|
| 
 enlarge | Author: Max Hastings
Publisher: Vintage
Category: Book
List Price: $16.95
Buy Used: $4.75
You Save: $12.20 (72%)
New (31) Used (19) from $4.75
Avg. Customer Rating:  13 reviews
Sales Rank: 105434
Media: Paperback
Number Of Items: 1
Pages: 400
Shipping Weight (lbs): 0.8
Dimensions (in): 7.8 x 5.2 x 0.9
ISBN: 030727571X
Dewey Decimal Number: 940.5421421
EAN: 9780307275714
ASIN: 030727571X
Publication Date: January 3, 2006
Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days
|
| Customer Reviews:
 HASTINGS & OVERLORD July 15, 2005
8 out of 12 found this review helpful
Montgomery's efforts to break out of Caen are legion and the
only clear fact is that Kurt Meyer & the 12SS fought a brilliant
defensive battle in which Montgomery repeatedly made crucial
mistakes. However, in all fairness, I don't think Bradley
would have done any better, and although Montgomery repeatedly
put massed armour up against "Hull Down Panthers & 88 Flak Guns"
it was the brilliant defense of Hauser, Bittrich, Witt, & Meyer
who fought the "Fight of their Lives" and stubbornly refused to
concede anything.
It could be argued that Montgomery's "Learning Curve" greatly
aided Bradley in planning Operation Cobra and the Capet Bombing
of the Panzer Lehr to aid Collins & Patton in the opening
breakout.
What is clearly erroneous is the assertion that Rommel was any
fan of Hitler or that Montgomery defeated him on a tactical
level in North Africa. It was a war of Supply which defeated
Rommel more than anything else. In Normandy, Rommel concentrated
his armour on Montgomery's front because it was Tank country and
the bocage facing Bradly could be defended by Infantry. With limited resources and the 1st SS in reserve, he had no choice.
In the final analysis, The German defense and tactical genuis
of Hauser, Bittrich, Witt, and Meyer must be given great credit
because they truly made the Allies pay for the gains they achieved. One must also remember that the Allies had an over-
whelming advantage in Firepower (ie artillery), Supplies, Air
Power, and personel replacements.
 Problems..... April 19, 2005
19 out of 33 found this review helpful
While I read his Armageddon with interest, I found that much of his perspective is skewed. The same applies even more to Overlord.
In the latter book, he makes the astonishing claim, among others, that Field Marshal Rommel was, by implication, a Nazi - because of his personal loyalty to Hitler. This is absurd. This is like saying that if Sir Max Hastings is proud to be British, he is both an Imperialist and a condoner of the brutalities that often accompanied the British Raj, which any thinking person would rightly dismiss as being absurd.
Sir Max Hastings should realise that there are two primary reasons why Rommel enjoys a 'good' reputation - First - he was a brilliant commander and his legendary exploits in the Desert Campaigns of North Africa - despite certain problems associated with his command style - remain, by far, the best example of how to conduct a campaign based on 'shock and awe' - something that Montgomery could never emulate. Let us not forget that Montgomery's eventual victory at El Alamein was due to 'material superiority' rather than through strategic and tactical dexterity. The second reason is due to Rommel's basic sense of decency - witness his handling of Allied POWs - black, white, brown and Jewish - in North Africa - this is more than what can be said of the British handling of their 'coloured' colonial troops.
It is recently that I realised that Sir Max Hastings was a professional journalist - his lack of academic rigour - at least in the context of "Overlord" and "Armageddon" - thus becomes easier to explain. As a journalist he gives in to sensationalizing and this detracts from the integrity of his texts - though he does have a fluid style of presentation which works well to seduce the 'trusting' reader. But, if Sir Max Hastings is to write a piece of solid work, then his shoddy research, glossing over details and sensationalizing events and personalities will not work.
A superb, unvarnished military history April 10, 2005
9 out of 10 found this review helpful
Hastings strips away the mythology of the "triumphant" march across Western Europe from D-Day to the Falaise Gap. We see instead often confused, all too timid generalship, poor training and worse execution that may have lengthened the European war by months.
Hastings is the very best of the current crop of WWII historians.
Jerry
 Find out what happened after the Longest Day August 12, 2002
50 out of 50 found this review helpful
This book fills in a nice gap of WWII history in that it covers the initial battles that followed immediately after D-Day. Max Hastings does an excellent job of trying to figure out why certain parts of the Allied plan went so well, while others seemed to take forever. Additionally, he interviewed numerous Germans involved with the Normandy command in order to give perspective on what the German Army was experiencing and how this affected the outcome of certain battles.I really enjoyed the new material and research that Hastings reveals as he tells the tale following D-Day. His treatment of the US Army is pretty balanced (some units fought well, while other "green units" had a tough time fighting the Germans), and I think he draws some interesting conclusions. His point that American Paratroopers and Ranger units were essential to the success of many battles highlights the success (and misuse at times) of these units. Hastings goes into great detail about why the British/Canadian army struggled so much to take Caen. He has some critical words about Montgomery performance (he promised much, but deliverd little), but concludes overall that the British had a much more difficult fight against a stronger part of the German defense. I really enjoyed this section of the book because I have not read much about this part of the battle. Hastings does talk at length about the mistake of letting the German Army escape at Falaise, although he concludes that the US Army would not have been able to close the gap with the units available. I do not totally agree with this conclusion, but it makes for interesting discussion. I recommend this book for anyone interested in the ETO, especially Operation Overlord. If you are looking for a book specifically about D-Day, this is not the best one, in that it covers all of Operation Overlord, not just the invasion.
Balanced and objective masterpiece June 29, 2002
27 out of 34 found this review helpful
Max Hastings has with this book produced yet another masterpiece. Having read Carlo D'Este's brilliant "Decision in Normandy," I had doubts that anyone could do it better - but Hastings certainly has.
For several years, authors writing about the campaign have had a tendency to repeat comfortable half-truths and myths, and have conveniently forgotten all the problems that dogged the Allied advance. Much space has been devoted to the terrible bocage and to Montgomery's mistakes, but little to the fact that many of the Allied troops - American as well as British - fought poorly and were in the end regarded as unreliable by their own commanders.
Personally, I found it refreshing that the problems the Americans had were finally analized thoroughly. Irritatingly, the British have been blamed for just about everything that went wrong in the campaign, while the American failures(which were just as numerous as the British) have been "forgotten." That is what makes this book so refreshing! Hastings describes the lacklustre performance of numerous American units in great detail, and points out that the airborne divisions had to be kept longer in battle than what was originally intended because other American units fought poorly. At the same time, he describes the similar British problems with brutal honesty.In the end, one gets a far better understanding of this battle. It becomes clear that the British attacks on Caen was the key to the battle, and that the reason that it took them so long to take it was that the Germans concentrated the bulk of their armour to stop them - leaving the unexperienced Americans a better chance to succeed. It also becomes clear that the Germans fought exceptionally well, and that their superiority over the Allied soldiers time after time frustrated the great plans of the Allied commanders. And above all, it becomes clear that Montgomery - that master of warfare - had to fight with his hands tied because of the lack of British replacements. In all, a brilliant book from a brilliant author, and one which I will recommend to anyone interested in learning about this legendary campaign.
|
|
|
Powered by Associate-O-Matic
| |
