Leading historians tell us how, with the benefit of hindsight, they would have stopped Hitler without going to war whilst conveniently ignoring major issues which prevented Hitler being stopped without going to war.
The historians, of course, all present thier own mildly agreeing but differing views whilst pouring scorn on historical figures without presenting the full facts.
It's not all bad but it certainly isn't good, or rounded but a narrow look at why the historians think appeasement didn't work...but again with the full benefit of hindsight.
It ends perhaps with the most telling point, that if Hilter wasn't appeased that he would have turned Eastwards to Russia...a nation that nearly fell but for the many military assets occupied in the West, the same nations would likely then be drawn into the war but a different one where Russia may have already been defeated.
This kind of whatifism just doesn't work.
