by Mark Perry (2007)
The depth and significance of the relationship between George Marshall and Dwight Eisenhower has eluded historians for years. In Partners in Command, acclaimed historian and journalist Mark Perry gets to the heart of arguably the most fateful partnership in American military history, a union of two very different men bound by an epic common purpose. He follows Marshall and Eisenhower's collaboration from the major battles in North Africa and Italy to the planning and execution of the D-Day invasion, the crisis of the Battle of the Bulge, and the postwar implementation of the Marshall Plan, and the establishment of Eisenhower's leadership of NATO. erry shows that Marshall and Eisenhower were remarkably close colleagues who brilliantly combined strengths and offset each other's weaknesses in their strategic planning, on the battlefields, and in their mutual struggle to overcome the bungling, political sniping, and careerism of both British and American commanders that infected nearly every battle and campaign. Finally, Marshall and Eisenhower collaborated in crafting the foreign policy and military infrastructure that became the foundation for winning the Cold War.From their first meeting after Pearl Harbor in 1941, Marshall and Eisenhower recognized in each other an invaluable military partner-by February 1942, Marshall, who was Army chief of staff, had promoted Eisenhower to head the War Plans Division, where his first job was to write the initial plan to win the war against Japan. Within a few months, Marshall selected Eisenhower as commander of all U.S. forces in the European theater. By early 1944, however, a subtle but major shift had occurred: Marshall the teacher had become Eisenhower's student, Eisenhower having developed the superior grasp of command challenges.Partners in Command is an extraordinary portrait of an often ignored alliance between two iconic military figures and the ways in which their unusual collaboration would ultimately shape fifty years of successful American foreign policy.
Kazimierz Moczarski
"Relying largely on Stroop's own words ... Moczarski recreates the chain of events which caused a nondescript German youth, the son of a provincial policeman, to rise to the top of the Nazi hierarchy; become part of the inner circle of Hitler, Himmler, and Göring; wield ... power in Czechoslovakia, Soviet Russia, and Greece; and mastermind Warsaw's "Final solution"--Jacket.
Ed Longacre
Did two more perfectly matched enemies ever confront one another on the field of battle? The reserved and gentlemanly Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee and the brash, arrogant, and brilliant Union Gen. Joseph Hooker squared off in the pivotal battle at Chancellorsville, the only time they were in combat. Although Lee and Hooker were equals in ability, these two were opposites in personality. The magic and mystery of the story of these two generals is even greater than the battle they fought. Colorful and controversial, "Fighting Joe" Hooker had a fondness for cards, booze, and loose women. His army was so undisciplined that the dalliance of his troops with camp "followers" is frequently said to have spawned the modern word hooker. In the strategies of war he had a gambler's mentality -- a unique combination of nerve, braggadocio, and bluff that made him a formidable foe. Robert E. Lee, born and bred a gentleman, was in many ways Hooker's opposite. With his impeccable social and military pedigree, Lee exuded rectitude, respectability, and erudition. He carried the mantle of authority with the ease and grace of a genuine aristocrat. Chancellorsville was a pivotal battle of the Civil War. The disaster that befell the U.S. Army of the Potomac there was the latest in a series of catastrophes for the North and eventually led Lincoln to remove Hooker from command. For the South, Chancellorsville was a monumental victory -- and an equal disaster, for it was at Chancellorsville that Stonewall Jackson suffered a mortal would. At Chancellorsville, "Fighting Joe" Hooker came close to matching Robert E. Lee's masterful maneuvering. Although he retreated, Hooker's brilliant strategy could just as easily have destroyed Lee's plans and ended the war in May of 1863. - Jacket flap.
George Forty
Overview: See how Patton created and manipulated his armies for the challenging tasks at hand, how he structured his forces and kept them supplied with arms and food, worked with his own subordinates, and secured the men he needed from his superiors. General George S. Patton dominated two major military theaters, proving himself a master planner, strategist, tactician and charismatic leader.
Ron Knapp
"Read about these American Generals of WW II including Henry H. Arnold, Omar N. Bradley, Dwight D. Eisenhower, Curtis E. LeMay, Douglas MacArthur, George C. Marshall, George S. Patton, Matthew B. Ridgway, Holland M. Smith and Joseph W. Stilwell"--Provided by publisher.