D Day through German Eyes: How the Wehrmacht Lost France, by Jonathan Trigg

[Aida1]

So the good book on Germans in Normandy is still to be written.

Die Entscheidung im Westen 1944 - Dieter Ose

A very good one. Have it too. Individuals that do not understand german simply ignore anything that is in german.

[Mori]

So the good book on Germans in Normandy is still to be written.

Die Entscheidung im Westen 1944 - Dieter Ose

Jean-Luc Leleu, "Combattre en dictature. 1944, la Wehrmacht face au débarquement". Just published.

It's a professor thesis, 700 pages thick, all based on archival documents, very well thought through. Makes everything earlier obsolete, I suppose.

[Westphalia1812]

So the good book on Germans in Normandy is still to be written.

Die Entscheidung im Westen 1944 - Dieter Ose

Jean-Luc Leleu, "Combattre en dictature. 1944, la Wehrmacht face au débarquement". Just published.

It's a professor thesis, 700 pages thick, all based on archival documents, very well thought through. Makes everything earlier obsolete, I suppose.

Seems like I have to upgrade my French...

[Westphalia1812]

So the good book on Germans in Normandy is still to be written.

Die Entscheidung im Westen 1944 - Dieter Ose

A very good one. Have it too. Individuals that do not understand german simply ignore anything that is in german.

Same can be said for Russian and French books...most people prefer reading in their own or at most second language (mostly being English)

[jpz4]

So the good book on Germans in Normandy is still to be written.

Die Entscheidung im Westen 1944 - Dieter Ose

Jean-Luc Leleu, "Combattre en dictature. 1944, la Wehrmacht face au débarquement". Just published.

It's a professor thesis, 700 pages thick, all based on archival documents, very well thought through. Makes everything earlier obsolete, I suppose.

I agree with Mori. My French is very rusty but it' appears to be very good book. List of records used is impressive

[Aida1]

So the good book on Germans in Normandy is still to be written.

Die Entscheidung im Westen 1944 - Dieter Ose

Jean-Luc Leleu, "Combattre en dictature. 1944, la Wehrmacht face au débarquement". Just published.

It's a professor thesis, 700 pages thick, all based on archival documents, very well thought through. Makes everything earlier obsolete, I suppose.

I agree with Mori. My French is very rusty but it's a very good book.

The introduction shows it to be very biased anti german army and exhibiting a lot of prejudices which are typical and not new at all.

[Aida1]

So the good book on Germans in Normandy is still to be written.

Die Entscheidung im Westen 1944 - Dieter Ose

Jean-Luc Leleu, "Combattre en dictature. 1944, la Wehrmacht face au débarquement". Just published.

It's a professor thesis, 700 pages thick, all based on archival documents, very well thought through. Makes everything earlier obsolete, I suppose.

If you decide to ignore all what was written in the past.

[Mori]

The introduction shows it to be very biased anti german army and exhibiting a lot of prejudices which are typical and not new at all.

Care to be more specific?

Most books have a very strong *pro-German* biais: blaming defeats on errors by superior command and/or reducing Allied victory to quantity of shells and bombs and/or stating the German individual soldier was "superior" to Americans and British.

So a book with an anti-German army biais would be such an isolated case it's worth reading it.

[Michael Kenny]

Most books have a very strong *pro-German* biais: blaming defeats on errors by superior command and/or reducing Allied victory to quantity of shells and bombs and/or stating the German individual soldier was "superior" to Americans and British.

My favourites are the personal memoirs where Heinz recounts his encounters with The Soviets. Heinz and his mates win every encounter. They routinely kill 150 Soviets and knock out 20+ T34 and beat off every attack. Then for some never explained reason they are forced to retreat to a new position where they again despatch 150 Soviets and 20 more T34. This continues until they finally have nowhere else to run and they 'reluctantly' surrender. One wonders why such a successful 'never-beaten-in-a-fair-fight' outfight ever had to surrender in the first place. I think 'Bloody Streets ' is the ultimate example of such a book.
As an aside I had to smile at an earlier remark where the same poster criticised those who cant read German commenting on German actions in the east. This from a poster who has hundreds of posts about Soviet actions on the Eastern Front despite not being able to read Russian!

[Aida1]

The introduction shows it to be very biased anti german army and exhibiting a lot of prejudices which are typical and not new at all.

Care to be more specific?

Most books have a very strong *pro-German* biais: blaming defeats on errors by superior command and/or reducing Allied victory to quantity of shells and bombs and/or stating the German individual soldier was "superior" to Americans and British.

So a book with an anti-German army biais would be such an isolated case it's worth reading it.

I think you have a strange opinion about history books in general on world war 2. The german army obviously is rated high and that will never change but the simplistic way you describe it has nothing to do with the reality of what is written by authors.
And having more firepower is important to win although you seem to want to ignore that as shown by your earlier postings where you were unwilling to accept any testimony that describes the effect of total alled air superiority and massive artillery superiority in Normandy. You would be hard put to prove that the allies had some magic tactic that would make them win even without having a strong advantage in fire support.
The french professor comes up with the usual boring stock phrases that you can read many times on the internet and that hold no water.

[Aida1]

Most books have a very strong *pro-German* biais: blaming defeats on errors by superior command and/or reducing Allied victory to quantity of shells and bombs and/or stating the German individual soldier was "superior" to Americans and British.

My favourites are the personal memoirs where Heinz recounts his encounters with The Soviets. Heinz and his mates win every encounter. They routinely kill 150 Soviets and knock out 20+ T34 and beat off every attack. Then for some never explained reason they are forced to retreat to a new position where they again despatch 150 Soviets and 20 more T34. This continues until they finally have nowhere else to run and they 'reluctantly' surrender. One wonders why such a successful 'never-beaten-in-a-fair-fight' outfight ever had to surrender in the first place. I think 'Bloody Streets ' is the ultimate example of such a book.
As an aside I had to smile at an earlier remark where the same poster criticised those who cant read German commenting on German actions in the east. This from a poster who has hundreds of posts about Soviet actions on the Eastern Front despite not being able to read Russian!

You have no reading on the german army including what german officers wrote on the red army which is far more complex and balanced than the caricature you presented above. I pretend to have an interest in the german army about which i have read a massive amount of literature and primary sources. I have zero interest in the russian army with which you have a love affair including even Putins army so i do not have to learn russian. I post about the german army which is the main subject of this forum.

[Mori]

I think you have a strange opinion about history books in general on world war 2.

I am not into panzer-porn. This may seem a "strange opinion".

The german army obviously is rated high and that will never change but the simplistic way you describe it has nothing to do with the reality of what is written by authors.
And having more firepower is important to win although you seem to want to ignore that as shown by your earlier postings where you were unwilling to accept any testimony that describes the effect of total alled air superiority and massive artillery superiority in Normandy. You would be hard put to prove that the allies had some magic tactic that would make them win even without having a strong advantage in fire support.
The french professor comes up with the usual boring stock phrases that you can read many times on the internet and that hold no water.

Instead of refering to long-forgotten statements of mine, why can't you be more specific about the "reality of what is written by authors" and share some names / titles?
Same question about the French author: can't you be more specific what these "usual"+"boring"+"stock phrases" are?

I hate to discuss without being specific. This may again seem a "strange opinion".

[Mori]

I pretend to have an interest in the german army about which i have read a massive amount of literature and primary sources.

And have you produced anything with all that?

[Aida1]

I think you have a strange opinion about history books in general on world war 2.

I am not into panzer-porn. This may seem a "strange opinion".

Qualifying history works as panzer porn is certainly a very strange opinion.

[Aida1]

Instead of refering to long-forgotten statements of mine, why can't you be more specific about the "reality of what is written by authors" and share some names / titles?
Same question about the French author: can't you be more specific what these "usual"+"boring"+"stock phrases" are?

I hate to discuss without being specific. This may again seem a "strange opinion".

You came up with the statement that most books have a very strong pro german bias and giving a description of the alleged bias so it is up to you to support that with quotes.