Russo German War, 1941-45

Rating:
Summary: Good overview of Eastern Front
Review: All in all this was a good book. It is a good comprehensive look at the war in Russia. I have no feelings as to the book being biased, I read it for pleasure only and did not do an analysis of the authors perspective. The only negatives I found with the book were that there were far too few maps and far too much attention paid to who was commanding which formation.

Rating:
Summary: Good overview of Eastern Front
Review: All in all this was a good book. It is a good comprehensive look at the war in Russia. I have no feelings as to the book being biased, I read it for pleasure only and did not do an analysis of the authors perspective. The only negatives I found with the book were that there were far too few maps and far too much attention paid to who was commanding which formation.

Rating:
Summary: dry
Review: i am a big "eastern front" reader,and this book doesn't compare to Alexander werth's magnificent "russia at war",and it doesn't compare to Alan clark's outstanding "barbarossa" Seaton's book is too dry,too pro-nazi,and just doesn't convey to the reader the vast scope of this awesome event,the war between russia/germany,which was the greatest conflict in human history. Werth's book give's you a human look at the tragedy, and the scope of this world historcal event. Clarks' book is sweeping,and vibrant in it's reporting i loved the quotes from the german infrantrymen,and the descriptions of the ugly landscape,and the savage weather,all in all,Seaton's book is too dry,too antiseptic.

Rating:
Summary: A must read for anyone interested in the Eastern Front
Review: I found albert Seaton's book, The Russo-German War 1941-45 to be well researched and well written. Anyone interested in the largely unknown war between Germany and Russia, the strategies, the victories and the defeats should read this book. I found that I could not put it down.

Rating:
Summary: disgusting and boring
Review: Perhaps the most bizarre, dishonest, inaccurate, biased, opinionated and offensive piece of world war ii pseudo-history to be ever published in English language.

Albert Seaton, a notable Nazi apologist, goes to extraordinary lengths to describe "atrocities" committed by the Russian army after it expelled Nazis from the Soviet territory and entered Nazi Germany proper whilst epic crimes of Nazis, German barbarity and senseless vandalism - from deliberate destruction of cultural and architectural heritage throughout Europe to indiscriminate looting, mass murder of civilians, pillage and rape unseen since the times of Genghis Khan, and ultimately extermination of millions of people solely because of their ethnicity or religion in giant extermination camps set up on industrial scale in all occupied European countries, including Russia - goes conveniently unnoticed and unmentioned.

The author describes Russian soldiers in most disparaging terms, which often border on plain Nazi-style racism while glorifying fighting qualities and valor of the Nazi warrior. Typically of post-war Nazi apologists, hardened in the bloodless combat of the Cold War, Hr. Albert Seaton tries hard to retroactively replay and rewrite battles long lost by his favorites on the actual battlefields of the WWII (however even the title of this obscene piece of Nazi apologia implies, this "was" the Russo-German conflict, not even Soviet-German conflict, and is therefore outside the scope of World War II).

Nazi victories are uniformly attributed to the brilliancy of German command and gallantry of the Hitlerite soldiers whilst any of our ally's' advances (albeit combination of the adjective "allied" and the noun Russian is not to be encountered on the pages of this piece of psedo-historical propaganda. One easily gets the impression that the US, Great Britain and France either were allied to or at least should have been allied to Nazi Germany) are "explained" - or should "justified" be the word - by chance, luck, rain, snow, mud, atmospheric temperature (as if Russians had to fight in a different climate) and other esoteric phenomena.

The worst part about this oeuvre is not the outrageous prejudice and the author's obvious affection for the German Nazis, but the book's patently low readability, the book is so poorly written and is so boring, that it can be only classified as waste of time and money.

Rating:
Summary: Waste of time
Review: There is still no really good balanced single-volume or two-volume work on the Eastern Front, and most are riddled with errors (i.e. check their accounts of the Battle of Prokhorovka). Ziemke's books are certianly the most accurate overall, and would recommend them as a starting point. After that Erickson (although Werth is good for perspective). After that Seaton, even with its errors and "German perspective" is probably the best of the rest.

Rating:
Summary: Classic Book of Eastern Front
Review: This book is the one of the best book ever written by western historians. I strongly suggest to read this book for readers who interested in russo-german war.

Rating:
Summary: First class account of the Battle of the Century
Review: This book is the product of the Cold War. It says nothing of the at least 17 million Soviet civilians murdered or starved to death by the Germans. It is not accurate either. It is offensive and some would think Seaton is a Nazi apologist. When he describes Russian atrocities, he fails to say that there was no official policy of the killing of the Germans. Many Soviet commanders often had their soldiers court martialed or executed when the commanders visited the front. The Soviets rightfully felt hatred for these Nazis who started this war in the first place. During the Cold War, this book must be highly acclaimed by us. I also guess if this book is on sale in Germany (which it probably is) it is highly popular.

Rating:
Summary: A good qualitative study
Review: This book will provide you with an eye-opening panorama of the eastern front. If for no other reason, read this book to gain even a tiny bit of appreciation for the scale and magnitude of the war on this front. In contrast to others, I did not find this work to be pro-Nazi. In fact, Seaton rightfully places the Wehrmacht in it's role as a professional army, and juxtaposes Hilter against this professionalism. He clearly portrays the decline of the professional cadre in the German army while the Soviet miltary improves in tactics and technology throughout the war. This is not a pro-Nazi sentiment on the part of the author; there is no doubt that for all the documented atrocities by both sides, the German army in 1940 was the pre-eminent military in the world in all aspects, while the sheer size of the Soviet Union (in terms of geography and population) ultimately won the war in the East. This is the backdrop against which Seaton paints the picture of the eastern front, not the resulting Cold War.

Rating:
Summary: First class account of the Battle of the Century
Review: This is a superb account of the bitter struggle in the East. I am impressed the way the author brings us detailed information about the workings of the Higher German and Soviet Commands and also details experiences of Some individual units. Viewed mainly from the German side the author does not ignore the massive Soviet War machine and its economic War industries and this has to appreciated. Perhaps some more attention to Nazi attrocities might have been helpful but the Book is a essentially a Military account. Also the Eastern front is examined in detail with emphasis on the main battles in Belorussia, the Ukraine and Baltic states and in Eastern Europe while discussing the conflict in lesser sectors such as Karelia and the Crimea. This book makes one see just how massive a battle the Eastern front was and the attention to details on weapons, equipment, supply and logistics, War economies, administration, Geography and Climate is magnificent. I was impressed at the Strategic and tactical description of both German and Soviet armies and corps, and their deployment and use in battle. What also impressed me was the way the book looked at the conflict within the whole political/military WW2 global view and just how far the Wermacht became over-extended during the War especially in 1943/44. While one is left in awe at the magnitude of the Soviet Armed forces by 1945, and their increasing sofistication and use of modern equipment the Author gives us a sound insight as to Hitler's abuse of his army and his contempt for the General staff and the increasing out-datedness of much of the Wermacht. So much that one cant help feeling the German army was fighting on 3 fronts. East, West and from within its own government. Definately one of my favourite accounts of the Eastern Front in WW2.