Gives a birds-eye perspective on the Normandy campaign, with an emphasis on Montgomery's leadership. One of the fairest assessments by an American, I think, concluding that Montgomery's strengths were not best suited to a campaign which required rapid readjustment and a high-degree of risk-taking. Readers who like to know what war was like for individual soliders may find the book disappointing, but those more interested in strategy and politics will enjoy it immensely. ( )

2452 Decision in Normandy, by Carlo D'Este (read 5 Jul 1992) This is a very balanced, very well-researched, and an exceptionally good book on the Normandy campaign. It is fair but leaves it clear that Montgomery was not a great and able strategist. The whole controversy over the Falaise Gap is an intriguing one. and though I have read much on D-Day and its aftermath I did not have a good view of the events of the summer of 1944 in France till I read this excellent book ( )

http://www.amazon.com/Decision-Norman... ( )

Part of a 4 book set. This is a great book focusing on Montgomeries contribution then anything else. The original Overlord plan was for Monty to capture Caen by D plus 2 or 3. Instead the British and Canadians became the hingepin for the Americans to swing from the Continen to the east and Falaise. Interesting perspective. D'Este is big fan of Monte, but feels that this story needed to be recorded as Monty was his own worst enemy. An eye opener and must read for those studying the landings at Normandy