D-Day: The Battle for Normandy

Other than the occasional mention of Ultra intercepts, there is nothing new in this book that hasn’t been covered in the past 50 years. If you read Cornelius Ryan's "The Longest Day" and watch "Is Paris Burning" you'll get as much information and knowledge as you will from this book.I sensed an unstated bias against the United States throughout the book. Any American mistake was a disaster; any British mistake was understandable or had a silver lining. If there were 390 "friendly fire" causalities by US Air Force bombing, it deserved significant coverage and opprobrium; when 390 Commonwealth soldiers were killed by British bombing, well, these things happen. The bloodbath and failure that was Caen was the key ingredient of the the successful US breakout from the Normandy bocage.The US 3rd Army advanced hundreds of miles after the breakout, but it was all thanks to the Brits accomplishing nothing in front of Caen beyond wasting hundreds of those American Sherman’s they were driving.The British pulverized the city of Caen, but it was the destruction of the much smaller town of Mortain while the Americans were under attack by the Germans that raises his bile. How can any real historian claim that Montgomery’s bias against the Falaise encirclement and failure to aggressively close the salient were correct in retrospect?Sixty Hitler Youth held off two Canadian divisions at Falaise for three days, but it was the Americans who lacked drive.Beevor also doesn't seem to do simple math. He waxes poetic about British Typhoons destroying 9 tanks with 294 sorties, and mentions that those 294 sorties were by 18 squadrons (each of which had a strength of 16 planes), but fails to do the calculation that this is just about one sortie per plane, not the six hours of non-stop/fast-turnaround shuttle bombing that Beevor portrays.And he makes simple mistakes. He refers repeatedly to the 2nd Free French Armored Division's "Staghound" armored cars. In fact, the French never operated the Staghound, and the 2nd FF AD had M8 Greyhounds throughout the campaign.

This review is specific to "D-Day: The Decision to Launch: A Selection from D-Day: The Battle for Normandy (Penguin Tracks)" . This title is only a very short excerpt of the main book. It's 33 pages long (the full book is over 600 pages). This is deceptive as when you search for this title this is the "sponsored listing" that comes up. When you click to the Kindle edition it shows a really low price but it actually takes you to a 33 page excerpt of the book for the low price.

[Expletive deleted], Beevor is a good writer. How I envy him. His recounting of Stalingrad got into the dirty details, both at the top and lower echelons. I admire him not just for the research that went into this book, and not just for his ability to write in such a way that the readers attention is in the thrall of that prose, but because of Beevor's even handedness. He treats the Allies, the Germans, and the French will equal candor.The ability to "take the role of the other," as a sociologist described it, may seem like a small thing. Anybody can do it. Yet even military historians have shown a lack of that ability.The late Stephen Ambrose did a book on D-Day too, noting that the French civilians of Normandy and Brittany were more sullen that the civilians of the South. He offered no explanation and left us with the assumption that there are regional differences in national character.But the fact is that the French civilians of northern France had plenty of reasons to be resentful, as well as many reasons to be grateful. Except for the French resistance (made up of fractious elements, much like the Syrian insurgents today), the French had lived in reasonable comfort among the Germans, whose orders regarding public behavior were strictly enforced. And, after all, we had just bombed the hell out of Normandy. The critical city of Caen had been literally flattened by bombs and artillery to no particular tactical advantage. Crops were devastated and the fields dotted with the rotting carcases of cows.And by the time the Allies reached Paris -- well, let me quote Beevor."The Petit Palais had been taken over, with a large sign announcing the distribution of free condoms to U.S. troops. In Pigalle, rapidly dubbed 'Pig Alley' by GIs, prostitutes were coping with over 10,000 men a day. The French were also deeply shocked to see U.S. Army soldiers lying drunk on the pavements of the Place Vendôme. The contrast with off-duty German troops, who had been forbidden to even smoke in the street, could hardly have been greater."Separate chapters are given over to the attempt to assassinate Hitler and to the liberation of Paris. That second one, the liberation, would have been hilarious if it hadn't been so serious and at times lethal. You have the U.S. Army arguing with the organized and uniformed French troops for the honor of being the first to enter Paris. Then you had the French generals, LeClerc and DeGaulle, arguing with each other. Then you had the civilian French resistance arguing with the uniformed French army. Then you had the leaders of the factions within the resistance -- the nationalists, the communists, the marginal groups -- arguing with each other. Although in retrospect it may seem unlikely, DeGaulle was the most steady and reasonable figure. That will give you some idea of how complicated this strictly symbolic issue was.I won't go on about it. Most other reviewers have hit the high spots of the book and of Beevor's writing skills. Beevor knows what he's talking about and he tells the story well.

Another great book on World War II by Antony Beevor. He covers the build-up, planning, and the details of the attacks on each of the five landing beaches (Omaha, Utah, Gold, Juno, and Sword) during Operation Overlord in amazing detail, including the events which followed as the the Allied troops bitterly fought their way inland. His writing style puts you there as a bystander witnessing the events as they unfold. You can see the smoking and flaming towns and villages, hear the tanks, artillery and weapons fire, touch the dead bodies, smell the gunpowder and white phosphorus, experience the terror, as it all happens, and ponder the grisly ugliness of combat. No human sensibility goes untouched; so real, so vivid.The book covers the battles from the landing on the beaches of Normandy to the liberation of Paris. Sources and research are beyond reproach. I highly recommend this book; it is chock full of information, captivating reading, and well written.Rich

...at least that's what you would believe if this was your only reference to this pivotal event in world history - although Hemingway did lend a hand. Montgomery must have really upset Antony Beevor, because he takes every opportunity to paint him in such an unfavourable light that it's hard to believe he made it to the end of the war above the rank of private.I finished the thinking I new need to find a more objective history - the only saving grace was that I only paid 99p!One last irritation, during the occupation he refers constantly to Milo mindbenders, a reference to catch 22 apparently, Antony,just say black marketeers.

The book starts well but then falls down when comparing American leadership with the British. I'm sure it's true but when he discusses American failures he glosses over them and yet when dealing with British failures there is a general criticism that at times seems totally out of step with the rest of the book. This criticism rises through the book with the use of hearsay in support of the American role and no attempt to discuss the British one. The majority of sources he has used are American which may explain why he has written it in this jaundiced and prejudicial style.

Interesting subject, but very poorly executed. The author makes you believe that it was only the Americans who won the war with minimum help from the rest of the allied troops, the author was also quick to point out the failures of the British Army whilst constantly praising the Americans. All of the allied powers made mistakes not just the British forces. With the author being British you’d of thought he’d write more about his own country’s part in the war not just the American

If you are looking for a book about the D-Day landings and what followed, you've found it.There may well be factual inaccuracies for all I know and, yes, it does come down hard in its criticism of Montgomery in particular. However, as a general reference from start to end, this book will delight, thrill and horrify you in equal measure (and those probably aren't the best choice of words).I found myself having to put the book down at certain points. That isn't because I wanted to, far from it. It is purely because of how well it communicates the horror of war on both sides. It is also a book that'll make you gasp at the sheer luck, poor decision-making and sheer guts of all concerned - but more than anything it'll make you realise that not everyone was a hero and war has a habit of glorifying all those involved. The manner in which it conveys the fear of the vast majority of troops versus the fanaticism of the Nazi forces is outstanding.If there was one area in which I felt the book lost pace for a while, it was in the way it dealt with the attempts to assassinate Hitler (taking place during the landings and after). That doesn't take away from the fact this is a remarkable collection of historical fact, anecdotal (and heart-warming at times) accounts in addition to being a lesson for everyone in society.If there was a book to be added to the national curriculum at schools, this is probably it. I think that's the biggest compliment I can pay it (and the fact that, having finished it, I have purchased another 5 Beevor books).

Beevor's account of the D-Day landings is typically thorough, and those who enjoyed his accounts of the battle of Stalingrad and the fall of Berlin are unlikley to be disappointed. But, I would have to agree with some other reviewers here that perhaps the sheer scale of the campaign in Normandy has stretched Beevor's talents too far on this occasion.Beevor is good on drawing out the inevitable behind-the-scenes rivalries between the military leaders and statesmen involved in the planning and execution of D-Day. Montgomery comes out of it particularly badly, and Beevor does seem to favour the might and organisation of the US forces over the apparently ill-prepared and poorly disciplined British involvement. This is never completely backed up with overwhelming evidence, so it does make for a slighly biased read that gets the hackles rising.As ever, Beevor is good on the detail of combat, but the names of the various divisions blur after a while, and what the book really lacks is more strategic and historical analysis of why D-Day was so important, and where it fit into the wider picture of shaping the end of the war in 1945. This is tackled a bit half-heartedly in a very short Aftermath chapter, as if Beevor himself has grown bored of his efforts to pull together too much material. Beevor seems to be more of a details man, but military history can occasionally benefit from less minutae and more probing and succinct analysis to make it really valuable.Reading the Kindle version, one is struck by just how unsatisfactory the e-reader is for this sort of material. Photos, footnotes, maps and references are clumsily presented, and although the chapters themselves are readable enough, the whole thing is probably better read and enjoyed on paper.