  Then Japan attacked Pearl Harbor and America was brought into the war.  America decided to put an end to this whole game and liberated France when they struck at Omaha Beach (which happens to be on Normandy Beach).  Oh yeah, Britain and Canada were in there too.  There were lots and lots of Germans, and Hitler sent his best units, but America emerged victorious because they fought with camaraderie.  Paris rejoiced when American troops marched into Paris.  Then America struck at the heart of Nazi Germany, but Hitler shot himself just before American troops entered Berlin.  The world rejoiced since the war was over!  The was something in the Pacific too, but then America nuked Hiroshima!  What's up with that?









Is it just me, or is this widely accepted view of World War II becoming ever more frustrating?  Every time I look for anything (book, movie, game, whatever) it's America fighting Germany.  There's almost no mention of other Allies, and much less of other Axis.  This is half of my justification for visting Japan next year; maybe I can get a different viewpoint (but I will have to find a good friend/translator ).  I sure hope Europe gets a better perspective of things, but I have to admit, the last place I'd want to be to learn about World War II is Germany.

[Felix/FFDS]

Then Nazi Germany invaded North Africa

Actually, ITALY attacked Ethiopia and into Egypt from its colonial possesions, got into trouble and THEN Germany had to go into N. Africa to get its partner out of trouble, thereby diluting its forces from the Russian effort  Italy also attacked Albania and Greece, and after the Greeks were throwing Italy back to the sea, the Germans had to go in and finish taking Greece.

As to why you always see the Americans fighting the war against the Germans in the movies, well, they're mostly American movies that you see, no?  Also, in a Euro-centric culture, portrayals of Anglo-Saxon conflict is politically correct and acceptable, instead of showing "other"  culture shocks.

[Scorpiоn]

Actually, ITALY attacked Ethiopia and into Egypt from its colonial possesions, got into trouble and THEN Germany had to go into N. Africa to get its partner out of trouble, thereby diluting its forces from the Russian effort  Italy also attacked Albania and Greece, and after the Greeks were throwing Italy back to the sea, the Germans had to go in and finish taking Greece.

Sshh!  That never happened! And Japan never invaded China and Korea, America never imposed tariffs...

What I'm mostly after here is books.  I was looking around in my local library (though I've always said it was bad) and  Half Price Books, and lo and behold, all that could be found was Holocaust, Nazis and America.  The only book that looked worth buying was a book actually written by a U-Boat commander, but I was strapped for cash that day.  Personally, I'm looking for info on the Pacific, but it became apparent to me just how bad the distortion is between the French battlegrounds, the rest of Europe and the rest of the world.  I even resorted to Barnes and Nobles!

I understand the films, but I figured perhaps in other countries there would be films on wars besides World War II (where the only participants are Germany and America).  You can't blame it all on Hollywood, because as I remember, the Thin Red Line didn't sell that well, neither did Windtalkers.  But Windtalkers was poor movie.

As for Games, the only titles that come to mind are Medal of Honor: Allied Assault and  Call of Duty (which surprisingly casts Russians).  Then again, I don't play that many games.

[Felix/FFDS]

Okay, now I see your point better.


Unfortunately, like in many things, you have to do some research to find out "the Truth" - and even then, you have to filter out the writer's own bias.

I like Barnes and Noble, but I've almost narrowed my taste in history to things aeronautical.  Most of my history has been learned while reading the histories of certain airplanes.

Case in point.  recently I was rereading "Japanese Army Air Force Aces", one of the Osprey publications.   The emphasis is on the pilots/aces involved, but their stories are told within the context of what was going on at the time - that's where I learned of the Nohoman incident where Soviets and Japanese faced off in a nasty series of scraps, how it came about, etc.  Of course, in the reading of the book, you learn about the Japanese occupation of China, the different battles opponents of the Japanese (Buffalos and Hurricanes over Singapore, etc), and not just "here come the Americans with their hundreds of planes..."

One of the most entrhalling history books I've read (and reread) is "Dreadnought" - which takes a naval view of the history from the fall of France 1870, right up to the fateful day in August, 1914 when Britain finds itself at war.  HOWEVER, it goes through the events through the descriptions of the people involved, not only what they did, but who they were that  made them act that way!  Oh, and by the way, the battleships were made...

[ozzy72]

It really depends what aspect of the war you wish to look into. Amazon has lots of good second hand books that are out of publication as does eBay....

[Hagar]

You can find a lot of information on the Internet. It's the biggest resource of information in the world after all but you obviously need some idea of what you're looking for.

[beefhole]

Is there anyone that actually believes the Americans took Berlin?  That's pretty ignorant.

[Felix/FFDS]

[quote]Is there anyone that actually believes the Americans took Berlin?

[denishc]

I even resorted to Barnes and Nobles!

[ChuckMajik]

As for the Russian side of the war, not too long ago there was a film about snipers in Leningrad.  Can't remember the name of the flick, but it stared Jude Law.

Stalingrad, Enemy At The Gates.

[denishc]

Stalingrad, Enemy At The Gates.

[ChuckMajik]

No problem, eh. I watched it two nights ago.

[Scorpiоn]

 The Longest Day
 Is Paris Burning?
 A Bridge Too Far
 Devil's Brigade

I could be wrong, but once again all those films are about the European Allies.  It'd be nice if Hollywood made something from the Axis viewpoint.  Modern culture seems to have some sort of sick, abnormal fascination with Nazis or anything with a Swastika, so I'd imagine such a film would sell well.  As far as I've seen, that's about the only kind of war film that does well here.  It more of a problem with society than with Hollywood.

I actually thought Enemy at the Gates was a rather bad film.  Besides getting you interested in the story, its a bit too dramatic.  Movies like that just don't sync well with what veterans have to say about war.  Glory vs despair.

Hagar, you must be some sort of genious with the Google engine, because most of my search results aren't that great.  Perhaps I'm trying too hard?  The book listed in your first link interests me most, as most books list the Japanese conflict as 1941-1945, rather than 1931.  Again going with the whole World War II according to America in lieu of just World War II.

There's a lot of meat here in these replies, and that's just what I was looking for.  It's kind of frustrating when you can get individual troop movements for the Battle of Normandy, and you can't get more than a synopsis for anything else.  Kind of inhibitive when you're trying to learn about World War II in a balanced manner!

I'd still like to know if it's kind of the same story in Europe.

[H]

Additionally, the Americans held back (stopped at the gates, so-to-speak) so that DeGaul's French Free troups could parade into town and further elate the liberated Parisians. Similar to WWI, the war had been going on for some time in both theaters before the U.S. was "officially" involved. Also like WWI, U.S. mercenaries were already in combat (although their percentage of combat pilots may have been higher [well, not in altitude::)] for WWI; the contrary is definately true after "official" declarations).
As far as facts, they get all messed up, -- around, down and inside-out. Sometimes the difference seems to be according to what side(s) are referenced to [how many sides does something have? Even a sphere can have more than two, depending upon the point of view:P]. Right now my tiny WWI campaign is held up because my .avi-making program has messed up; the greatest amount of time was consumed, however, because of the conflicting info I found in the research process -- and there's much I still can't vouch for.

[Hagar]

[quote]


Hagar, you must be some sort of genious with the Google engine, because most of my search results aren't that great.