Why Must Read Crusade in Europe?

"If you have nothing nice to say, don't say anything." A nice standard for being thought amiable and tactful, a terrible standard when applied to history. Ike has little or nothing bad to say about anyone. This was first published in 1948, a period in American culture when citizens believed in every "truth" uttered by their government and everything was put in the best possible light. From the dozens of other books about WWII that I have read, there should have been plenty to criticize in an honest treatise. Nonetheless, this is a book worth reading. I am thrilled when I am able to learn something I did not know about WWII. Ike provides insight to the options considered and the prevailing rationale for strategic and tactical decisions. This is most enlightening and helpful in putting the pieces of the WWII jigsaw puzzle in context and explaining the apparently perplexing. Notwithstanding this, there are deficiencies. First, again, his tendency to be too nice to be truthful, e.g., the well-documented shortcomings of Montgomery's feckless leadership and egomania are consistently rationalized, as are the well-known arrogant behaviors of De Gaulle. Maps do not always contain the cities/towns discussed in the adjoining pages. Because this is written from a very high strategic level, the most egregious tactical failures and atrocities are glossed over, such as Omaha Beach, Operation Market Garden, and German massacres of American prisoners during the Battle of the Bulge. Given the scope of perspective it is understandable, but juxtaposed with many of the minor anecdotes he does include, I found this off-putting. So go in to this understanding its merits and deficiencies and you will probably be the wiser therefore.