Rating: 
Summary: My Kingdom for a Proofreader with knowledge of history!!
Review: All in all, a very good book. I enjoy D'Este's writing style. But the glaring historical errors leave one dumbfounded. In the chapter on Ike's West Point years, it is noted that he and his cadet colleagues kept up on the progress of the war in Europe in spite of the absence at West Point of radios and newspapers.Radios--in 1914?? All they had then were "spark" sets, over which Morse Code could be transmitted. As I recall, the first commercial radio broadcast was made in 1920, over KDKA in Pittsburgh. I volunteer to proofread your next book, Col. D'Este.
Rating:
Summary: My Kingdom for a Proofreader with knowledge of history!!
Review: All in all, a very good book. I enjoy D'Este's writing style. But the glaring historical errors leave one dumbfounded. In the chapter on Ike's West Point years, it is noted that he and his cadet colleagues kept up on the progress of the war in Europe in spite of the absence at West Point of radios and newspapers. Radios--in 1914?? All they had then were "spark" sets, over which Morse Code could be transmitted. As I recall, the first commercial radio broadcast was made in 1920, over KDKA in Pittsburgh. I volunteer to proofread your next book, Col. D'Este.
Rating: 
Summary: Not the best
Review: By far the superior Biography of Ike is Ambros's 'Eisenhower: Soldier and President'. Carlo's biography differs in that it covers only the war period. Weak on the Lousiana Manuevors it does detail essential aspects of Ike's career. It explains his terrible experience as staff officer to Macarthur. It also shows his dull career as an army nothing in which he trudged through years of worthlessness before being appointed the top job in Europe. Ikes story is purely American. Unnoticed for years, with a less then interesting record at West Point, he was picked by Marshall to lead the men ashore in N. Africa. This biography explains the essential Ike, the books Maps are well presented and show the tactivcal units that most books fail to show. Nevertheless the writing lacks and Este's account does not do him justice. Carlo is well known writer on WWII, his books on Patton and his books on the Italian and Sicialian camapigns are one of a kind, but this focus on Ike is not his best work.
Rating:
Summary: Not the best
Review: By far the superior Biography of Ike is Ambros's 'Eisenhower: Soldier and President'. Carlo's biography differs in that it covers only the war period. Weak on the Lousiana Manuevors it does detail essential aspects of Ike's career. It explains his terrible experience as staff officer to Macarthur. It also shows his dull career as an army nothing in which he trudged through years of worthlessness before being appointed the top job in Europe. Ikes story is purely American. Unnoticed for years, with a less then interesting record at West Point, he was picked by Marshall to lead the men ashore in N. Africa. This biography explains the essential Ike, the books Maps are well presented and show the tactivcal units that most books fail to show. Nevertheless the writing lacks and Este's account does not do him justice. Carlo is well known writer on WWII, his books on Patton and his books on the Italian and Sicialian camapigns are one of a kind, but this focus on Ike is not his best work.
Rating: 
Summary: Everything You Wanted To Know About Ike
Review: Carlo D'este has followed up his work on General Patton with a biography of General Eisenhower which cover his life through World War II. The book is 705 pages long not counting the notes, and will take some time to pioneer your way through. I found the book to be interesting, but have to admit I was glad when I finally finished it. You will learn a great deal about Eisenhower the young boy and his competitive attitude which contributed to his qualities of leadership. The responsibilities he had thrust upon him throughout his military life brought on an addictive smoking habit that would later lead to health problems. Juggling the egos of George Patton, Omar Bradley, Bernard Montgomery, and others proved to be a challenge and strain on Eisenhower as he directed the allied forces through Europe. Patience and restraint were often needed when it may have been helpful for Eisenhower to vent his frustrations. Ike's relationship with his driver, Kay Summersby, is dealt with in some detail. They were very good friends, but there is no evidence of a consummated romantic relationship. I'm not going to rehash the book in this review. Suffice it to say if you want to learn about America's man in command of World War II this book will provide you with ample information of both Eisenhower the man and the soldier.
Rating:
Summary: Everything You Wanted To Know About Ike
Review: Carlo D'este has followed up his work on General Patton with a biography of General Eisenhower which cover his life through World War II. The book is 705 pages long not counting the notes, and will take some time to pioneer your way through. I found the book to be interesting, but have to admit I was glad when I finally finished it. You will learn a great deal about Eisenhower the young boy and his competitive attitude which contributed to his qualities of leadership. The responsibilities he had thrust upon him throughout his military life brought on an addictive smoking habit that would later lead to health problems. Juggling the egos of George Patton, Omar Bradley, Bernard Montgomery, and others proved to be a challenge and strain on Eisenhower as he directed the allied forces through Europe. Patience and restraint were often needed when it may have been helpful for Eisenhower to vent his frustrations. Ike's relationship with his driver, Kay Summersby, is dealt with in some detail. They were very good friends, but there is no evidence of a consummated romantic relationship. I'm not going to rehash the book in this review. Suffice it to say if you want to learn about America's man in command of World War II this book will provide you with ample information of both Eisenhower the man and the soldier.
Rating:
Summary: Bio of Eisenhower only goes halfway
Review: Carlo D'Este is one of my favorite authors, and I don't think there's a better military historian in the United States. It was, therefor, interesting to me to see that he'd written this book, following the life of Dwight Eisenhower. His previous biography, of George Patton, was complete and frankly one of the best military biographies I've ever written, so I was expecting something similar. Unfortunately, while this is still a good book, it doesn't realize the promise at that level. This book follows Eisenhower from his beginnings in Texas and Kansas to the end of WW2. D'Este turned out to be quite good at depicting the beginnings of a person's life in the Patton bio, and he does the same credible job here. Eisenhower's early life is wonderfully brought out, and right up to the Second World War the book is quite good. Then things sort of go sideways. Eisenhower's rise during WW2 was precipitous, to say the least. He was a lieutenant colonel on the eve of the war, wondering if he would get promoted again, and three years later he was promoted to five star general. He rocketed past most of the U.S. army, from Patton and Mark Clark to his old boss, Douglas MacArthur. All of this is reasonably well recounted, but the author does something I've never seen in a book, or at least haven't seen at this level, and I will confess I was annoyed a bit. He quotes other authors. It would seem appropriate to quote from the various memoirs (Eisenhower's, Monty's, Bradley's, etc.) or perhaps an official biography, but he goes further, and at various times quotes Geoffrey Perret, Ronald Lewin, Russell Weigley, and so forth. If I want Geoffrey Perret's opinion on Eisenhower I'll read that book. Perhaps he was reacting to the Ambrose/Goodwin plagarism scandals? The book is also shaped by a few opinions that the author holds, which are very important and which, if you read the Patton biography, you don't need me to tell you. If you didn't read it, you will need to be warned of these things before you start Eisenhower: A Soldier's Life. He doesn't like Omar Bradley really at all, thinks he was at best a mediocre general, and often a really lousy one, thinks only a bit of Eisenhower himself, and thinks Patton was brilliant, if a bit flawed by his personality. Interestingly, he thinks relatively well of Monty. Patton and Monty were good tactically and strategically, but had no clue how to fight coalition warfare alongside Allies. Bradley, by Normandy, was getting fed up with both men's antics in favor of their own careers or methods of fighting the war. Bradley was horrified by Patton's slapping incident, and disgusted by Monty's seeming assumption that the British should be allowed to lead American troops to victory. Somehow Bradley comes out of this considerably behind the other two men, and is also censured for being "intolerant of failure." As if being tolerant of it is a good thing. There is one further issue: the book isn't a complete biography in that it ends in 1945. We don't see Eisenhower become president or anything of his postwar activities. Leaves you with an incomplete feeling. So I only gave this book four stars. I do like Carlo d'Este, and I did enjoy the book, but not as much as I hoped to.
Rating:
Summary: A very fair look at Ike!
Review: Carlo D'Este wrote a very readable account of Eisenhower's military career. While its not good as his work on Patton, D'Este managed to conveyed a true essence of Eisenhower and his abilties as a soldier. The author is fair and correct and while Ambrose's books may be more detail, Ambrose was definitely Eisenhower's admirer and defender. D'Este appears to admired Eisenhower but he seem to realized that Ike got some super limitation as a soldier, that is - a fighting soldier which Ike definitely is not. Eisenhower we see here proves to be the ultimate paper pusher, supreme organizer and as many thought during the war, a fantastic chairman of the board. He seem to be the World War II version of General George McClellan of the Civil War in some ways (without McClellan's super ego and risk fearing personality). What is interesting is how Eisenhower, a student of military history, failed to understand the political aspect of war which is just as important as the military aspect. I don't think Ike ever considered the post-war situation once during his period as Supreme Allied Commander and that was a major failing in his part. But a great book overall, I wished D'Este finished covering Eisenhower's military career which did not end with the surrender of Germany. (It also interesting to note that General Omar Bradley continued to get bad press by historians of our generation.)
Rating: 
Summary: Filled with errors, minor and major
Review: Carlo D'Este's book on the Normandy invasion, Decision in Normandy, is first rate, and there is no competition, so far as I know, to his thorough history, Fatal Decision, Anzio and the Battle for Rome. So I eagerly looked forward to his new biography of General Eisenhower. Extremely disappointing. One might expect a book of 822 pages by a West Pointer to be good on military analysis. But this book is not. For example, D'Este points out that planning for the invasions of Sicily and Italy was hampered by the fact that the army, navy, and air forces had headquarters 600 miles apart from each other. But was this Eisenhower's fault? He had enough staff experience that he could have hardly failed to be aware of the problem, so why did he do nothing about it? Or did he try and fail to budge his subordinants? It would be nice to know how or why Eisenhower allowed this obvious problem to go unsolved. I have never encountered a book with so many errors. D'Este was very poorly served by his editor, if in fact he had one. (He says he did. And a proof reader too.) Perhaps this book is proof that a spell-check on a word processor does not replace an editor. Some examples: --'When not working, young Eisenhower could be found sipping a sundae at Case's Department Store'.' (Page 23) Since when do you sip a 'sundae'? --'Indeed, were it not for his glowing reputation gained during the maneuvers, it is arguable that Eisenhower's name would not have appeared at all, had it not been for Mark Clark's persistence in extolling his friend.' (p.82) This is about the worst sentence I have seen since I stopped teaching. Did Eisenhower's name appear because of his glowing reputation or because of Clark's persistence? --'[T] he Japanese, whose seizure of Burma, Hong Kong, and Malaya culminated in the greatest humiliation in the history of the British army'surpassing even Dunkirk'when Singapore fell'.' (p.294) It is true that the fall of Singapore was arguably the British army's greatest humiliation, but few, if any, think that Dunkirk was a humiliation at all, much less in the same league as Singapore. Churchill had to remind the elated British people that wars are not won by evacuations. --'Nylon stockings'were unobtainable [in the U.K.]; instead young British lasses would draw a line up the back of their legs to simulate the seams.' (p.316) Actually, 'young British lasses' (What were older women doing?) had never seen a nylon stocking. They were not introduced in the U.S. until October 1939, and not commonly available here until 1940, by which time Britain was at war. Few if any would have been exported. By the end of the year they were not available in the U.S. either, all nylon going to rearmament. --'It illegality [of a cash gift from the President of the Philippines] did not prevent MacArthur from accepting a payment of $500,000 in March 1942'.However questionable these payments, they were nevertheless legal under the terms by which MacArthur went to the Philippines in 1935.' (p.735) In all my reading, I cannot recall another instance of an author contradicting himself in his very next sentence. Was the payment illegal or not? --'The American Grant tank, with its puny 37-mm gun, was helpless in battle against the German Mark IV panzer; only the eventual arrival of the new Sherman tank would even the paying field somewhat.' (.370) I saved the best for last. This really takes the cake. The Grant had BOTH a 37-mm AND a 75-mm gun. This guy was an officer in the army. He should not make this kind of mistake. I thought that perhaps he meant to say 'Stuart' tank, which did only have a 37-mm gun. But it was just a scout tank, never intended to be a main battle tank. Eventually the Sherman did replace the Grant, while the Stuart was used to the end of the war. The whole sentence does not make any sense if you replace 'Grant' with 'Stuart.' (Incidentally, the British called Stuarts 'honeys,' because they were so reliable. It is kind of weird to read in British histories: 'And then 10 honeys formed a line of battle.') Further, if D'Este were at all familiar with the history of the desert war before the coming of the Americans, he would know that the Germans were very unpleasantly surprised when they encountered the first Grants in battle. Both the Brits and the Germans considered the Grant superior to anything the British produced, which admittedly is not saying much. While the Grant left much to be desired, it was not such a bad tank.
Rating:
Summary: Eisenhower's Luck
Review: Carlo D'Este's new book on Eisenhower immediately seized my interest. I know quite a bit about the War, but I didn't really know much about Ike. I found out plenty about Eisenhower's career, too much to easily compress into a short review. Even so,
here are a few main points: 1. Eisenhower's spectacular elevation to supreme commander was fantastic luck for Ike and a terrible risk for the Allies. At the time he took command, he had never held a combat assignment.
He simply was not prepared for the job. 2. Eisenhower had to deal with a nasty, egotistical, and scheming group of ambitious subordinates. They all distrusted his abilities; Clark, Bradley, Patton, Alexander, Montgomery, etc. Nor were these prima donnas very good soldiers, except for Patton. Depressing. 3. Eisenhower and the allies botched many operations: Darlan, Sicily, Anzio, Salerno, Omaha Beach, Arnhem, Berlin, etc. 4. D'Este insists on writing about Mamie, John SD, and Kay Summersby, even though they had no effect on Eisenhower's commands. 5. Ike was often sick. He suffered from dozens of afflictions. 6. Eisenhower endured a level of conflict and pressure that few men could endure without cracking up. 7. Eisehnower wanted to become a real fighting commander. He disliked staff and bureaucracy. Ironically he build a huge bureaucratic staff and he never commanded troops in battle. 8. Ike never cared a whit for material possessions, money, women, or fame. As soldiers and politicans run, he was a Saint. 9. The World class act was Marshall, standing aside so Ike could command in Europe. But Marshall was much better prepared! I find it difficult to understand Marshall's motivations. This is a strange book. D'Este is a better military writer than a biographer. I can't see why his book is better than Ambrose. Nor is it particularly strong on operations, compared to say,
Perrett's book. In particular, the book really ought to end with a chapter summing up the many contradictions and ironies of Ike's sudden rise and his troubled command. D'Este has many harsh judgments to make, but they are left scattered.
| 
