What do you think?
Rate this book
The Illusion of Victory: America in World War I
The political history of the American experience in World War I is a story of conflict and bungled intentions that begins in an era dedicated to progressive social reform and ends in the Red Scare and Prohibition. Thomas Fleming tells this story through the complex figure of Woodrow Wilson, the contradictory president who wept after declaring war, devastated because he knew it would destroy the tolerance of the American people, but who then suppressed freedom of speech and used propaganda to excite America into a Hun-hating mob. This is tragic history: inexperienced American military leaders drove their troops into gruesome slaughters; progressive politics were put on hold in America; an idealistic president's dreams were crushed because of his own negligence. Wilson's inability to convince Congress to ratify U.S. membership in the League of Nations was one of the most poignant failures in the history of the American presidency, but even more heartrending were Wilson's concessions to his bitter allies in the Treaty of Versailles. In exchange for Allied support of the League of Nations, he allowed an unfair peace treaty to be signed, a treaty that played no small role in the rise of National Socialism and the outbreak of World War II. Thomas Fleming has once again created a masterpiece of narrative American history. This incomparable portrait shows how Wilson sacrificed his noble vision to megalomania and single-mindedness, while paying homage to him as a visionary whose honorable spirit continues to influence Western politics.
576 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2003
29 people are currently reading
565 people want to read
About the author
Thomas Fleming
127 books149 followersLibrarian note:
There is more than one author in the GoodReads database with this name
Thomas James Fleming was an historian and historical novelist, with a special interest in the American Revolution. He was born in 1927 in Jersey City, New Jersey, the son of a World War I hero who was a leader in Jersey City politics for three decades. Before her marriage, his mother, Katherine Dolan Fleming, was a teacher in the Jersey City Public School System.
After graduating from St. Peter's Preparatory School in Jersey City, Fleming spent a year in the United States Navy. He received a Bachelor's degree, with honors, from Fordham University in 1950. After brief stints as a newspaperman and magazine editor, he became a full-time writer in 1960. His first history book, Now We Are Enemies, an account of the Battle of Bunker Hill, was published that same year. It was a best-seller, reviewed in more than 75 newspapers and featured as a main selection of the Literary Guild.
Fleming published books about various events and figures of the Revolutionary era. He also wrote about other periods of American history and wrote over a dozen well-received novels set against various historical backgrounds. He said, "I never wanted to be an Irish American writer, my whole idea was to get across that bridge and be an American writer".
Fleming died at his home in New York City on July 23, 2017, at the age of 90.
There is more than one author in the GoodReads database with this name
Thomas James Fleming was an historian and historical novelist, with a special interest in the American Revolution. He was born in 1927 in Jersey City, New Jersey, the son of a World War I hero who was a leader in Jersey City politics for three decades. Before her marriage, his mother, Katherine Dolan Fleming, was a teacher in the Jersey City Public School System.
After graduating from St. Peter's Preparatory School in Jersey City, Fleming spent a year in the United States Navy. He received a Bachelor's degree, with honors, from Fordham University in 1950. After brief stints as a newspaperman and magazine editor, he became a full-time writer in 1960. His first history book, Now We Are Enemies, an account of the Battle of Bunker Hill, was published that same year. It was a best-seller, reviewed in more than 75 newspapers and featured as a main selection of the Literary Guild.
Fleming published books about various events and figures of the Revolutionary era. He also wrote about other periods of American history and wrote over a dozen well-received novels set against various historical backgrounds. He said, "I never wanted to be an Irish American writer, my whole idea was to get across that bridge and be an American writer".
Fleming died at his home in New York City on July 23, 2017, at the age of 90.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 31 reviews
July 19, 2021
“Oh Quentin, why does it all have to be? It isn’t possible that it can be for any ultimate good that all the best people in the world have to be killed.”
Flora Payne Whitney, the fiancé of Quentin Roosevelt, the son of Theodore Roosevelt, quoted in The Illusion of Victory by Thomas Fleming (Page 490)
This is a powerful history of America’s involvement in The Great War. This book is a perfect companion to the previous history I read A World Undone. That book described the European politics and the tragedy that The Great War even started. In this book American politics are described and the tragedy is America’s involvement.
This book is a damning verdict on the presidency of Woodrow Wilson. The book opens with President Woodrow Wilson’s address to Congress requesting a State of War Resolution with Germany and ends with the defeat of Wilson’s proposed League of Nations. This is a very tragic and disturbing account.
By the time America does enter the war there were several attempts to arrange a peace. There were attempts by the Catholic Pope, the Bolsheviks of Russia, and several others all of which go nowhere. Wilson enters this phase late with his 14 points speech.
Once the Americans did arrive in Europe, French and British military leaders were eager to use these troops in their continuing carnage. These European military leaders were “apostles of the school of attack”, that had accomplished nothing but pile up bodies in front of German lines. Some of the American military leaders were anxious to prove their fighting ability and military valor by following the same tactics.
There is a continual assault on Wilson’s conduct of the war by his opponents, mainly Theodore Roosevelt. His son, Quentin, had died flying a decrepit French aircraft because Wilson had neglected to prepare for the war in spite of spending almost a billion dollars. There were reports of ships being built and planes being sent to Europe that were completely false. Men joining the army were sent to training camps that could not shelter them and led to hospitals filled with men dying of pneumonia. A group of congressmen visiting the American troops in Europe found them “freezing in summer uniforms, eating abominable food, and without vital weapons.” (Page 175)
The main effort of Wilson was to stir up public enthusiasm for the war. To do this he appointed a George Creel to run the Committee of Public Information. The role of this committee was to handle war news with the purpose of inspiring Americans to see the struggle as a patriotic crusade. This combined with the British propaganda on the brutality of the German army created a hatred for Germans and created the idea that the chief end was a “Knockout Blow”. This would eventually poison any peace initiatives.
Wilson also suffered from the imperialism of Britain, France and other countries. Instead of waging war in order to make the world safe for democracy, these countries were out to gain territory and plunder. The allies had started a war of propaganda aimed at sympathy for poor little Belgium. This was the Belgium that was revealed to have subjected the Congo to “brutality and rapine unmatched in the annals of imperialism. … a holocaust that exceeds anything in previous, or subsequent, recorded history”. (Page 49)
Throughout this book Wilson is shown to be not up to the job. After a meeting with the British King George, the King said of Wilson “I could not bear him. An entirely cold academical professor—an odious man.” (Page 321). The French President Clemenceau remarked “I never saw a man talk more like Jesus Christ and act more like Lloyd George.” (Page 363) Lloyd George himself said of Wilson “He believed in mankind but distrusted all men.” (Page 363). John Maynard Keynes, the young British economist, said that Wilson lacked the “intellectual equipment” to deal with David Lloyd George and Georges Clemenceau. Describing Wilson at the Paris Peace Conference, Keynes said “there can seldom have been a statesman of the first rank more incompetent than the President in the council chamber.” (Page 444)
After returning to the United States from the Paris Peace Conference Wilson began a fight for the League of Nations and the Treaty of Versailles. As the opposition grew to the League of Nations Wilson became more adamant in its need for passage. Eventually on a speaking tour in the West he suffered a debilitating stroke and returned to the White House an invalid for the remainder of his term. During this time his wife shielded him from the public and took over most of his presidential duties.
In the last chapter the author indulges in the popular historical “what-if” exercise. Would a German victory have been a “better historical alternative?” If America had maintained a strict neutrality during this war the Germans might have been victorious or at least The Great War might have ended in 1916 with a negotiated peace. The collapse of Russia might have been avoided. There would have been no Hitler, no Mussolini and no Stalin. In addition, the domestic policies of the Wilson administration during the war, suppression of free speech and the attacks of various ethnic and political groups, might not have occurred.
The Americans had been in combat for only 200 days. In 1930 the Veterans Bureau reported the number of Americans deaths attributed to The Great War at 460,000. Compared to the subsequent wars, WWII, Korea and Vietnam, the price paid in this war was “disproportionally large.” (Page 307).
Visiting the battle sites of The Great War the author states:
I also visited cemeteries in the Argonne and Champagne, where mute rows of white Carrara marble crosses testify to a soldier’s ideals, courage and brotherhood. Each cross was a wound torn in the lives of wives, sons, daughters, fathers, mothers, sisters and brothers. Did these grieving survivors think it was worth the sacrifice of these beloved dead to procure Woodrow Wilson a seat at the Paris peace Table? Somehow, I doubted it. (Pages 488-489)
I could only shake my head and hope the men and women who guide America’s covenant with power in the world of the twenty-first century have the courage and the wisdom to manage our country’s often perplexing blend of idealism and realism. (page 490)
December 14, 2023
The Americans had been in combat two hundred days-approximately six months. In that time, 50,300 doughboys were killed. Another 198,000 Americans were wounded in action. Another 62,668 died of disease-an appalling 38,815 of these in training camps in the United States. Another 4503 were killed in accidents. Almost 1000 committed suicide. Adding minor causes, the total deaths were 120,139.
There were 259,376 Americans killed in the 47 months of WWII, 53, 886 killed in the 37 months of Korea and 57,000 killed during the 11 years of Viet Nam. Proportionally, the butcher's bill for WWI was far greater than all our other wars. I don't usually start my reviews with a quote from the book but this was stunning fact that I didn't know on top all the rest of what I didn't know about this war. Worse, I don't think I am alone in my ignorance of this war and that should be a matter we should all endeavor to correct.
As the 100th anniversary of WWI approached I decided to learn more about this war that is rarely mentioned and certainly not as well known or discussed as WWII. In my search for a good book on the war I discovered The World Undone by G. J. Meyers which I thought was an excellent book and reviewed it accordingly. I also discovered another book, Lawrence In Arabia by Scott Anderson which was an eye opening history of the English and French intrigues in the Middle East during WWI. Finally, a couple of years later G.J. Meyer wrote another book called The World Remade which was about how the U.S. came to be involved in WWI. If you read my review of that book you will see that I was hesitant about reading that book as I couldn't imagine there was much to learn about such a simple and limited subject. I couldn't have been more wrong. What I learned from that book was how much I really didn't know about WWI and the history of the rest of the 20th century and about our present international problems. After recently reading an excellent review by a GR friend (thanks Jim) about this book my interest was piqued and I bought a copy. I discovered that there was even more that I didn't know about things I thought I now knew.
Fleming's book covers the same territory as Meyer's Remade book but is far, far, more detailed and expansive. Meyer's book might be considered an overview of the book that Fleming gives us. Fleming is also much more of a historian and scholar so the book is replete with footnotes which I know many reader enjoy. I thought the Meyer book, Remade, was a jaw dropper but this book had me gasping for air. What Woodrow Wilson did in this country a century ago is not to be believed. We just lived through 4 years of tension as the institutions of our nation were threatened by ignorant and misguided leadership but what Trump only dreamed of Wilson accomplished and accomplished with ease and the judiciary turned a blind eye to whole thing because there was a war being waged. Anybody that thinks it would be impossible for this country to become a police state only has to read this book and learn what happened once this country declared war on Germany in WWI. You will be shocked into disbelief but every incident is fact and facts we should be ashamed of. Maybe the fact that we know so little about this war is not a matter of neglect but one of design. Fortunately, the parents currently objecting to what their children are being taught haven't discovered our WWI history so there's time and opportunity for all of us to learn before it's too late.
The more you read and the more you learn you will come to understand that Wilson bungled his responsibilities to the people of this country and allowed himself and the nation to be played for fools by the charlatans in Great Britain and France. Wilson's arrogance, ego, and intractability clearly makes him one our worst presidents. After reading this book and the other three I mentioned and probably any good history of WWI you will realize that just about every negative international political event that occurred in the 20th century can have its origin traced to WWI and the horrendous peace treaty that followed and virtually insured another war. What happened a century ago is a great illustration of why it is so important to teach history and to understand it. Because we haven't learned from our mistake we repeated it by electing somebody whose personality was almost a carbon copy of Wilson's with one exception, Wilson was accomplished and intelligent while our recent mistake wasn't. It also illustrates how uncorrected mistakes can snowball. My God I had no idea that a stupid political intrigue by the British that failed contributed significantly to rise of Lenin and Trotsky to power in Russia. But for an event in WWI Russia might never have become Communist and the Cold War might never have happened and that's not to mention Hitler and WWII. But WWI is the war that fails to get top billing and the primary focus of historical attention?
This is an incredible history that spans Wilson's presidency, our involvement in WWI, the war itself, the aftermath with the peace treaty and the League of Nations as well as the political fights in Congress. If any current U.S. Senator needs a template for how a U.S. Senator should conduct him/herself I can strongly suggest Wisconsin Senator Robert La Follette’s life and political career. This man has become a new historical hero to me and I think he would be ashamed at what is going on in our Senate today but he also wouldn't be surprised either. I strongly recommend reading this book to anybody that cares about this country and our history.
There were 259,376 Americans killed in the 47 months of WWII, 53, 886 killed in the 37 months of Korea and 57,000 killed during the 11 years of Viet Nam. Proportionally, the butcher's bill for WWI was far greater than all our other wars. I don't usually start my reviews with a quote from the book but this was stunning fact that I didn't know on top all the rest of what I didn't know about this war. Worse, I don't think I am alone in my ignorance of this war and that should be a matter we should all endeavor to correct.
As the 100th anniversary of WWI approached I decided to learn more about this war that is rarely mentioned and certainly not as well known or discussed as WWII. In my search for a good book on the war I discovered The World Undone by G. J. Meyers which I thought was an excellent book and reviewed it accordingly. I also discovered another book, Lawrence In Arabia by Scott Anderson which was an eye opening history of the English and French intrigues in the Middle East during WWI. Finally, a couple of years later G.J. Meyer wrote another book called The World Remade which was about how the U.S. came to be involved in WWI. If you read my review of that book you will see that I was hesitant about reading that book as I couldn't imagine there was much to learn about such a simple and limited subject. I couldn't have been more wrong. What I learned from that book was how much I really didn't know about WWI and the history of the rest of the 20th century and about our present international problems. After recently reading an excellent review by a GR friend (thanks Jim) about this book my interest was piqued and I bought a copy. I discovered that there was even more that I didn't know about things I thought I now knew.
Fleming's book covers the same territory as Meyer's Remade book but is far, far, more detailed and expansive. Meyer's book might be considered an overview of the book that Fleming gives us. Fleming is also much more of a historian and scholar so the book is replete with footnotes which I know many reader enjoy. I thought the Meyer book, Remade, was a jaw dropper but this book had me gasping for air. What Woodrow Wilson did in this country a century ago is not to be believed. We just lived through 4 years of tension as the institutions of our nation were threatened by ignorant and misguided leadership but what Trump only dreamed of Wilson accomplished and accomplished with ease and the judiciary turned a blind eye to whole thing because there was a war being waged. Anybody that thinks it would be impossible for this country to become a police state only has to read this book and learn what happened once this country declared war on Germany in WWI. You will be shocked into disbelief but every incident is fact and facts we should be ashamed of. Maybe the fact that we know so little about this war is not a matter of neglect but one of design. Fortunately, the parents currently objecting to what their children are being taught haven't discovered our WWI history so there's time and opportunity for all of us to learn before it's too late.
The more you read and the more you learn you will come to understand that Wilson bungled his responsibilities to the people of this country and allowed himself and the nation to be played for fools by the charlatans in Great Britain and France. Wilson's arrogance, ego, and intractability clearly makes him one our worst presidents. After reading this book and the other three I mentioned and probably any good history of WWI you will realize that just about every negative international political event that occurred in the 20th century can have its origin traced to WWI and the horrendous peace treaty that followed and virtually insured another war. What happened a century ago is a great illustration of why it is so important to teach history and to understand it. Because we haven't learned from our mistake we repeated it by electing somebody whose personality was almost a carbon copy of Wilson's with one exception, Wilson was accomplished and intelligent while our recent mistake wasn't. It also illustrates how uncorrected mistakes can snowball. My God I had no idea that a stupid political intrigue by the British that failed contributed significantly to rise of Lenin and Trotsky to power in Russia. But for an event in WWI Russia might never have become Communist and the Cold War might never have happened and that's not to mention Hitler and WWII. But WWI is the war that fails to get top billing and the primary focus of historical attention?
This is an incredible history that spans Wilson's presidency, our involvement in WWI, the war itself, the aftermath with the peace treaty and the League of Nations as well as the political fights in Congress. If any current U.S. Senator needs a template for how a U.S. Senator should conduct him/herself I can strongly suggest Wisconsin Senator Robert La Follette’s life and political career. This man has become a new historical hero to me and I think he would be ashamed at what is going on in our Senate today but he also wouldn't be surprised either. I strongly recommend reading this book to anybody that cares about this country and our history.
May 21, 2009
One of the crazy things about my developing interest in history is that it's really hard to know where to start. A few years ago, I was curious about how World War II started, so I did what any reasonably savvy computer user would do and checked out wikipedia and a few other Google searches. Almost every article or essay on the subject of the beginnings of World War II began with a statement something like this: "To fully understand the reasons for the start of the second World War, one must understand the reasons for the start of World War I, and the failure of the Treaty of Versailles.
Well, I knew little about World War II, I knew even less about World War I. So, I went on a little hunt, and found a great book: A Storm in Flanders. I've commented on this book before. I really found it very interesting, and as the war was, very depressing. This book focused on the Great War mostly from the European viewpoint, though the author's intent was to write it for Americans who knew little about the war.
Fleming's book, Illusion of Victory, focuses on America's involvement in the war, and primarily focuses on Woodrow Wilson's failure as president to guide the country into the war (after running for re-election with the slogan "He kept us out of war"), and his failure as diplomat as he asserted himself as an almost unwelcomed negotiator for peace on the European stage.
One of the most startling things I took from this book is how unbelievably deceptive and censoring the federal government became toward it's citizens. People live in a great deal of ignorance about the current conflict in Iraq (and I use the term "conflict" intentionally since the 2nd World War was technically the last war declared by the US). If more people had a better sense of history, (and I can say I only feel like I'm getting my bearings lately), they would be surprised at what the Wilson administration (and later the Roosevelt administration) sanctioned regarding propaganda, what we would consider political "incorrectness" today, and stubborn political unilateralism. If you weren't on board with Wilson, too bad, he was gonna do things the way he wanted them done.
As I am learning, the problem with history is that it is hard to know where to start. I have now gained a broader appreciation for the start of WW II because of understanding WW I a little better. However, there were world events that took place before WW I that influenced it! Many US military commanders of World War I got their experience from fighting in the Spanish-American War! Now who can tell me something about THAT?
Well, I knew little about World War II, I knew even less about World War I. So, I went on a little hunt, and found a great book: A Storm in Flanders. I've commented on this book before. I really found it very interesting, and as the war was, very depressing. This book focused on the Great War mostly from the European viewpoint, though the author's intent was to write it for Americans who knew little about the war.
Fleming's book, Illusion of Victory, focuses on America's involvement in the war, and primarily focuses on Woodrow Wilson's failure as president to guide the country into the war (after running for re-election with the slogan "He kept us out of war"), and his failure as diplomat as he asserted himself as an almost unwelcomed negotiator for peace on the European stage.
One of the most startling things I took from this book is how unbelievably deceptive and censoring the federal government became toward it's citizens. People live in a great deal of ignorance about the current conflict in Iraq (and I use the term "conflict" intentionally since the 2nd World War was technically the last war declared by the US). If more people had a better sense of history, (and I can say I only feel like I'm getting my bearings lately), they would be surprised at what the Wilson administration (and later the Roosevelt administration) sanctioned regarding propaganda, what we would consider political "incorrectness" today, and stubborn political unilateralism. If you weren't on board with Wilson, too bad, he was gonna do things the way he wanted them done.
As I am learning, the problem with history is that it is hard to know where to start. I have now gained a broader appreciation for the start of WW II because of understanding WW I a little better. However, there were world events that took place before WW I that influenced it! Many US military commanders of World War I got their experience from fighting in the Spanish-American War! Now who can tell me something about THAT?
January 25, 2013
A riveting description of US policy during WWI.The book starts with the speech of President Wilson to Congress asking for a declaration of war against Imperial Germany following the unrestricted submarine warfare of that country around the British Isles that had sunken several American ships.What Wilson didn't say was that the US wasn't neutral and was supporting Britain and France since the beginning of the war, hence the German reaction was entirely justified.
Wilson emerges as a cynical politician that manipulated his country into a war that was far from being popular and that cost, in one year, more than a 100.000 deaths of American soldiers that were forcefully drafted into an ill prepared army.
Fascinating read and the author spares no punches.
Wilson emerges as a cynical politician that manipulated his country into a war that was far from being popular and that cost, in one year, more than a 100.000 deaths of American soldiers that were forcefully drafted into an ill prepared army.
Fascinating read and the author spares no punches.
February 26, 2022
So, I have been trying to read fast and haven't been doing reviews, but I have to talk about this one. I am teaching history II this semester. It is not my specialty--I am more comfortable with early America up to Reconstruction. That's why I am trying to pump up my background fast, reading books on the gilded age and the early 1900s prior to this one.
Now I am to WWI. I am pretty knowledgeable about the war itself and what was going on in Europe at the time. However, I am not as knowledgeable about the leadup to the war and political things going on in America before, during, and after the war. I hoped this book would help remedy that.
This book was an eye opener. But I have to say, the author (who I like) REALLY DOES NOT LIKE WOODROW WILSON! Now, I know Wilson was racist and had a lot of faults, but, this book is a pretty damning account of his actions as president. It goes in depth on the actions of a president elected to a second term on his motto "he kept us out of the war" and shortly afterwards asked Congress to declare war. The book goes describes in detail some of the political machinations going on and how Wilson and his advisors acted. It was disturbing learning how much freedom was taken away and how people who criticized going to war often went to prison. Labor unions were made the enemy, as well as "hyphenated-Americans" such as those with German, Irish, and Italian heritage. Any criticism at all was considered "unpatriotic."
As a sideline, the book gives a pretty good description of how Gen Pershing battled with French and British leaders to keep the American force a separate entity.
The section about Wilson's disastrous performance while working on the Treaty of Versailles, while leaving the US without a president for months, was eye opening. His clinging to the idea of a League of Nations caused him to basically give up on his 14 points (which Germany had based their agreeing to an armistice on), and allowed the Allied Powers to make land grabs and impose horrific reparations which helped lead to WWII.
I knew that Wilson had been incapacitated after returning from negotiations, but really didn't realize the extent of his incapacitation for the last 18 months of his presidency, how much his wife controlled the White House afterwards, and how much this impacted the debates on the Treaty and the League of Nations--which were never passed by the US.
Like I said, I learned a lot from this book, but now I have to get another version of this time-frame because either the author just hated Wilson, or Wilson was just a HORRIBLE president.
I am starting David Kennedy's "Over Here: The First World War and American Society" tonight to get a different perspective.
Now I am to WWI. I am pretty knowledgeable about the war itself and what was going on in Europe at the time. However, I am not as knowledgeable about the leadup to the war and political things going on in America before, during, and after the war. I hoped this book would help remedy that.
This book was an eye opener. But I have to say, the author (who I like) REALLY DOES NOT LIKE WOODROW WILSON! Now, I know Wilson was racist and had a lot of faults, but, this book is a pretty damning account of his actions as president. It goes in depth on the actions of a president elected to a second term on his motto "he kept us out of the war" and shortly afterwards asked Congress to declare war. The book goes describes in detail some of the political machinations going on and how Wilson and his advisors acted. It was disturbing learning how much freedom was taken away and how people who criticized going to war often went to prison. Labor unions were made the enemy, as well as "hyphenated-Americans" such as those with German, Irish, and Italian heritage. Any criticism at all was considered "unpatriotic."
As a sideline, the book gives a pretty good description of how Gen Pershing battled with French and British leaders to keep the American force a separate entity.
The section about Wilson's disastrous performance while working on the Treaty of Versailles, while leaving the US without a president for months, was eye opening. His clinging to the idea of a League of Nations caused him to basically give up on his 14 points (which Germany had based their agreeing to an armistice on), and allowed the Allied Powers to make land grabs and impose horrific reparations which helped lead to WWII.
I knew that Wilson had been incapacitated after returning from negotiations, but really didn't realize the extent of his incapacitation for the last 18 months of his presidency, how much his wife controlled the White House afterwards, and how much this impacted the debates on the Treaty and the League of Nations--which were never passed by the US.
Like I said, I learned a lot from this book, but now I have to get another version of this time-frame because either the author just hated Wilson, or Wilson was just a HORRIBLE president.
I am starting David Kennedy's "Over Here: The First World War and American Society" tonight to get a different perspective.
May 23, 2021
An informative, insightful and readable work.
Fleming doubts Wilson’s idealism, and in his telling Wilson comes off as self-righteous, arrogant, out of touch with reality, and easy to manipulate. His portrait makes Wilson out to be an autocratic demagogue with a messiah complex. Fleming also covers Wilson’s support of the Espionage Act and violations of civil liberties, as well as Wilson’s fervent support for the League of Nations and how it led the Allies to impose a peace that violated Wilson’s own ideals (laid out in the Fourteen Points), and how Wilson’s support for the League led him to sacrifice his own principles for which he wanted that League in the first place. Also, Wilson never really explained how the League would ensure peace.
The narrative can get a little breezy, however, and Fleming’s treatment of Wilson borders on disdain; this can get a little annoying, but it probably won’t strike one as entirely unjustified (he seems to go a little easy on imperial Germany, though) Still, he often criticizes Wilson as a hypocrite during situations where it seems more that Wilson was actually being influenced by forces that he simply didn’t understand. Fleming also blames the other Allies for American misfortunes on the western front (“the Allies did their utmost to turn the American Expeditionary Force into cannon fodder”), but he doesn’t fully cover the fact that the Americans entered the war with pretty basic equipment, outdated tactics, and in numbers that weren’t that large. He also seems to blame British propaganda for most of the anti-German sentiment in America.
There’s also some minor errors here and there, like the status of Danzig (Fleming goes back and forth on it), Henry Ashurst being called a New Mexico senator, Edward Douglass White being called “Andrew,” Yugoslavia being called a “republic,” the British army being called the “Royal Army,” Wilhelm II’s father being called the “first” Kaiser, and tanks making their first appearance at Cambrai (not the Somme?) At one point he writes that a constitutional amendment requires ratification by two-thirds of the states. He also claims that the British Tories “chose war” in 1914, even though they were in the opposition at the time.
Still, a well-written and mostly well-researched work.
Fleming doubts Wilson’s idealism, and in his telling Wilson comes off as self-righteous, arrogant, out of touch with reality, and easy to manipulate. His portrait makes Wilson out to be an autocratic demagogue with a messiah complex. Fleming also covers Wilson’s support of the Espionage Act and violations of civil liberties, as well as Wilson’s fervent support for the League of Nations and how it led the Allies to impose a peace that violated Wilson’s own ideals (laid out in the Fourteen Points), and how Wilson’s support for the League led him to sacrifice his own principles for which he wanted that League in the first place. Also, Wilson never really explained how the League would ensure peace.
The narrative can get a little breezy, however, and Fleming’s treatment of Wilson borders on disdain; this can get a little annoying, but it probably won’t strike one as entirely unjustified (he seems to go a little easy on imperial Germany, though) Still, he often criticizes Wilson as a hypocrite during situations where it seems more that Wilson was actually being influenced by forces that he simply didn’t understand. Fleming also blames the other Allies for American misfortunes on the western front (“the Allies did their utmost to turn the American Expeditionary Force into cannon fodder”), but he doesn’t fully cover the fact that the Americans entered the war with pretty basic equipment, outdated tactics, and in numbers that weren’t that large. He also seems to blame British propaganda for most of the anti-German sentiment in America.
There’s also some minor errors here and there, like the status of Danzig (Fleming goes back and forth on it), Henry Ashurst being called a New Mexico senator, Edward Douglass White being called “Andrew,” Yugoslavia being called a “republic,” the British army being called the “Royal Army,” Wilhelm II’s father being called the “first” Kaiser, and tanks making their first appearance at Cambrai (not the Somme?) At one point he writes that a constitutional amendment requires ratification by two-thirds of the states. He also claims that the British Tories “chose war” in 1914, even though they were in the opposition at the time.
Still, a well-written and mostly well-researched work.
October 3, 2023
The history around Woodrow Wilson is great - the blow-by-blow account of how America actually failed to join the League of Nations is particularly interesting. Fleming is right to excoriate Wilson's dalliances in Paris and failure to live up to his own ideals. That said, the tone is frankly more vituperative than I find useful. We get it dude, you hate Wilson. And FDR. His 'I hope God is guiding our current leaders in war' finale in a book published in 2003 makes his slant abundantly clear
But it's absolutely wild to read a historian claim that the Franco-Prussian war was started by France (p. 51) without recognizing Bismarck's admitted string-pulling to goad France into war. Fleming's attempts to revitalize Germany and the Kaiser rest upon quoting as unvarnished truth the same kind of propaganda that he accuses the British of in the same section. I'm uncertain how he thinks the Germans were so hard done at Agadir, and his whataboutism regarding executed Belgians is appalling. Genuinely bad faith stuff here! His work on the war itself is atrocious. He misses the point that the Germans destroyed their army in the Spring Offensive in a failed gamble to win the way militarily. He also totally ignores the tactical changes the French and British made in 1918 that allowed them to win the war on the battlefield - lessons the Americans spurned.
But it's absolutely wild to read a historian claim that the Franco-Prussian war was started by France (p. 51) without recognizing Bismarck's admitted string-pulling to goad France into war. Fleming's attempts to revitalize Germany and the Kaiser rest upon quoting as unvarnished truth the same kind of propaganda that he accuses the British of in the same section. I'm uncertain how he thinks the Germans were so hard done at Agadir, and his whataboutism regarding executed Belgians is appalling. Genuinely bad faith stuff here! His work on the war itself is atrocious. He misses the point that the Germans destroyed their army in the Spring Offensive in a failed gamble to win the way militarily. He also totally ignores the tactical changes the French and British made in 1918 that allowed them to win the war on the battlefield - lessons the Americans spurned.
Read
August 8, 2013'A government propaganda machine spews out questionable allegations to justify America going to war without its national interest being at stake. The president invokes global considerations transcending selfish nationalism. Critics of the war, Left and Right, come under attack. An aggressive attorney general tramples on liberties with hardly a peep of protest from the news media.
Is this a leftist, libertarian, or even paleoconservative critique of George W. Bush’s war policies? No, it is the account by Thomas Fleming, a prolific historian and novelist, of how President Woodrow Wilson and the United States entered World War I, how America kept Germany from winning that war, and how Wilson was complicit in the mangled peace, with tragic consequences for the future.'
Read the full review, "In Wilson's Wake," on our website:
http://www.theamericanconservative.co...
Is this a leftist, libertarian, or even paleoconservative critique of George W. Bush’s war policies? No, it is the account by Thomas Fleming, a prolific historian and novelist, of how President Woodrow Wilson and the United States entered World War I, how America kept Germany from winning that war, and how Wilson was complicit in the mangled peace, with tragic consequences for the future.'
Read the full review, "In Wilson's Wake," on our website:
http://www.theamericanconservative.co...
December 15, 2008
Mr. Fleming has a sense of humor and irony despite the gruesome tale he has to relate concerning World War I and how Edward Mandell House, Woodrow Wilson, Winston Churchill, and others manuevered the USA into a war we had no business being in. The truth about the Lusitania is found within the pages as well as Wilson's desire to be the "savior" of the world with his 14-points doctrine and his League of Nations global governmental idea. The machinations of national leaders are well laid out herein and the cost in human suffering as well. I recommend the book to any student of history or politics tha want to have a better understanding of the 20th century, since it brought us into the 21st century situations we're now in.
October 24, 2007
The author makes the case that America really didn't gain anything from fighting World War I, an argument I am wont to agree with. He makes a pretty good case, but toward the end the tone changes to point where I had the impression that the author has a real problem with Wilson, almost on a personal level. For a better discussion of America in WWI, see
The Last Days of Innocence: America at War, 1917-1918
.
October 6, 2018
“The Illusion of Victory” is a type of counter history that argues against all the themes that the United States entered World War I to make the world safe for democracy and that it provided the margin of victory for the Allies. It is also an anti-Wilson work. Wilson is portrayed as the flesh and blood Phillip Dru of Wilson aide Col. Edward House’s novel, “Philip Dru: Administrator: A Story of Tomorrow”
This tome begins with the week of President Wilson’s war message then turns back to the British propaganda that enticed America into the war, the struggle over neutrality or belligerency, the redefinition of patriotism and the persecution of those not meeting that definition. Segments move on to the military milieu into which Gen. Pershing and the American Expeditionary Force were inserted and the peace conference at which President Wilson claimed his role.
This saga presents its protagonist, Woodrow Wilson, against a host of antagonists attacking from all angles, Theodore Roosevelt for not engaging in the war soon enough or aggressively enough and Robert LaFollette for being drawn into the war by American financiers and industrialists desperate to have their loans repaid and orders replenished by the Allies. The portrayal of Assistant Secretary of the navy, Franklin D. Roosevelt as working to undermine the Secretary, Josephus Daniels, in order to gain his job is interesting, but not one that I had read of before.
Author Thomas Fleming has crafted a history with an agenda. He does cover a broad range of incidents required in any study of America’s involvement in World War I and adds some trivia that would otherwise be overlooked, such as the irony of American soldiers being transported to the front by Vietnamese drivers. Fleming’s point is that Wilson was wrong about the war, dishonest about the reasons for American entry, agreed to a peace that violated many of his Fourteen Points in order to get the League of Nations, and then lost it due to his stubborn refusal to accept reservations that would have ensured Senate ratification.
An agenda promoting book such as this can be intriguing, if its facts are correct. When I I catch errors I wonder how many others there are, and how many of them are crucial to the work’s agenda. I found two clear errors in this book. Campobello Island is placed in the St. Lawrence River when in fact it is a short distance across a bay from Lubec, Maine. The author also identifies Southwest Africa as the current Zimbabwe. In fact, Zimbabwe is the former Rhodesia while Southwest Africa is now known as Namibia.
I value “The Illusion of Victory” for presenting new perspectives on America’s role in World War I but believe that its facts need to be checked before accepting its conclusions.
This tome begins with the week of President Wilson’s war message then turns back to the British propaganda that enticed America into the war, the struggle over neutrality or belligerency, the redefinition of patriotism and the persecution of those not meeting that definition. Segments move on to the military milieu into which Gen. Pershing and the American Expeditionary Force were inserted and the peace conference at which President Wilson claimed his role.
This saga presents its protagonist, Woodrow Wilson, against a host of antagonists attacking from all angles, Theodore Roosevelt for not engaging in the war soon enough or aggressively enough and Robert LaFollette for being drawn into the war by American financiers and industrialists desperate to have their loans repaid and orders replenished by the Allies. The portrayal of Assistant Secretary of the navy, Franklin D. Roosevelt as working to undermine the Secretary, Josephus Daniels, in order to gain his job is interesting, but not one that I had read of before.
Author Thomas Fleming has crafted a history with an agenda. He does cover a broad range of incidents required in any study of America’s involvement in World War I and adds some trivia that would otherwise be overlooked, such as the irony of American soldiers being transported to the front by Vietnamese drivers. Fleming’s point is that Wilson was wrong about the war, dishonest about the reasons for American entry, agreed to a peace that violated many of his Fourteen Points in order to get the League of Nations, and then lost it due to his stubborn refusal to accept reservations that would have ensured Senate ratification.
An agenda promoting book such as this can be intriguing, if its facts are correct. When I I catch errors I wonder how many others there are, and how many of them are crucial to the work’s agenda. I found two clear errors in this book. Campobello Island is placed in the St. Lawrence River when in fact it is a short distance across a bay from Lubec, Maine. The author also identifies Southwest Africa as the current Zimbabwe. In fact, Zimbabwe is the former Rhodesia while Southwest Africa is now known as Namibia.
I value “The Illusion of Victory” for presenting new perspectives on America’s role in World War I but believe that its facts need to be checked before accepting its conclusions.
August 19, 2019
This is a very good, comprehensive narrative of the American side of World War I, particularly with the author's coverage of the political scene. Idealism vs. realpolitik is the conflict both domestically and overseas. The author's title reveals the outcome of this conflict. For me, the most interesting chapter, and a chapter I rate 4 stars, is Chapter 6, "The Women of No-Man's-Land." I had been aware of stories about the contribution of British women, but I was mostly unaware of the part American women took, so the information in this chapter - which is not just about the women who went overseas - was quite interesting. I enjoyed the author's writing of this chapter. Very moving. Two other chapters also deserve 4 stars, chapters 12 & 13, "Illusions End" and "A Covenant with Power." These two chapters wrap up the book. Chap. 12 is an excellent narrative of last gasp in the political fight to ratify the peace treaty and the League of Nations and its aftermath. Chap. 13 is a brief summary of Pres. Wilson's flaws and vision, and lessons learned (maybe).
August 5, 2018
Thomas Fleming, may God rest his soul, is a first-rate historian and author. As such, it pains me to give "The Illusion of Victory," his account of the United States in World War I, both at home and abroad, only three stars.
Fleming's book was too wordy and too long. His sentences fell flat. They lacked the passion of his better works, usually narratives on either the American Revolution or the Founding Fathers. "Illusion" was uber detailed in terms of Woodrow Wilson and the politicking back here at home (and among the allied nations comprising the AEF) and greatly lacking in regards to the fighting by U. S. doughboys in France itself. I found Fleming's endeavor to be uneven and uninspiring. I sure have enjoyed numerous other works from him over the years, however.
My condensed bottom line on "Illusion" is this: stay away from the book but do not shut out the author. Thomas Fleming, for my money, is truly one of the all-time greats.
Fleming's book was too wordy and too long. His sentences fell flat. They lacked the passion of his better works, usually narratives on either the American Revolution or the Founding Fathers. "Illusion" was uber detailed in terms of Woodrow Wilson and the politicking back here at home (and among the allied nations comprising the AEF) and greatly lacking in regards to the fighting by U. S. doughboys in France itself. I found Fleming's endeavor to be uneven and uninspiring. I sure have enjoyed numerous other works from him over the years, however.
My condensed bottom line on "Illusion" is this: stay away from the book but do not shut out the author. Thomas Fleming, for my money, is truly one of the all-time greats.
November 10, 2017
Though the author was a bit too virulently anti-Wilson, I thought this book was fascinating. I didn't realize that the British had a secret propaganda org designed to demonize the Germans and build up America's "war rage." American groups were complicit as well. Thousands of Americans were essentially thrown in jail without trial for speaking against America's involvement in the war. A sitting senator was almost expelled for being anti-war. The Constitution was in shreds.
I could go on, but read the book. Tomorrow is the 99th anniversary of Armistice Day. I think most Americans believe the USA got into the war to save our friends the French & Brits, kicked some Hun ass, then came home triumphant. The truth is far more complicated.
I could go on, but read the book. Tomorrow is the 99th anniversary of Armistice Day. I think most Americans believe the USA got into the war to save our friends the French & Brits, kicked some Hun ass, then came home triumphant. The truth is far more complicated.
July 27, 2013
Very thorough book, primarily about the"administrative" side of WW1. Interesting to read about how the US got involved and the negotiations of the Treaty of Versailles. It became obvious very early on that Fleming has a very negative view of President Wilson. So, while most of his arguments supporting Wilson's missteps were persuasive and contained evidence to support the argument, at times it was difficult to separate the argument from the author's vitriol.
July 9, 2010
Recommended to me, one I’ve meant to read anyway. Two thoughts: 1) Wilson was a crappy President and 2) this book was a slog. I don’t like World War 1 much, though, so that might be part of the reason why.
January 24, 2022
In the minds of many Americans, World War I was a first draft of World War II, fought with less advanced technology but otherwise similar. But the two wars were actually quite different. The earlier war was more or less a family squabble among the crowned heads of Europe; Kaiser Wilhelm was Queen Victoria's grandson.
Thomas Fleming presents a strong case that there was no reason for the United States to enter World War I, and argues that if it had stayed out, it might have played a more effective role afterwards as mediator, preventing the excesses of the Treaty of Versailles and its disastrous aftermath.
Woodrow Wilson was reelected in 1916 on a platform of staying out of the war, but almost immediately committed the U.S. to the conflict. German submarine warfare is often cited as a factor provoking American entry; Fleming argues that it was no worse than the British blockade of Germany. In any event, the sinking of the Lusitania was a dubious causus belli, since the ship was carrying munitions.
Once America was in the war, civil liberties slipped to their lowest point since the Civil War, if not in all of U.S. history. The Sedition and Espionage Acts made criticism of the government a crime. The Post Office banned dissenting magazines. Critics of the war and the draft received lengthy jail sentences. Robert Goldstein was sentenced to ten years for producing an "anti-British" film about the American Revolution. A Lansing, Michigan man got twenty years for denouncing the war in a private conversation. Even a U.S. Senator, Robert La Follette, was the target of charges of sedition and treason. Bigotry against German-Americans was rampant; both Wilson and Theodore Roosevelt denounced "hyphenated Americans."
After the war, Wilson's diplomacy was ineffective. England and France wanted revenge and had little interest in the Fourteen Points. The final treaty contained little of what he wanted, but Wilson accepted it in the hope of carrying through its provision for a League of Nations. Having created a wartime atmosphere in which disagreement was tantamount to treason, Wilson attempted to get the treaty ratified by impugning Republicans' loyalty, but the technique backfired on him. He then suffered a debilitating stroke; at first without his knowledge and later with his active participation, his disability was systematically concealed from the public; yet Fleming tells us he attempted to get nominated for a third term. (Roosevelt emulated this pattern, with greater success, in 1944 -- but that's a matter for Fleming's other book, The New Dealers' War.)
In a time when our government is using threats from abroad as an excuse for reducing our liberties, a look at the events from 1916 to 1918 can provide perspective — and give us a warning.
Copyright 2004 Gary McGath. This review was originally posted on my blog in a different format.
Thomas Fleming presents a strong case that there was no reason for the United States to enter World War I, and argues that if it had stayed out, it might have played a more effective role afterwards as mediator, preventing the excesses of the Treaty of Versailles and its disastrous aftermath.
Woodrow Wilson was reelected in 1916 on a platform of staying out of the war, but almost immediately committed the U.S. to the conflict. German submarine warfare is often cited as a factor provoking American entry; Fleming argues that it was no worse than the British blockade of Germany. In any event, the sinking of the Lusitania was a dubious causus belli, since the ship was carrying munitions.
Once America was in the war, civil liberties slipped to their lowest point since the Civil War, if not in all of U.S. history. The Sedition and Espionage Acts made criticism of the government a crime. The Post Office banned dissenting magazines. Critics of the war and the draft received lengthy jail sentences. Robert Goldstein was sentenced to ten years for producing an "anti-British" film about the American Revolution. A Lansing, Michigan man got twenty years for denouncing the war in a private conversation. Even a U.S. Senator, Robert La Follette, was the target of charges of sedition and treason. Bigotry against German-Americans was rampant; both Wilson and Theodore Roosevelt denounced "hyphenated Americans."
After the war, Wilson's diplomacy was ineffective. England and France wanted revenge and had little interest in the Fourteen Points. The final treaty contained little of what he wanted, but Wilson accepted it in the hope of carrying through its provision for a League of Nations. Having created a wartime atmosphere in which disagreement was tantamount to treason, Wilson attempted to get the treaty ratified by impugning Republicans' loyalty, but the technique backfired on him. He then suffered a debilitating stroke; at first without his knowledge and later with his active participation, his disability was systematically concealed from the public; yet Fleming tells us he attempted to get nominated for a third term. (Roosevelt emulated this pattern, with greater success, in 1944 -- but that's a matter for Fleming's other book, The New Dealers' War.)
In a time when our government is using threats from abroad as an excuse for reducing our liberties, a look at the events from 1916 to 1918 can provide perspective — and give us a warning.
Copyright 2004 Gary McGath. This review was originally posted on my blog in a different format.
February 12, 2025
Every person with any knowledge of history knows that the failures at the end of World War I led to the even more destructive World War II. Furthermore, even a minimal study of history will lead you to conclude that Woodrow Wilson was an idealistic fool that never really understood the expansionist and vindictive colonial thought processes of Britain and France. Wilson put forward his famous 14 points as a framework for peace talks and the German leaders thought that they were the basis for a peace to end the First World War in Europe.
This book is a thorough, well referenced explanation of the role of Wilson and the United States in World War I. Most of those actions in the early years of the war has been well documented, so that part is important, but not of compelling interest. What is fascinating is how the leaders of Britain and France, especially Lloyd George of England, manipulated Wilson into committing the United States to fighting against Germany.
The sections that should be required reading for all people that are studying the consequences of how peace was achieved are those about how the spoils were parceled out. By the time Wilson became a player, Britain and France had already reached an agreement on how the land of the Ottoman Empire would be allocated to them. The leaders of Britain and France were determined to punish Germany, justifying their actions by making false claims that the war was the fault of Germany and Austria-Hungary.
Wilson was extremely naïve in believing that he could attend the peace conference and achieve his idealistic goals through the force of his personality. As Fleming makes clear, while the European crowds were cheering Wilson, the other Allied leaders were hatching their schemes of grabbing territory and German assets. Wilson also demonstrated a lack of understanding of the political climate in the United States. He could have taken a small group of Senators with him that could have served as agents to argue his case in the U. S. Senate.
Woodrow Wilson’s last two years in office were a disaster. Totally outmaneuvered by the other Allied leaders, his failures were monumental and consequential. I am a student of history, but until I read this book I was unaware of how much of a dupe he was.
This book is a thorough, well referenced explanation of the role of Wilson and the United States in World War I. Most of those actions in the early years of the war has been well documented, so that part is important, but not of compelling interest. What is fascinating is how the leaders of Britain and France, especially Lloyd George of England, manipulated Wilson into committing the United States to fighting against Germany.
The sections that should be required reading for all people that are studying the consequences of how peace was achieved are those about how the spoils were parceled out. By the time Wilson became a player, Britain and France had already reached an agreement on how the land of the Ottoman Empire would be allocated to them. The leaders of Britain and France were determined to punish Germany, justifying their actions by making false claims that the war was the fault of Germany and Austria-Hungary.
Wilson was extremely naïve in believing that he could attend the peace conference and achieve his idealistic goals through the force of his personality. As Fleming makes clear, while the European crowds were cheering Wilson, the other Allied leaders were hatching their schemes of grabbing territory and German assets. Wilson also demonstrated a lack of understanding of the political climate in the United States. He could have taken a small group of Senators with him that could have served as agents to argue his case in the U. S. Senate.
Woodrow Wilson’s last two years in office were a disaster. Totally outmaneuvered by the other Allied leaders, his failures were monumental and consequential. I am a student of history, but until I read this book I was unaware of how much of a dupe he was.
May 4, 2016
Very well written and extremely thought-provoking. Fleming gives a clearer understanding to why the US entered the war and how it was concluded. Fleming holds back no punches against Woodrow Wilson and his 0ne-sided and egotistical idealism. Wilson's hypocrisy in claiming freedom of the seas in the face of German U-boats as a causus belli while ignoring the British blockade against German civilians is infuriating. His abuse of civil rights and blatant use of lies and propaganda is appalling. Fleming does well to point out Wilson's "sham neutrality" and argues that genuine neutrality with true impartiality (instead of following his Anglophile and Germaphobe feelings) may have led to an earlier and less vindictive peace which the Germans were willing to negotiate in 1916. When the Germans accepted an armistice on the basis of the Fourteen Points, Wilson betrayed them for the sake of his pet project, the League of Nations. This betrayal, we all know, caused an even more horrific war 20 years later.
This quote summarizes the consequences of Wilsonianism
"Woodrow Wilson's covenant with power remained a reality, twenty years after e had bungled its presentation to the American people. By breaking his promise to Germany to make peace on the basis of the Fourteen Points, Wilson had also betrayed the liberals who created the Weimar Republic at his invitation. In 1941, the republic was dead and Germany was ruled by a man who personified the accumulated rage at that betrayal: Adolf Hitler." -pg 483
It would be interesting to contrast this perspective with authors who aren't so negative of Wilson.
This quote summarizes the consequences of Wilsonianism
"Woodrow Wilson's covenant with power remained a reality, twenty years after e had bungled its presentation to the American people. By breaking his promise to Germany to make peace on the basis of the Fourteen Points, Wilson had also betrayed the liberals who created the Weimar Republic at his invitation. In 1941, the republic was dead and Germany was ruled by a man who personified the accumulated rage at that betrayal: Adolf Hitler." -pg 483
It would be interesting to contrast this perspective with authors who aren't so negative of Wilson.
December 24, 2013
This was a good book. It tells the alternate history of Woodrow Wilson and World War I, some of which has been neglected over time. Fleming recounts the contemporary criticisms of Wilson from both the right and the left. The alternating focus between opposing viewpoints make it a little difficult to track Fleming's position initially, but these forgotten sides of the debate are important history regardless of which camp one falls into. The book had at least one factual error (Treasury Secretary William McAdoo resigned in November 1918 because the war ended, not in January 1920 as a protest against his father-in-law, President Wilson), but overall, Fleming's ability to illustrate what was going on throughout the country during World War I while still focusing on Wilson makes this book much more warm and engaging than John Milton Cooper's Woodrow Wilson: A Biography. Fleming is a great storyteller, and his account brings the era to life.
June 16, 2012
Interesting and persuasive, though the argument loses some force just through its vehemence -- Fleming savages Wilson at every opportunity, to the point where it seems over the top. He's got some stylistic quirks that grate on me, but overall it's very readable.
March 18, 2009
An excellent and well-written account of the United States in WW1.
July 1, 2013
This is a revisionist (?) history of World War One and the participation of the United States of America in it. In any case, it's quite different than what I'd been taught in high school.
August 2, 2011
Great insight into Woodrow Wilson's presidency and the events surrounding the U. S. entry into World War I.
February 13, 2013
Not a bad place to start getting aquatinted with history. Sourced well, engaging and hard for me to put down. Well researched.
May 11, 2013
In depth on the USA entering the war and the historical importance that the US stepped in the world and out of their islolation policy. Also the role and person of Wilson very interesting described.
October 4, 2014
Fleming is too critical of Wilson, but this is an eye-opening book, especially for those interested in propaganda, censorship, and public opinion's involvement in the Great War, or any war really.
October 13, 2016
I gruesome account of the end of WWI. I guess any book that really tells what goes on in war is gruesome. I didn't come away with good feelings about Woodrow Wilson.
March 11, 2017
Well worth the time
November 20, 2019
Oh how we learn from well told hitory!
Displaying 1 - 30 of 31 reviews