10 of 10 people found the following review helpful:
1.0 out of 5 stars
Rehash OF Earlier Work with Errors, Speculation, and Specious Charges, September 23, 2008
This review is from: Last Assault (Pen & Sword Military Classics) (Paperback)
This book is conspiracy theory at its finest: the author builds a case against Eisenhower for evil and bad strategy making him responsible for 60,000 American casualties in the Battle of the Bulge. If the reader hates Eisenhower or is in love with Montgomery, this is the book for him -- otherwise pass it up.
The basis for the author's thesis is that he believes Eisenhower knew the German attack was coming and set up Middleton's corps to be sacrificed in order to draw German forces out into the open so they could be destroyed. Supposedly that worked, but then Eisenhower lost his nerve, and the Americans had to call on Montgomery to enter the fray as their savior and bring order out of chaos.
The evidence for Eisenhower's alleged nefarious actions is based on the idea that Ultra and Magic supposedly did uncover evidence that the attack was imminent, that Bradley stated he wished the Germans would come out from behind their defenses so he could get at them, that Ike's communications almost ceased for three days before the attack, and that some records are now missing or that the author was not granted access to them because such information might damage Eisenhower's reputation and presidential aspirations. And so the cover-up continues. Sound like Pearl Harbor? Everything else the author brings up is supposition or the absence of evidence. There's a lot of spin here.
First, that Ultra and/or Magic might have indeed uncovered evidence of a pending attack does not mean that such information was seen by Eisenhower or his staff (of whom his Chief of Intelligence, Kenneth Strong, was a British Army officer), or that if they did, it was sufficient to overcome the plethora of evidence to the contrary. And secondly, the other pivotal points in the author's argument hardly need refutation.
This work re-releases much of the author's earlier book, "Death of a Division", his story of the 106th Infantry Division released in 1979. What is new is the charge against Eisenhower, and that the author makes repeatedly as if his opinions are fact. Whiting does not offer citations in footnotes or end notes, but merely lists a very short bibliography for each chapter. His lack of notes is a serious deficiency given that there are serious problems with his historical facts.
Montgomery figures prominently in this story, and it should be noted that the author is British. Although Montgomery's only action in this part of the battle was to order Ridgeway to have his troops in the "fortified goose egg" retreat (to tidy up the lines), Whiting nevertheless paints Montgomery as the hero of the hour.
One should read John Eisenhower's 1969 work "The Bitter Woods", pages 288-289 for a superior account of the Montgomery/Hodges interaction, 291-294 for the account of the 106th's 423rd Regiment's surrender that is strikingly like Whiting's account without citation, and 302-303 for the Ridgeway/Hoge meeting. General Gavin, liberally quoted by the author from Gavin's "On To Berlin", again without citations, stated: "...even Montgomery had no inkling of the coming offensive," and Montgomery was privy to the identical intelligence as that given Eisenhower.
In addition, Gavin's comments were taken out of context by the author, giving Gavin a respect for Montgomery that he didn't possess. When one examines "On To Berlin", pages 232-233, one can see the comments in context.
Whiting's treatment of Ridgeway is less than charitable, and it should be noted that the Montgomery meeting Whiting describes with Clarke at Clarke's headquarters inside the "fortified goose egg" never took place. The author also takes pains to mention "Eisenhower's mistress" Kay Summersby multiple times although whether she was or wasn't is still controversial. Whiting even goes on to state that Patton had three mistresses, something I have never seen in print before, naming his niece as one -- again a relationship that most discerning historians discount. In addition, Middleton, Bradley and Patton all come in for their share of criticism for aiding and abetting Eisenhower's allowing of three divisions to be sacrificed. Wow, and double wow!
In short, this is not a work for serious historians. In many respects it is historical fiction, with charges specifically aimed to discredit a number of senior American commanders. I do not recommend its purchase.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
