Goodreads helps you keep track of books you want to read.
Start by marking “The Battle for the Rhine 1944” as Want to Read:
The Battle for the Rhine 1944
Could the war in Europe have been won in 1944 if the right strategies had been employed? Historian Robin Neillands casts a new and informed light on the long-drawn-out and costly struggle for the Rhine.
MP3 Book
Published
April 25th 2007
by Blackstone Audio, Inc.
(first published January 1st 2005)
Friend Reviews
To see what your friends thought of this book,
please sign up.
Reader Q&A
To ask other readers questions about
The Battle for the Rhine 1944,
please sign up.
Be the first to ask a question about The Battle for the Rhine 1944
This book is not yet featured on Listopia.
Add this book to your favorite list »
Community Reviews
(showing
1-30
of
117)
This book was well written and well laid out. Information was presented in a easy to follow manner. That being said, this book was hard to choke down. Written from the decidedly British point of view, the author had no kind words to say about any of the American or Allied leaders. Essentially, if it weren't for Montgomery, the bumbling American Generals would have lost WWII. Sigh....as it was pointed out to me, each country has its heroes and we must respect that. Montgomery was as integral part
...more
Wish I could say I enjoyed this book, I only got the book out as I am planning on visiting Holland in May 2013, and specifically Arnhem, were the battle of Arnhem occurred, the book is filled with details, which is understandable, as that is what it is all about, it seems to me there were a lot of lives lost due to stupidity on the part of those in charge, it is my contention that war is horrific, and those in charge worry little about loss of lifes, as they are never in the front lines, and mak
...more
This book discusses the allied push to the Rhine after Normandy. It was argued that Eisenhower's broad front strategy, i.e., attacking the entire front all the time , forcing the enemy to retreat, was problematic on several counts. Firstly, as Antwerp was not opened, the army could not be supplied properly when supplies became longer, esp when coupled with an overly bureaucratic and unaccountable supply chain. Secondly, the large front meant that the forces could not concentrate for attacks when
...more
May 23, 2013
Adam Smith
rated it
really liked it
·
review of another edition
Shelves:
the-big-historical-shelf
This book poses a question that any book on war could ask:
Could we have won the war sooner had certain plans worked out better?'
I didn't read this book for the answer of the "what ifs" but there is much to be learned/applied to real life.
The book also gives a good snapshot of this particular time period of WWII.
****possible spoiler*****
The answer is yes. Of course the victors of any battle or war, in hindsight, may have executed better or differently and shortened the timeline.
Could we have won the war sooner had certain plans worked out better?'
I didn't read this book for the answer of the "what ifs" but there is much to be learned/applied to real life.
The book also gives a good snapshot of this particular time period of WWII.
****possible spoiler*****
The answer is yes. Of course the victors of any battle or war, in hindsight, may have executed better or differently and shortened the timeline.
A good look at the strategy of this period of the war. He claims to bridge the Monty-vs-Patton argument that historians, amateur and otherwise, break down, but he's clearly on Montgomery's side. He does a very good job of backing it up, though.
He's not very complimentary to most American generals, and perhaps rightly so, but I think he is excessively harsh on Patton. That said, I'm emotionally a Patton-o-phile, but I am convinced that Montgomery had some right ideas.
He's not very complimentary to most American generals, and perhaps rightly so, but I think he is excessively harsh on Patton. That said, I'm emotionally a Patton-o-phile, but I am convinced that Montgomery had some right ideas.
I give this book a 4 rather than 5 stars mostly because it seems a bit 'light'. It is not a hugely in-depth treatment of the topic. What makes this book interesting to read is that it is part of an emerging revisionist take on WWII. Namely, Neilands is attempting to revive the reputation of Field Marshal Montgomery, who has long been held in contempt by American historians, while taking Eisenhower down a peg or two. Well written in the English fashion.
A very in-depth look at the Battle for the Rhine, from September through December 1944. I learned a lot about what happened during that time, not just the highlights that most people know. You really get into the heads of the commanding generals, and see the conflicts they have to go through. At times, it's almost too much information.
I recommend having a map at hand, because you'll need it to get a feel for the whole battlespace.
I recommend having a map at hand, because you'll need it to get a feel for the whole battlespace.
This is a deeply detailed and exhaustively research account from the first hours after D-Day up to The Battle of the Bulge. Sometimes repetetive as a Montogmery apologist, this author also takes Patton down a few notches. This account makes for good balanced reading to the dramatic and simplified popular accounts of the movies "Patton" and "A Bridge too Far"
Interesting perspective on the political infighting between Eisenhower, Bradley, and Montgomery. Originally read this because I thought it was an operational account of the Battle for the Bulge but instead it provided the strategic framework for the European theater in late 1944. Three cheers for not reading the back cover.
This book is a good alternative to the traditional view of WWII Allied generals and leaders. It has a perpsective that should be heard. Understanding that the author thinks Field Marshal Montgomery was the second coming and world savior, the ending conclusion about Ike's overall strategy will come as a surprise.
A pro British view of the post Normandy campaign in the west. Argues that the broad front Eisenhower strategy was wrong and slowed the defeat of Germany. Not the most stunning proses but well argued
It was good to read an English account of this time period. I have read so much from American sources that hearing Monty described as the best commander of the war is hard to swallow.
Superb. Nijmegen...!?!
factual
There are no discussion topics on this book yet.
Be the first to start one »
Robin Hunter Neillands was a British writer who specialized in travel and military history. He also wrote under several pen names: Robin Hunter, Rob Hunter, Neil Lands and Debbie Hunter.
Neillands served in 45 Commando, Royal Marines in Cyprus and the Middle East. Afterwards, as a salesman for Pan Books, he travelled widely. In Britain, he founded Spur Books and through them published his early tra ...more
More about Robin Neillands...
Neillands served in 45 Commando, Royal Marines in Cyprus and the Middle East. Afterwards, as a salesman for Pan Books, he travelled widely. In Britain, he founded Spur Books and through them published his early tra ...more
Share This Book
No trivia or quizzes yet. Add some now »
