The Blitzkrieg Myth : How Hitler and the Allies Misread the Strategic Realities of World War II

Rating:
Summary: Excellent book challenging reaving the Truth of WW2
Review: This is the first book written in english that brings the truth about the Blitzkrieg and dares to challenge the "Convenient version" of the history of WW2. The Western propaganda machine conveniently twisted the real history of early WW2 to cover own faults and create anti-Polish propaganda used during Cold War against Poland: Polish Concentation Camps, exclussion of Polish Army from being ever mentioned as part of Allied Forces despite having the 5th largest armed forces in Allied coallition (see another excellent books on this subject - 'A Question of Honor'and books by Norman Davies), the propaganda that puts Poland on the Congressional list of Countries collaborating with Nazis to be listed as #1, despite being the reason WW2 broke out including having its Goverment exiled to London for entire length of WW2, plus having its Armies fighting the longest againts Germans in European theatre of war, from September 1939 till Fall of Berlin, where Polish Army took Berlin alongside Red Army before the US and British Armies even entered Berlin. The Polish flag flew above the Brandenburg Gate days before the Old Glory and the Union Jack.
Excellent book definitely worth reading.


Rating:
Summary: Compelled to respond
Review: When I saw John Mosier's The Blitzkrieg Myth on the shelf, I couldn't help but start reading it. As the title suggests the book is revisionist history, and I am always interested in finding out what recent research and ideas have uncovered, and what traditional beliefs consequently have been brought into doubt. I expected something fresh and thought provoking, but I was sorely disappointed. Mosier's book told me only one thing I didn't already know when I was twelve years old- the extent of German air transport losses in Holland. Needless to say, that has nothing to do with proving his thesis. The same could be said for most of the book.
The main point of The Blitzkrieg Myth is to discredit Fuller's ideas on armored attacks, and Douhet's on strategic bombing. Since virtually no one believes in the efficacy of strategic bombing as conducted in WWII, the latter assertion is largely superfluous. The majority of the book is devoted to advancing the idea that armored breakthroughs were a myth created by propaganda and reinforced by the blind beliefs of military leaders.
Naturally, one would expect that Mosier would address the battles which are considered to be classic examples of armored breakthroughs and explain how and why they have been misunderstood. But he doesn't. The most troubling feature of the book is Mosier's ignorance or willful exclusion of contradictory or problematic evidence. As I read The Blitzkrieg Myth, I kept leafing backwards and rereading, wondering if I had missed something. But I hadn't. Mosier simply does not deal with events that don't fit neatly into his prescriptive theory.
A good example of his biased selectivity is the chapter in which he deals with the German invasion of France in 1940. He claims that German victory had nothing to do with the employment of armor, or a superior understanding of its use. This is, of course, a bold revisionist claim. A serious student would wonder at how the German Panzer thrust through the Ardennes would have proceeded were it not the use of tanks. Rommel's extremely deep and quick drive through Belgium and into France which everyone has previously called an armored breakthrough deserves some sort of explanation. (Rommel penetrated almost 50 miles in one day, which would have been completely impossible with merely infantry). It should be noted, however, that Mosier has a personal prejudice against Rommel which he reveals several times throughout the book, and since personal prejudice seems to be the only guiding influence in this book, Rommel's achievements are hardly likely to be mentioned. Instead of a clear explanation of how previous views are misguided, Mosier rattles off irrelevant anecdotes about how the Germans took heavy losses against the French in several battles, how the British didn't really fight (despite the fact that the Germans considered the British counterattack at Arras the biggest threat to their flank during the entire campaign), etc. What these random snippets are meant to prove is a complete mystery. There is no train of argument, only a mangled conglomeration of random facts that don't suggest anything other than the author's inability to address his argument's detractions head on.
After reading many hours in frustration, trying to figure out where I had missed his argument, I realized he didn't really have one. Mosier is simply a contrarian. He prefers disagreement over understanding, and excludes evidence and ideas which he disagrees with. Glancing over his footnotes and reading his other comments about those who disagree with him shows Mosier to be hubristic and petty, and completely outside the realm of serious scholarship. Mosier openly admits he is not an historian. This book proves it.


Rating:
Summary: A tragedy the likes only an English professor could conjure
Review: Words simply cant describe my utter contempt for the lack of authoritative research the author displays in this pedantic effort. I will not repeat the previous maligns of this novel only to say that any student of WWII armored warfare will cringe at the numerous inaccuracies, pufferies, and fallacies throughout this tragedy of errors. The "author" even opines that the Panther tank first saw service in 1944? This glaring mistake typifies the entire work. The Blitzkrieg Myth is a dumbed down effort targeted for those readers who know even less than the author. Please Mr. Mosier, I want my money back!!!

Rating:
Summary: A tragedy the likes only an English professor could conjure
Review: Words simply cant describe my utter contempt for the lack of authoritative research the author displays in this pedantic effort. I will not repeat the previous maligns of this novel only to say that any student of WWII armored warfare will cringe at the numerous inaccuracies, pufferies, and fallacies throughout this tragedy of errors. The "author" even opines that the Panther tank first saw service in 1944? This glaring mistake typifies the entire work. The Blitzkrieg Myth is a dumbed down effort targeted for those readers who know even less than the author. Please Mr. Mosier, I want my money back!!!