Rating: 
Summary: Biased conclusions, but otherwise excellent!
Review: The methods of narraration used to describe the events that occured on this tremendous day were incredible. The use of the individual soldiers' memoirs and testimonies was some of the best implementation of "primary sources" and event description available today. Fortunately for the public, Ambrose was able to use these sources while they still existed to bring to light a small piece of the madness and sacrifice that took place on that day. As a result, a little bit of knowledge and understanding can be passed on to those who never saw nor partook in D-Day, and this is what makes this book excellent.Unfortunately, there is one drawback: Ambrose's mistake of making of obviously biased conclusions concerning overall events and decisions for D-Day. His most notable: his inability to justify the extreme criticism of the military quality and decision capability of the Wehrmacht. Often times, he falls just short of completely gathering the facts in order to justify his point, and, as a result, he contradicts himself. A case in point: his statement that all previous authors who drew the conclusion that the German Army was superior to the American Army were wrong. His "proof" is that all other historians are overly concerned with the fact that the Germans acheived a two-to-one kill ratio on the Western Front. Anyone who knows military tactics also knows that kind of kill ratio is excellent under any circumstances, not just because they were defending the entire time. His biggest support to this statement is "The Battle of the Bulge," which he considered to be the only time the Germans were on the offensive. His justification of German ineffectiveness was that the 101st Airborne held out in Bastogne and other units performed quite well after recovering from the initial shock. In reality the actions of the 101st were not only commendable but also the exception. The only thing halting the German advance was a lack of fuel combined with gradually clearing weather, which allowed Allied air superiority to become another factor in the German supply problems. This slowed the German advance enough to allow the Allies to funnel in men and equipment, thus allowing Allied "recovery" and Ambrose's most important counterargument to come true, that Allied overwhelming firepower was the primary reason for Allied victory. An interesting point of note is that this section of the book in which his "factual" conclusion is drawn is sorely lacking in endnotes, showing his unwillingness to find support for his arguments in a concrete form. One could continue, but to put it simply, Ambrose's analysis falls far short of the mark, is not at all convincing, and clearly shows that his opinion is biased with some form of the "America is #1" attitude. This is displayed not only by his lack of coverage of other nations' contributions on that day, but also by the fact that his conclusions are marred by blind worship of America and Eisenhower. As a final statement, one should not let these negative aspects diminish an excellent book. It is an excellent presentation of "living" history, and it is a great thing that someone took the time to narrarate the events of that day.
Rating: 
Summary: Entertaining, but biased
Review: I first read this book 4 years ago, and found it so brilliant that I immediately started reading it again when I had read the last page. Since then, however, I've read several other books on the subject, and through the great books of Hastings, D'Este and Keegan I've gained a far better understanding of the D-Day landings and all the problems the Allies faced. Compared to these books, "D-Day" is, to put it mildly, of very dubious quality. Ambrose's first major mistake is his ridiculous claim that men born and raised in democracies will always fight better than men from countries ruled by dictators. Although this would've been nice, it's far from the truth. The Soviets, Germans and Japanese were all exceptionally hard and fanatical soldiers, known to fight to the very last man, and without doubt better soldiers than, say, the Americans, Brits or Canadians. This is perfectly clear to most professional historians, but Ambrose deliberately ignores historical facts if they don't match his political views.
Ambrose's simple(and idiotic, one might add) conclusion is that since Germany lost the war, the Americans and Brits were better soldiers. Little attention is paid to the fact that by 1944, the flower of German youth had already been wiped out in the great slaughterhouse known as "The Eastern Front," and that lack of fuel had made the German Panzer Units quite useless in offensive operations. The Germans aren't the only ones who are victims of Ambrose's subjective approach to the war. The Brits are, quite wrongly, characterized as over-cautios pessimists, as poor soldiers and nearly as a burden to his "glorious Americans." To support this ridiculous claim, Ambrose makes use of two witness-accounts, from Montgomery and "many Germans I have spoken with" respectively. Montgomery is quoted as saying that his men weren't really killers(a statement made during the Italian campaign) while the Germans, according to Ambrose, "were surprised by how often the British would surrender as soon as they got the chance to do so." This is, of course, pure rubbish. First of all, Montgomery regarded his men as some of the toughest soldiers in the world(his tribute to the British soldier in his memoirs confirms this), and his statement that his men weren't killers are taken completely out of context.
His German source is even more unreliable, as the Germans for some reason or the other, always regarded the British soldier as better than the American. If this view was mistaken or not is a another discussion, but the fact is that the British were respected and even admired by the Germans until the end of the war. To conclude, this book is totally useless as a serious account of D-Day. Yet, Ambrose is a very good story-teller, and the interviews with Allied and German veterans are very interesting.
Therefore, I would advice the reader to enjoy the first-hand accounts, but to ignore the rest of the book.
Rating:
Summary: D Day: June 6 1944
Review: Mr. Ambrose narrated his book with great enthusiasm. Unfortunately, his dentures were slipping or something and the whistling and so on resulting are rather distracting. Perhaps to compensate he attacked some words like 'especially,' as ex-specially, to avoid the whistle, which was even more distracting. Ambrose included a lot of first rate research in this effort, but it is padded with a certain amount of formulaic war book boiler plate. For example there is too much of the superlative; we know it was a big event, we do not need to be reminded in every description that the tonnage, air bombardment, etc., were the greatest in all recorded history. Similarly there is a certain amount of dogmatic expression of respect. He argues briefly to take exception to the critics who say that the American fighting man in this war was not the equal of the German. But the argument sheds no light, and does not include statistics or examples, or even reference to the specific viewpoints he opposes.
Rating:
Summary: A Little Biased?
Review: I loved this book. I have rarely read such an informative and 'on the beach' account of the d-day landings. There are a huge number of personal accounts and experiences of people who were actually there. Its actually very interesting to note how many small details the film Saving private Ryan apparently took from this book (e.g. Cross of david on the back of a Rangers tunic, Brooklyn, NY.) However after reading most of Stephen E. Ambrose's work an overiding theme occurs. Acording to Ambrose, the second world war was entirely won by the American nation. Despite several years of war before the US became involved, Ambrose consistantly portraits all non-American allied forces as bumbling fools. I really feel that Ambrose is an amazing historian who really needs to let go his bias and accept that no single nation was capable of winning the war. All up one of the best accounts of D-Day I've ever read but please Stephen, relax, America was essential in winning the war, but they didn't do it alone, and the rest of the world survived several years before the US got involved. What can I say, Theres no US in team.
Rating: 
Summary: Ugly American Read, Where is Canada and Britain?
Review: If you want a book with a major case of John Wayne syndrome. ,his is the book for you. The mission Involved the US taking utah and omaha beach, Brits taking Gold and Sword and Canada taking Juno. The Canucks shattered the german defences at Juno within 2 hours. Americans spearheaded attacks on only 2 of the 5 beaches at Normandy. you read this book and you'll think Amricans were the only ones that showed up .
Rating: 
Summary: a sobering, fascinating testimony to courage
Review: D-Day came alive for me when I saw the epic "Saving Private Ryan" at the movies five-and-a-half years ago.
Reading Stephen Ambrose' "D-Day-6th June 1944" made it even more relevant.
I am no avid reader by any stretch, certainly a 600 page paperback does not elicit huge excitement on my part, but once I started reading this masterpiece, I couldn't put it down.
I felt as if I had personally encountered the murderous savagery of Omaha or Juno beach, or had been with the Rangers at Point du Hoc, or even jumped out of a C47 with the 101st , such is Ambrose' masterful retelling of a day that should live for all time as a testament to the courage, and self sacrifice of the men of the D-Day generation.
I would recommend this book as compulsory reading to anyone with any interest in WWII, or who feels a sense of gratitude to those guys...if you don't feel it now, you certainly will after you have finished.
Rating:
Summary: 5 PLUS
Review: I loved this book (along with just about everything else that Ambrose has written). Throughout the entire book, I kept thinking, "Thank God I never had to go to war". This is a fantastic read. Enjoy!!! Dr. Michael L. Johnson author of "What Do You Do When the Medications Don't Work?--A Non-Drug Treatment of Dizziness, Migraine Headaches, Fibromyalgia, and Other Chronic Conditions".
Rating:
Summary: WONDERFUL AND RIGHT ON
Review: It is sad that many of the reviewers complain of a pro American slant by the author. Regadless, this book is well written and historically acurate. Well in July the British still had not accomplished their objective and Montogmery is now well know as the culput. If it were not for American help, leadership and material, we would still be on the beachs waiting for the British to get moving. The truth hurts, and for the new reader of WWII you will get about all you need to know on the Normandy invasion from this book. Paul Posey
Grovetwon, GA
Rating:
Summary: Canada, Britain, and the Commonwealth: Buy a different book
Review: Ambrose is such a Yank. He treats us as an afterthought. He tells us about U.S. civilian reaction to the invasion -- get this -- BEFORE he tells us ANYTHING about what happened at the beaches we care about -- Juno, Gold, and Sword -- where our guys are. He has the gall to quote our PM, Mackenzie King, as saying "the landings were making good progress" three (!) chapters before he tells us what happened at Juno Beach. Oh, so Mackenzie King was talking in the Commons about Utah Beach, was he?
Ambrose refers to George VI as "the king of England". That would make perfect sense if D-Day had occurred on June 6, 1544. His guy supposedly attended a graduate school?
Get a book by an unbiased UK author instead.
Rating: 
Summary: biased
Review: Stephen Ambrose most definately wrote a well constructed book on the climatic battle of the Second World War, and for that he deserves credit. He also deserves credit for the great effort he has undertaken, on behalf of WWII veterans, to educate the world on the sacrifices endured by a generation which won the freedoms we enjoy today.
Where he falls short, however, is to the uneducated reader where one may believe that the Second World War was a sole undertaking by the United States. "D-Day" is a case in point. There is little mention of allied forces (which is okay, Ambrose is an American historian afterall)but his opinions regarding Britains Montgomery are disparaging to say the least. There is only one chapter apiece given to the beaches that American forces didn't participate in; Sword, Gold and Juno, and little mentioned about Britains airborne troops.
We are now living in a generation where knowledge of World War 2 is gained through watching movies such as "Saving Private Ryan" , "Band of Brothers" etc... (all great movies but with a definate American slant) I would have expected Mr. Ambrose to have written a more balanced account of a battle where the greatest nations in world united to defeat a truly evil empire. Well written but with an unfortunate bias. Hence three stars.
|
