Customer Reviews

Eisenhower: A Soldier's Life

5 star:		(17)
4 star:		(18)
3 star:		(9)
2 star:		(3)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

Through the lens of history, Dwight David Eisenhower, General of the Army, Supreme Allied Commander, President, is often seen as the affable embodiment of all that it is to be American. Of course, the truth is actually much more interesting. In Carlo D'Este's superb biography we are introduced to an Eisenhower who is full of contradictions and failings, but one who ultimately takes on a greater, and certainly more real, stature as a result of them.

As with his likewise excellent biography of Patton, D'Este sets the stage for Eisenhower's life by exploring the origins and beliefs of his forebears. As a result, the reader is introduced to perhaps the greatest irony of Eisenhower's life: his parents were staunch pacifists, and while proud of their son's accomplishments, were never particularly comfortable with his chosen career path. It is also worth noting that Eisenhower's life was utterly different from George Patton's, whose career became intertwined with his own. Unlike Patton's privileged upbringing, Eisenhower was dirt poor for pretty much his entire life, and yet the two men were close friends for decades before the pressures of war drove them irretrievably apart.

What is perhaps most interesting about Eisenhower, is that America's most well known soldier never actually directly commanded men in combat. His proficiency as a trainer kept him out of the trenches of WWI, and his skill as a staff officer meant that thereafter, he was always the brain behind the throne for a string of officers including such luminaries as MacArthur and Marshall. Yet, it was this perceived deficit in his resume that actually proved to be his greatest strength.

Above all, Eisenhower was a master administrator; he could take a long view of the situation, and insomuch as he was able, build a consensus out of the egos of his generals. It is perhaps the greatest strength of D'Este's research that he can paint a portrait of Eisenhower beset on all sides by prima donnas like Montgomery, Bradley and Patton, who is still able to maintain control over the long term progress of the war. D'Este is particularly scathing of Bradley, who is clearly the most overrated general of World War II, but even with Montgomery and Patton, who were undoubtedly Eisenhower's superiors in matters of operational art, he correctly recognizes that they lacked the fundamental character traits that made Eisenhower so successful as Supreme Commander. Traits like patience, affability, and the ability to place the good of the Allies above his own feelings meant that he could guide a supremely fractious coalition to victory.

That's not to say that D'Este is an unabashed admirer of Eisenhower. He correctly recognizes that, particularly early in the war, Eisenhower was far too tentative in his command. Moreover, he had a tendency to place personal loyalty above competency, and tolerated far too many laggards on his staff for political reasons. Moreover, as an infantryman, Eisenhower never completely grasped the need for maneuver and speed in his operations, a failing that lay at the root of his problems with Patton. That said, Eisenhower is often unduly criticized for not capturing Berlin. Military considerations and possibilities aside, any captured territory behind that designated in the Yalta agreements would have been turned over to the Soviets at the conclusion of hostilities anyway.

Finally, a few complaints about what is overall an excellent work. First, D'Este all too frequently digresses into long descriptions of the operational situation and then fails to link it back to Eisenhower. It is perhaps inevitable in that Eisenhower was in a position where he was frequently just an overseer. Still, I would argue that there are plenty of fine operational histories of WWII, and that the narrative could have been greatly improved by more effectively tying Eisenhower to the action on the ground. Secondly, while I applaud the use of primary sources, D'Este's use of the them is oddly stilted. For example, he will insert the text of a letter from Mamie Eisenhower to Ike, but then fail to link it to the overall flow of the narrative. Such non sequitors can be very disruptive, and more than once I had to flip back a page to pick up the point D'Este was trying to convey. Lastly, I was rather disappointed that D'Este didn't include Eisenhower's illustrious post-war career. While 1945 is certainly a logical stopping point, and D'Este can hardly be blamed for not tackling the monumental task of researching the post-war years, I finished this work feeling that I didn't have a complete picture of either Eisenhower the soldier, or the man.

Those complaints aside, I would like to reiterate that this is a superb biography. As was the case with "Patton: A Genius" for war, D'Este reveals his admiration when appropriate but is never unbalanced as a result. He gives a fair evaluation of Eisenhower's triumphs, and likewise considers his tragedies, and his miscues. Throughout, he offers a fascinating, thoroughly real portrait of a remarkable man. Perhaps the best compliment I can pay to this book is to state that it is my sincere hope that D'Este will follow it up with a second volume covering 1945 to the end of Eisenhower's life.

Jake Mohlman

In his second foray into biographies, D'este does a brillant job of bringing Eisenhower the man to the fore front. D'Este gives a great deal of insight into the nature of Eisenhower's peronality by delving into the relationships he had with his brothers and the some-what unique relationship he had with Mamie his wife. D'Este, in addition, shows a much differnt side of chain-smoking Eisenhower, than the public usually sees, who has quite a temper and a vocabulary to make a sailor blush.

One of the best sections of the book deals with Eisenhower's leadership during the North African campaign. D'Este characterizes this period of where Ike's leadership was lacking for incompetant.

The author does a great job dealing with Operation Overlord (for the definitive account of the Normandy campaign read the author's Decision in Normandy) and the time period leading up to the German surrender.

This is a fine biography and one that should be in every WW II student's library. What makes this biography great is D'Este demonstrates all sides of Eisenhower - both good and bad; and his analysis is first rate.

Having already read D'Este's Patton: A Genius for War, I was eager to read this biography of Eisenhower and found it to be of comparable quality in terms of scope, depth, and eloquence of analysis. Moreover, D'Este offers a portrait of Eisenhower somewhat different from those I had previously found in other studies of one of our nation's greatest generals. For example, until reading this book I was unaware of the nature and extent of Eisenhower's stress-induced illnesses and am now curious about their impact on his judgment. (Do they help to explain his commitment to the Market Garden initiative?) Also, D'Este indicates that Eisenhower was by no means the great strategist which I had once assumed him to be, nor especially effective as a field commander. Prior to leading the Allied invasion of North Africa in 1942, he had never been in combat. His promotion less than two years later (from colonel to four-star general) removed him entirely from field operations. He had a volcanic temper and tended to play favorites (e.g. Bradley, Hodges, and Clark). If the buck stopped on his desk, he must assume primary responsibility for failures such as the Anzio and Salerno invasions as well as for the vulnerabilities which German strategists exploited during the Battle of the Bulge.

His greatest strengths include being able to resolve or at least neutralize conflicts between and among prima donnas such as Patton and Montgomery; gaining the loyalty and devotion of his staff officers; being revered and trusted by the troops; and meanwhile, sustaining the support of Roosevelt, Churchill, and (most importantly) Marshall.

It is important to keep in mind that D'Este limits his attention almost entirely to Eisenhower's military career, devoting almost no attention to Eisenhower's private life. Readers must seek elsewhere for a probing analysis of Eisenhower's personal relationships such as those with wife Mamie and his female driver, Kay Summersby. For me, the book's greatest value is derived from what I characterize as D'Este's "You Are There Strategy" as he enables his reader to accompany Eisenhower throughout his military career. Along the way, we learn about his childhood, his erratic years at the U.S. Military Academy, various peacetime assignments following his commission, and finally his tenure as Supreme Commander of Allied Forces during World War Two.

According to D'Este and countless others, Eisenhower was probably the only person (with the possible exception of Marshall who was needed elsewhere) who could have assumed and discharged the duties and responsibilities entrusted to him in that position. His 'finest hour" occurred when he (and he alone) had to decide whether or not to launch the invasion of Europe on June 6, 1944. Perhaps at no other time (before or since) did Eisenhower feel greater pressure. He fully accepted that burden and, as specified in writing on the eve of the invasion, he accepted full responsibility if the invasion failed. British General Alan Brooke once observed that Eisenhower "learned a lot during the war, but tactics, strategy, and command were never his strong suits." I am unqualified to comment on that observation but D'Este seems to agree with Brooke. Be that as it may, Eisenhower's position is secure among our nation's most distinguished military leaders. Moreover, there are also quite specific reasons why so many people loved him. His is an eminence few other American heroes can claim.

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.)

This book left me wondering who the hell Eisenhower was. I also got the impression that I shared that curiosity with Ike himself. It confirms all the bad mouth of him I heard during and after WWII while in the military. For example, one very high ranking officer who was in a position to know offered this assessment: "He never made a decision in his life! He left them to his staff and took the credit if they were right, and blamed his staff if they weren't."

This book confirms the near truth of that without exactly saying so. Eisenhower may have been a "soldier statesman" using euphemistic terminology, but it appears to me from the testimony of this deeply researched book that he was more of a man in a grey flannel suit. A company man. Also an apple polisher and "yes" man. These, of course, were exactly the traits necessary to make him the ideal man for the job that made him famous, "Supreme Commander" for the allies in Europe. If he had been any tougher in his decisions and in enforcing them he'd have been fired, or had to resign. He was, as the British said, "Chairman of the Board."

Having lived those times and been familiar with the famous names, I can't think of a single man who could have filled his shoes. D'Este suggests that Gen. Marshal was considered for the job and wanted it. I think he'd have been canned as too abrasive in the long run.

Ike's lack of combat experience was often painfully apparent as this book shows? It also shows that those who had such experience screwed up as often as he did. Examples are his principal subordinates, Montgomery and Bradley.

One strong point of this book for history buffs is the detail on Eisenhower's youth and early career. He was born into a very poor family headed by a father with problems that Ike may have inherited. First was a recognition, profoundly apparent in his father, that he was a born loser (which his son may have inherited and gone to extreme lengths to deny to himself, conceal from others and overcome in any case. ) Second was his father's inability to show love, or much emotion at all.

Eisenhower frantically engaged in contact sports and was a workaholic for whatever reasons. Men such a Pershing and MacArthur almost worked him to death, with little protest from him. It made him indispensable as a staff man and prevented his serving with troops, which he sorely wished to do. It also ultimately brought him to the attention of the top men in his profession on whose staffs he performed remarkably well and faithfully. Because of this Gen. Marshall ultimately recognized him as the Chairman of the Board that they needed in Europe to manage the prima donnas from several nations who held the top military commands. This made Ike famous since he automatically got credit for their successes. This book led me to wonder, however, if even becoming President ever really overcame a dark inheritance from Ike's roots.

Perhaps unrealistically, this book is full of episodes of grown men blowing their stacks, especially Ike. I was never yelled at by a General in my life and worked for a lot fo them, and never raised my voice at a subordinate in anger. It isn't typical military conduct, and especially not becoming livid while doing so like a kid with a tantrum. Big men becoming livid, like high school kids, is a chronic condition in this recital.

This is a tour de force of detail, a convincing revelation of the truth of Gen. Orville Anderson's appraisal: "We didn't beat the Germans because we were better men, but because they were stupider than we were."

On balance, a depressing book, since it is inevitable to conclude it is telling it like it was. The book suggested to me that I should read or reread a lot of other WWII memoirs and the biographies of the principal characters, since I am curious to know if during WWII, I and most Americans in and out of service, were living in an optimistic "fool's paradise" induced by war propaganda as this book suggests to me.

Ike's unhappy relations with his wife are also covered sketchily. I'd bet she was the classic example of a woman totally unqualified by background to be a military wife, or even an upper class one...

There is so much compelling in Eisenhower's story and his rise from obscurity, (he was a major for 16 years) to command of the greatest invasion in the history of armed conflict. D'Este gets most of telling this story right, especially the battles. D'Este also compellingly conveys the loneliness of command; you could cut the tension with a knife the morning Ike decides, based on the weather report, to launch the invasion of Europe on June 6th. The weight of that decision, and the fate of so many men, must have been crushing.

And yet I can't recommend this book. There no cohesive narrative flow; D'Este jumps around too much and as a result makes it hard to follow him sometimes.

Even worse, this book is replete with factual errors, some galling. His map of Northern Africa in 1942 confuses Algeria with Morocco. How the hell does that happen? Ike's father apparently married at the age of 2 based on the dates cited in the book. I could go on, but there is no point.

Instead of this book, pick up Ambrose's two volume bio.

There is certainly no shortage of biographies of Dwight David Eisenhower, but this particular effort written by Carlo D'Este concentrates brilliantly on a comprehensive coverage of Ike's military career as an officer, focusing much more than any of the other treatments of Ike's life on the amazing transformation Eisenhower made from being a staff officer to becoming the Supreme Allied Commander for the European Campaign. Indeed, Eisenhower was literally transformed from the doldrums of being a career Lt. Colonel to being a five star General in just over three years, based on his unusual organizational abilities and the occasion of the outbreak of WWII. This was done based on his long apprenticeship as a career officer, with a multitude of trying and difficult assignments, including one long-term tour as General Douglas MacArthur's aide and later his executive officer.

Eisenhower's forte was his ability to organize and oversee a variety of complex assignments simultaneously, and his keen sense of bureaucratic gamesmanship. It was this set of capabilities that General of the Army George Marshall keyed in on and recognized as crucially important to whoever would command the prosecution of the war with the Allies in Europe, which both Marshall and Churchill understood would be a titanic effort, and one so complicated that no one short of a brilliant bureaucrat certainly would not be able to execute. In the midst of all this Sturm und Drang, Eisenhower had to learn the lessons of modern warfare, for he was neither a solid tactician nor a logistician. Through the crucible of both the African and Mediterranean campaigns Ike gained a better understanding of how to carry through the planning and the execution of the different phases of a campaign successfully.

Still, this was no easy task. He was personally stretched to the limits of endurance, and was unable to sleep for weeks prior to the Normandy invasion. He suffered the hardships of long absences from his wife and family, and the rumors of an affair with his English jeep driver Kay Summersby ran rampant. Still, he held the coalition of quite different egos and often clashing personalities together extraordinarily well, forging uneasy alliances with Field Marshall Montgomery and with a host of other difficult people to smooth out the incredibly difficulty task of getting all of the aspects of the mammoth D-Day invasion plan working together. Yet beneath the calm and driven exterior was a literal volcano of emotion, for he was a mercurial type who demanded much of his subordinated, and who also drove himself quite as mercilessly.

D'Este is highly critical of Eisenhower's performance in many ways, and shows how various blunders by Eisenhower both lengthened and extended the war. Yet no one can deny the titanic triumph Ike was largely responsible for in terms of making D-Day a success and for then determinedly stamping out the stubborn remnants of resistance in the long and difficult drive toward Berlin. We are treated to glimpses of Ike's sense of frustration in his refusal to sit down with the defeated German Generals due to their barbarous conduct during the war, and he (along with Winston Churchill) once advocated for the summary execution of all such captured senior officers before being outvoted by Roosevelt, who wanted a trial to showcase how civilized and judicious we would be in extending the rule of law even to those who had been deliberately lawless themselves. This is a wonderful book, and one I am sure you would benefit from reading. Enjoy!

Eisenhower was never one of my favorite generals and this book didn't change my opinion, but it did give me a better understanding of the man and the tremendous problems he faced as the Allied Commander of the European Theater during World War II. I don't know why Roosevelt and Marshall picked Eisenhower for a job he wasn't qualified for. The British had little faith in him but accepted him because they figured they could manipulate him, and this proved to be true early in the war. But in the end, Eisenhower shouldered the responsibilities, made the tough decisions, dealt with the French, and got the job done. This book gives an honest insightful look at the men that ran the war, their strengths and weaknesses, and their triumphs and disasters. I found that D'Este's coverage of such luminaries as Montgomery, Patton, Bradley, and Alexander (to name but a few) a real education. This is a real eye-opener for those who thought the Allied Armies were the best trained, equipped, and led. This book led me to the conclusion that we won the war because we were better able to recover from our mistakes and replace our losses. This is a great read for World War II history buffs.

This is a powerful, compelling and probably destined to be somewhat controversial book which captures Dwight D. Eisenhower in a different light than past biographers. Carlo D'Este has carefully and thoroughly woven together exhaustive research to describe with often brutally honesty "Ike," the man. Eisenhower's childhood, education at West Point, long and painful service between the World Wars and his meteoric rise from Lieutenant Colonel to Five-Star General reveal a man driven by ego and determination, fired by a tremendous and sometimes ungovernable temper. The author carefully removes the veneer from almost every important character within Ike's circle of friends, fellow soldiers, adversaries and others with whom he had to interact as he ascended to Supreme Allied Command. Ike's relationships with Kay Summersby, Generals Marshall, Patton and Bradley, Winston Churchill and Field Marshal Montgomery are explored in great detail, much of which will be new and intriguing to most readers. The political pressures Eisenhower faces as his responsibilities increase, from the Pentagon, to London, North Africa and finally the D-Day Invasion and ultimate surrender of the Germans, are artfully explored and the key players like General Charles de Gaulle, Churchill and President Roosevelt are brought into sharp focus. The author treats all those surrounding Ike with penetrating precision, extolling their strengths and exposing their shortcomings. Readers will come away appreciating that Eisenhower's almost mystical skills in holding together allies, led by men of great power and even greater egos, are the critical aspect of allied success in the war. His single-minded determination and methods for achieving the allied cause make for dramatic reading entertainment. This book is very well written, clearly revealing the incredible pressures Eisenhower faced and the travails they created, giving the reader an enjoyable and highly informative picture of one of America's greatest military men.

I really wanted to enjoy this book, but found after wading through it, there was really little new here. The author does present a new case about the Eisenhower family's business dealings in Abilene from the days before and up to Dwight's birth, but most of that is of little interest to scholars. Plus, when it comes to sex and scandal, there's nothing really new here when it comes to Kay Summersby, and their alleged romance during World War Two. He says it didn't happen (and it probably didn't), but really doesn't provide the solid link of evidence to disprove it which the dust jacket hints it would.
My biggest complaint about this book is someone was apparently asleep in the proofreading of it. There are a number of grammar errors and typographical errors, particularly in the early chapters. Also, someone needs to explain to the author why Ike and Mamie didn't have a radio in 1917 as they lived in cramped living quarters, because there was no commercial broadcasting in the United States until 1920. And, of course, the book stops after Germany's surrender in World War Two. So this book never even looks at the development of NATO, Ike's tenure as Chief of Staff, Columbia University, or his years in the White House. Truthfully, much of this book relies on quotes not credited unless you read the footnotes from previous books. Readers looking for a gripping story that parallels the years of Eisenhower's life this book covers, should find a copy of Merle Miller's "Ike the Soldier." It remains the most fascinating story about Eisenhower's years from Abilene until the end of World War Two. For a look at his post-war years preceding the 1952 election, turn to Ambrose. Ambrose's works on Eisenhower's presidency are also worth reading, and for scholarly works, there are voluminous writings. As much as I hate to say it, choose one of those over this book.