Devildoc
Verified Military
Like any good "military historian" I have read my more-than-fair share of book on WWII...strategy, tactics, units, biographies. Up until now I have not read much regarding the American "high command" and decision-making.
This book was, for me, an eye-opener. For one, it goes into the interpersonal relationships among Roosevelt, Stimson, Knox/Forrestal, Leahy, King, Marshall, and to a lesser extant Truman and Eisenhower. It also takes these relationships across the sea to England and the USSR. While The Admirals: Nimitz, Halsey, Leahy, and King do a similar job, it is from a Navy-centric perspective and lacks insight into the British view.
Additionally, while I knew quite a bit about Roosevelt in an overarching way, I never appreciated his very personal role into military decisions and his personal touch in creating policy (i.e., by command pronouncement and often not in writing) and in shaping the military-industrial complex via nationalization.
I am astounded at how this collection of individuals was able to put their animosities aside (King liked, well, no one, really) as well as their partisanship (Stimson was a Republican) for the benefit of the war and country and build consensus.
Just as eye-opening was our relationship with the British and Soviets. Popular history likes to show how we were all one big happy family with regard to our allies but the reality was all three--the US, Britain, the USSR--had very different agendas and plans on how to prosecute the war and the alliance was always tenuous.
I enjoyed the book, I do wish it would have gone more in-depth with regard to the impact on the military-industrial complex but understand why it would have been difficult to add to this book.
This book was, for me, an eye-opener. For one, it goes into the interpersonal relationships among Roosevelt, Stimson, Knox/Forrestal, Leahy, King, Marshall, and to a lesser extant Truman and Eisenhower. It also takes these relationships across the sea to England and the USSR. While The Admirals: Nimitz, Halsey, Leahy, and King do a similar job, it is from a Navy-centric perspective and lacks insight into the British view.
Additionally, while I knew quite a bit about Roosevelt in an overarching way, I never appreciated his very personal role into military decisions and his personal touch in creating policy (i.e., by command pronouncement and often not in writing) and in shaping the military-industrial complex via nationalization.
I am astounded at how this collection of individuals was able to put their animosities aside (King liked, well, no one, really) as well as their partisanship (Stimson was a Republican) for the benefit of the war and country and build consensus.
Just as eye-opening was our relationship with the British and Soviets. Popular history likes to show how we were all one big happy family with regard to our allies but the reality was all three--the US, Britain, the USSR--had very different agendas and plans on how to prosecute the war and the alliance was always tenuous.
I enjoyed the book, I do wish it would have gone more in-depth with regard to the impact on the military-industrial complex but understand why it would have been difficult to add to this book.
