A first rate poplular history, very well told and judicious in its judgments. Some readers might disagree with the 'FDR could have done more' thesis, and readers seeking a more academic treatment might prefer the work of Justus D. Doenecke. But for most readers Those Angry Days is a model narrative history.

NOTE ON AUDIOBOOK: The audio version is narrated by Robert Fass, who offers an outstanding rendition of this excellent book. ( )

In all the rancor of the pre-war politics, I felt like Olson was trying to give the reader a fair telling of the positives and negatives of the pro-war and anti-war factions. Roosevelt was shown as a flawed human, preoccupied with not getting ahead of popular opinion, at times suspicious or vindictive. But a charismatic leader who idealized national unity. Lindbergh was shown as driven toward his own ideals, against the national mood and tempering advice. He could not take seriously other opinions divergent from his own, from the nation or from his family. At the end his daughter recognized that he lacked that ability to really listen.

Some things I learned:
* After the court-packing fiasco, Roosevelt was not confident he could lead popular opinion anymore, and he hesitated to push for war, even though he believed in saving Britain. The US could have entered the war far earlier if he had taken the risk and publicly pushed for it.
* Hitler did not want the US in the war until he had a chance to finish off Europe. He had to balance how to advance militarily without alarming America so much that they would engage.
* Many Americans did not like Britain at all, seeing it as an imperialistic belligerent. They equivocated between siding with Britain or Nazi Germany.
* Nazi state persecution against Jews was very well known and not seriously concerning throughout America.
* Republicans were generally anti-war isolationists, but when America finally entered the war they ironically gained congressional seats from the pro-war enthusiasm, because they were seen as the nationalistic party.
* Even after Pearl Harbor, Roosevelt still did not want to engage Germany and only declared war on Japan, to the dismay of Britain. Germany hastily declared war on America, giving Roosevelt the justification to finally jump into Europe directly.
* America's support of Britain led to a number of American casualties and damages inflicted by German forces, the first deaths of the war before we had even officially begun. Even still, Roosevelt avoided using this as a pretense to declare war.
* Politics is always politics. Both sides make a public case while concealing their true intentions. Pro-war incremental actions were presented as regrettably necessary for American self protection, and swearing to never actually engage in the war. Of course they wanted to ease into the war. Anti-war actions were presented as saving American blood and treasure from a distant foreign concern. But they played it up to exaggerated levels (wailing mothers, predictions of financial ruin), and occasionally let pro-German and antisemitic sentiments slip.
* It was learning about the holocaust that made antisemitism unacceptable in America. ( )

I have only begun reading this, but I find it is a well-researched and rather coolly objective account of the struggle between isolationists and internationalists in the last years before the US entered World War II, focusing on the ;personal duel between Charles Lindbergh and Franklin Roosevelt., with considerable discussion of British and American propagandists for intervention and their isolationist opponents. It tends to be very sympathetic to Lindbergh's wife Anne, though not so much to Lindbergh himself; It also follows Anne's brother-in-law Aubrey Morgan, one of the leading British propagandists in America. Although it accept that FDR's side was basically "right" it is very aware of his nature as a calculating politician and does not present him along the heroic lines of some of his admirers. ( )

This covers from 39-41, and the contentious issue of whether and how much the US should support Britain against Germany. FDR and interventionist groups are on one side, while Charles Lindbergh and isolationists are on the other. A sad picture of Lindbergh emerges, as he had been pursued by reporters for years, and proves to make many unwise decisions. Also, the aftermath of his life is quite surprising, as he fathers many children in Europe.

Also, Anne's life is comparably sad, as she lives in his shadow. The book fills an interesting gap in America's wrestling with its unpreparedness for war, and its desire to avoid it entirely. The book is a good read, but not compelling for me. ( )

Excellent study of the two-year period leading up to Pearl Harbor on Dec 7, 1941. The author follows the progress of American public opinion about the growing conflicts in Europe due to the Nazi expansion and conquest of nations. The main antagonists are FDR and Charles Lindbergh, but the story is much wider than those two men. The author excellently details how American isolationist beliefs were an important part of our history as a nation, and how difficult it was to bring out a clear picture of the full threat of Naziism to the world and to America. I really enjoyed reading this book. Olson has also written other histories of the period which I am going to read as well. ( )