Rating: 
Summary: Read this book!
Review: I'm not sure what the grumbling is about Ambrose's objectivity concerning American v British troops. Frankly, I knew that this book was written from the American Point of view so it didnt bother me. And its impossible for an historian to not be a little slanted in his view. I would think that if a writer were to write from more then one perspective it would make the book too bulky and unwieldy. Amborse does not glorify the American Soldier too much. He goes out of his way to say that oftentimes the German Soldiers the GIs faced were not thier equal because of conscription, the two front war, etc. The more important point that Ambrose makes is that the German command structure was the main reason for the German failure.A wonderful book, very comprehensive. I've found that it has wheted my appitite for more specific themes and books, such as his Band of Brothers. It is true that it can at time overwhelm a reader with facts. It would serve a reader well to only read a couple chapters at a time and even purchase an Atlas of World War II so that you can use the maps to piece together the story. You will be the better for reading this book.
Rating: 
Summary: Why the hype?
Review: Professor Ambrose writes history by anecdote. While he is a master at recounting the first-hand experiences of the men who were there, his analysis of historical fact is poor. Many reviewers on this site seem to take offense to some of the criticisms others have dished out towards this work. It is true: Ambrose's pride in America results in smeared objectivity. Yes, the British were slow to advance in some places. On the flip side of that coin, US forces suffered a dissertion rate of 10 percent on the frontline. (Read Mark Arnold-Foster's updated edition of The World at War). None of the Western Allies were without their flaws. To call any of the men who stormed the beaches that June morning 'gutless' is a disgrace--American or British--especially when coming from a man considered this country's top WWII historian. There are many excellent reads on D-Day that cover the matter in an objective manner and include all the participants who fought that day. Try John Keegan's astounding 'Six Armies in Normandy' or Carlos D'Este's 'Decision in Normandy.' ... Then compare them to Ambrose's work.
Rating:
Summary: Patriotic Overkill
Review: While I'm proud to be an American, Ambrose's triumphalist approach to history is annoying at best. He lets his love of country and admiration for Eisenhower get in the way of objectivity. He smears all non-American participants, while elevating the American GI to mythical heights. Some of his comments regarding the British are out of line. We should all remember that Britain stood alone against the Nazi onslaught for two years. Their refusal to give in ensured the future liberation of Europe. To treat them as anything less than warriors is a grave disservice. He claims the Germans were 'soundly whipped' whenever American troops went up against the Wehrmact. He then points out the Battle of the Bulge (the Ardennes Offensive) as an example. Nevermind the Germans had no aircover, had over-stretched supply lines, had meager fuel supplies and were using second-rate troops. Regardless of what Ambrose says, the troops faced by the Western Allies were not Germany's elite. They were all wiped out on the Eastern Front. His claims about British surrendering are absurd ('many German sources). He quotes one official document and cites 'many German sources.' He doesn't mention the British faced the vast majority of tanks in Normandy during their attack on Caen. ...
Rating: 
Summary: The Definitive Work
Review: This is the definitive work on D-Day. After reading it, I visited the Normandy beaches, museums and St. Mere Eglise. The book truly enhanced my visit. It is extremely well written and reads like a novel instead of a historical document.
Rating:
Summary: Very enjoyable, second only to Citizen Soldiers
Review: If a reader would want to know why Stephen Ambrose has been so successful as a professor and author, this book can help explain that. Of all of the things I have read by Ambrose, this book, and the even-more-amazing Citizen Soldiers truly stand out as masterpieces of education- thay make a reader want to know more about some of the most climactic days in the history of the world, and dleivers that infomration at a good clip with alternatively funny, sad, poignant, and inspiring stories all rolling one after another.
I only gave this book 4 stars because I was so blown away by Citizen Soldiers, which picks up where this book left off. By no mean should a casual observer think nothing of this book- instead all of the planning, logisitcs, and effort of June 6, 1944 will come to life.
Rating:
Summary: I dont read but i read this
Review: I am from Taipei Taiwan, a chinese but after i read this book i felt that I was American~ The detailed description of soldiers in this book left images in my head that i dont seem to be able to forget. My concept of war was totally changed after reading this book. Steven Ambrose is a amazing writer all of his books should be read and kept for collection
Rating:
Summary: Ambrose is Correct
Review: Euro-centric critics charge that this book mistakenly lauds the accomplishments of American GIs over the other Allies. That's a convenient criticism to make in the context of a book focusing on a single major operation in the European theater. But Ambrose could have powerfully supported that thesis by pointing out that the Americans successfully prosecuted a true world war on multiple fronts that could not have been more distant and dissimilar in geography and opponent. Nothing comparable has been accomplished by any nation, before or since. As gallant as they were, the British and Soviets could not have done it.
Rating:
Summary: Ambrose captures the intensity
Review: Stephen E. Ambrose has done extensive research, including many hundreds of interviews with D Day veterans; American, Canadian, British and German. This exciting narrative makes extensive use of these oral histories. This book comprehensively covers both the planning and execution of the enormous effort to establish a beach head and begin the invasion to end the war in Europe. The planning took two years. Everything had to be considered such as the tides, where German defenses were located, where there could be some element of surprise, how to train allied troops for every possible contingency, how to unload heavy equipment, how to provide artillary, air and naval coverage of the landing etc. It was a huge undertaking and a firm date could not be established until weather conditions were certain. Thus, June 5th 1944 was postponed to June 6th due to poor weather. Further postponements would have led to a much longer postponement until favorable tide conditions once again prevailed. The coordination involved was mindboggling but, it was carried out. The invasion was preceded by the landing of airborne troops by both parachute and glider. The invasion took place on five beaches in Normandy. Three were Brtish and Canadian landing sites and two (Utah Beach and Omaha Beach) were American sites. The most intense fighting was at Omaha Beach which was guarded by cliffs from which the Germans could fire down. Indeed, for a couple of hours it appeared that the landing might be a failure. However, although most D Day goals were not reached as to troop placements, the most important task of establishing beach heads was accomplished. I notice that some earlier reviewers take exception with Ambrose for stating that German troops were inferior. He did not say that!! What Ambrose says is that the Germans had too much land to defend so they were spread too thin. Additionally, Ambrose points out that many of the troops were Polish and French conscripts who did not really want to be fighting; not Germans. Since they were spread out so thin, it was necessary to rely on many German troops who were either very young or quite old. Also, not knowing where the landing would take place, many German troops were defending Calais or even the coastal areas of Belgium and much further north into Norway. So, Ambrose does say the German troops defending Normandy were not of the same quality of the Allied troops but for the reason just set forth, not because they were inferior. German troops were further hampered by the fact that Hitler insisted on the minutest control of events and he was sleeping until noon on the day of the invasion. Panzer divisions could not be properly deployed because only Hitler, not the field marshalls, had the authority to deploy them. Therefore, with all of these factors considered, the Allied effort was indeed the superior one. This is a fascinating history and it gives a great appreciation of the painstaking planning, coordination and execution of this important and highly intense event. I highly recommend it.
Rating: 
Summary: Good Read, Average History
Review: For those familiar with the Stephen Ambrose Method, D-Day is nothing new. The same Amero-centric Pop-historical style present in earlier works replicates itself in this slightly watered-down account of how the US Army single-handedly won the war in Europe - little mention is made of the allies or even the other US services. Nevertheless, if you are not overly familiar with military history, or just want to enjoy several evenings of good wartime anecdotes, you could do worse. Copious amounts of research have resulted in a work eminently readable, but containing little true analysis - this is unfortunate, as it is analysis that differentiates a true history from mere chronology. Summary: well written, possibly a good general background book, but not the definitive work on the subject. Advanced readers should stick with Cornelius Ryan. Three stars.
Rating:
Summary: History perverted
Review: It seems obvious that Ambrose has a problem with our British allies, for he seems to relish in taking pot shots at their expense. While he bad mouths the British Eighth Army's victory at El Alamein, arguing the Germans were under manned and under equipped, he leaves out the fact this same German army ran rampant over the Americans at the Kesserine Pass and was eventually pushed back, not by Patton's forces, but by Britain's famed Desert Rats. Nor does he mention that when the British moved on Caen, they faced five German Panzer divisions, four of them Waffen SS divisions (including 11 SS Panzer Division, veterans of the Eastern Front) -- some of the most formidable German forces in Normandy at the time of the landings. He claims the German soldier was 'inferior' to the average American GI in every way. Really?! I suppose that's why it took nearly half the free world to defeat the Wehrmact. How would the Americans and British have fared against the German Sixth Army? I'm going to say not very well. America was not the only country to land on D-Day. The Americans landed on two beaches. The Brits landed on three. (Juno Beach was a mix of Brits and Canadians). Also, let us not forget the Free French, the Czechs, the Poles, the New Zealanders... all of them were there. People consider Ambrose this country's 'eminent World War II historian.' His stuff is biased and self serving. His anecdotal material is top notch -- but his take on history is perverse. As great as a sacrifice and contribution the States made, it did not win the war by itself. Strangely enough, for a supposed historian, Ambrose is blatantly ignorant of this fact.
| 
