W. Keith Hancock and Margaret M. Gowing

Summary

W. Keith Hancock and Margaret M. Gowing British War Economy — Chapter III.

At the end of March, M. Reynaud pictured to the Supreme War Council a general feeling among neutrals ‘that the war had reached a deadlock, that Germany had only to wait, and that then, like the better of a pair of chess players, she would be able to take her enemy’s pieces one after another’. A war, after all, could not be won merely by trying not to lose it. Such an outlook, the Chiefs of Staff declared, was very unlikely to inspire neutrals who, whatever might be their sympathy with the Allies, had no wish to share the fate of Poland.
Source: Wikisource

W. Keith Hancock and Margaret M. Gowing British War Economy — Chapter III.

The theorists of government were in consequence inclined to lament what they considered a departure from true principles. They forgot that the making of a government is a delicate operation in which personalities count as much as the design of a machine. They over-estimated the contrasts, they under-estimated the identities and similarities between the War Cabinets of the two twentieth-century wars. By peace-time standards, the War Cabinet set up in September 1939 was, like its predecessor, very small, and its proportion of non-departmental ministers was large.
Source: Wikisource

W. Keith Hancock and Margaret M. Gowing British War Economy — Chapter III.

The switch over of the machinery of government from peace to war is no less difficult a task than the switch over of factory equipment, or the transformation of civilians into soldiers. If the task is mishandled, civilians will go short of food and armies of weapons, campaigns will be lost, the will to win them will waver.
As has been seen in an earlier chapter, the Committee of Imperial Defence had given much thought to the problems of government organisation in time of war.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature