SUSAN BUTLER

Click and type in a question or comment

I am sorry but this book is a complete failure at least its Polish version (Unfortunately English version is not available here). However I do not think we should blame the translator and the local editor. 1. Why publish only FDR and Stalin? The editor could have much better picture publishing also correspondence with Churchill, Attlee, Chang Kai Szek, and Truman. It would be a complete work. This book shows only part of the process. 2. The editor (sorry but should not call Susan Butler the author - the authors are Stalin and Roosevelt) simply disregards facts if they are not important for her or does not fit her idea of "great alliance". Sorry but as the Polish reader may not know who is (or was) "Chip"Bohlen (and this should be explained in footnote by Polish editor) the same is with common American reader who will not know who was "Bor" Komorowski, Mikolajczyk or Arciszewski. 3. Lack of footnotes! It is not a proper edition!!! Even university student knows that! 4. The editor introduction to each document is not divided from it. It may sometimes be difficult to distinguish (especially for less experienced or more careless reader) what is original document from 1940s and what comment from editor. This introductions are full of misunderstandings and mistakes. 5. The editor completely disregard the British input into the transport of goods via Murmansk and Archangielsk harbors (the Arctic Convoy Route). It was the Royal Navy who gallantly led the battle there. The same is with Battle for Atlantic. Royal Navy was in 1941 handling the subject pretty well. The crises of 1940 was overcame. It was US Navy that fell far to short its expectation within its area of responsibility (Western Atlantic and Caribbean). View knows that they had to borrow frigates from British and Canadian; not mentioning promotion of small (and useless) patrol boats by FDR, and unwillingness to create convoy system (by US admirals) led to disastrous losses in ships and manpower. Moreover American cites and towns were not willing to introduce blackout. This “business as usual” attitude was part of the problem. Editor should have make a research on that. In a war logistics is crucial. Neither FDR nor Stalin understood that (Churchill was no better). Finally: More critical attitude towards FDR and Stalin. They appear as good uncle and nice grandfather. They were not. I will not comment on FDR. But Stalin? He was a murderer. The allies (both Churchill and FDR) should take it into consideration. The editor quots some recent publications on the fact. (e.g. Montefiore’s book). But no! Not a single word! No mention about purges, about Beria (he was both in Teheran and Yalta, we know by now that his son was in charge of listening devices placed in the building on Russian compound used by US delegation), about the behavior of Red Army on conquered German territory, attitude towards Baltic nations, Ukrainians, Poles…. No word about the fact that thank to Polish government in London and its emissaries both Churchill and FDR knew about the Holocaust (please read about Jan Karski and Jan Nowak, the history of Szmul Zygelbojm) and did nothing. The editor could have done better.

It is now clear that Truman used deceitful process to ensure that the atomic bombs could be used in an irresponsible manner. He then had great incentive to cover up his deceit by sharing in the loot of the war spoil Japan hid away while keeping the emperor out of the war criminal court. After that, setting up a Cold War with Churchill would have been the only way to keep the deceit going. Had Roosevelt lived a few years beyond the end of WWII, and the UN formed not as a dysfunctional organization by design, do you believe that there would have been the Cold War? Since responsibility has to be assigned in history, do you believe that the U.S. is at least 85% responsible for starting the Cold War? -- 85% being the % of the world industrial production capability U.S. possessed in 1945.

An incredible mistake for a serious work of history like this. You stated that Claus von Stauffenberg, the leader of the plot against Hitler, had been the Ambassador to Moscow. This is not true. Stauffenberg was a relatively junior army officer. You have muddled him with Graf Schulenberg, an elderly man who had been Ambassador to Moscow. You have also invented a town in the Crimea called Saki. One must assume you meant Sochi.

yeah i like so much this book

Susan Butler welcomes thoughts from both fans and critics. Submit your comments to see them posted here.

Click and type in a question or comment

Quote: You have also invented a town in the Crimea called Saki. One must assume you meant Sochi. There is such a town as Saki: Moreover there is some correspondence publicized in Russian: http://www.eroplan.boom.ru/bibl/stalin/sc/sc45_02.htm The letter from Churchil to Stalin No 404 says: Estimated time of arrival to Saki is 12 o'clock Moscow time on February 3. After a lunch we procede to Yalta by automobile.

I can never accept the aberrant dictates of social justice of the satellites of Stalin imported to Europe and USA, which ruled out all populist into present Ukraine. What is treason if their reason is: [Quote taken from the letter of Roosevelt to Stalin on Katin of April 29, 1943] ‘I, too, believe that Premier Churchill will find a way to bring the Polish Government to reason and to help it in future to act according to the dictates of common sense.’ A very necessary correspondence, my thanks to Susan Buttler, and Sharon Mooney, who has kindly let me have the book. http://ukraine32famine.blogspot.com/

love the organization of the site --Luke, NY

I love the new website!

I like it very much!
-- Susie from Idaho