Rick Atkinson : "The Guns at Last Light: The War in Europe, 1944-1945"

May 13, 2014
Grand Valley State University
D-Day marked the commencement of one of the greatest common ground initiatives in world history -- the final campaign of the Allies to take Europe back during WW II. Pulitzer Prize-winner Rick Atkinson's riveting account of that bold gamble set the pace for the masterly narrative that follows. Historic events came alive with a wealth of new material and a fascinating cast of characters. Atkinson told the tale from the perspective of participants at every level, from presidents and generals to war-weary lieutenants and terrified teenage riflemen. When Germany at last surrenders, we understand anew both the devastating cost of this global conflagration and the enormous effort required to win the Allied victory.
This Hauenstein Center event was in partnership with the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Foundation and Library & Museum.
www.hauensteincenter.org

[@paulmanson253]

Well,they really did send me off to school for sixteen years. Years ago,now. I have heard some mighty fine lectures. Three instructors were magical. This lecture, and the effortless presentation Atkinson holds the audience with,is a tour de force all on its own. Much background and skull sweat no doubt, but this guy is in a class all on his own when it comes to delivery. Brilliant. Not many out there who can make statistics come alive. Glad I heard it.

[@MrWahooknows]

Throughout Mr. Atkinson's talks about WWII in Europe, he unfailingly throws shade on Eisenhower as a military leader.

[@Aubury]

Impressive lecture .. bravo.

[@mottipier]

Un esercito al tramonto, the guns al last lights. Una lettura estremamente piacevole e avvincente. Alterna la descrizione di operazioni militari, curiosità del periodo prima ignote, scorse biografiche dei personaggi, curiosità sulle questioni logistiche, sprazzi su intelligence e servizi segreti, questioni di alta politica di presidenti e primi ministri. Qualche aneddoto funzionale allo svolgersi del periodo. Il meglio del meglio senza nulla togliere a liddell hart e a hastings. Concludo: questo libro è gioia indicibile.

[@KJ6EAD]

Lecture starts at 4:45. The "I like my voice" guy before that.

[@wuffothewonderdog]

They are all the same, and every one of a sad little creep.

[@VanlifewithAlan]

Another very illuminating film - particularly with the statistics!

[@rosemybud]

National World War II museum symposia

[@davidsabillon5182]

I need to read these three books of his.

[@acommon1]

Great lecture. Enjoyed the balanced stories regarding the East and West contributions to defeating the Axis.

[@thomasgilson6206]

Just got into Atkinson's lectures here on YT but have to fast forward past the same journalist joke every single time.

[@LTrotsky21stCentury]

The Liberation of Europe began on December 5th, 1941, in front of Moscow.

[@JM-ji9kx]

No countries were liberated by the Soviet Union, not a single one. Any country that became enslaved behind the iron curtain spent the next 50 years trying to escape west. Eastern Europe was literally better off under the Nazis.

[@EllieMaes-Grandad]

The fight for freedom began in September 1939 and, post 1940, turned into a fight for the liberation of Europe, from Britain. USSR was late to the party - and a dollar short too.

[@camilomontoya7412]

The US involvment was essential , but just one Russian Offensive (Bagration) did more to defeat Germany than all the military effort by the western allies.

[@MrChickennugget360]

no not really. the Bagration battle was able to happen partly because of Allied Efforts

[@brucec43]

Not really. The Soviets shouldered the bulk of the losses, consumed 80% the German military, and ultimately took Berlin. But without other allies they would have likely fallen (imagine 20-30 more divisions present at Stalingrad to hold the flanks, or another 10,000 88mm guns on the eastern front as they were no longer needed against allied bombers), but even if not, they would not have had the resources to pull off the long march towards Berlin. From 1942 on, the vast majority of their radios and trucks came from the West, primarily the USA. As did massive amounts of raw materials such as aluminum. You cannot conduct mobile tank warfare and deep penetrations without radios and trucks. They would have been a horse-foot army with poor coordination and far fewer airplanes. The USSR may well have suffered a 1917 situation and collapsed politically and economically after stalling out on the way west in 1943-45. Plants that made tanks would have had to shift to truck production, meaning they'd have run out of tanks given the heavy losses. With no allies Germany could have captured vast oil sources in the middle east. So it took the entire team to win.

[@AndyK304]

And it needs to be said that the US was carrying the majority of the burden of fighting the Japanese, something the Soviets didn't get involved in until the very, very tail-end of that part of the war.

[@bbbabrock]

I heard recently, from Glanzt maybe, that 8 of 11 of German casualties were against t Russians.

[@AndyK304]

That seems about right, but it doesn't address the fact that the Soviets relied upon American materiel to fight on their fronts. They wouldn't have been close to Berlin in 1945 if not for all the Studebaker trucks they used to move men, other war materiel and rations.

[@daveshugart2195]

Boring!!! Not funny!!!