This is slightly off topic, but I trust the chat group will allow me a personal remembrance. Eisenhower came to Raleigh, North Carolina, to speak in 1946. One of my earliest remembrances was to go with my parents (and a huge crowd) to the train station to greet Eisenhower. When he got off the train my father lifted me up to see him. I waved and said "There he is." Ike smiled and waved back. I was five, almost six years old then. CES
----- Original Message ----- From: Marcus Frost <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Mon, 24 May 2010 02:57:10 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [ChurchillChat] Eisenhower's "Crusade in Europe" Hi Greg, Hope you are doing well as I haven't seen you in a while. We have had so much fun on our trips. To the matter at hand by your posting I would like to respond that it is very neat how you came upon the book "Crusade in Europe" by Eisenhower. When I bought mine, I read it in less than a week as well. It's neat that you read the book your father bought in 1948. Decision making at the highest level? I bet Eisenhower had a change of heart after he became President. From Military to Executive Branch is quite a jump! But, we won the war! Now the Spoils! It has confused me forever how Churchill and Eisenhower (basically Eisenhower) couldn't get along after the war when they should have been the best of friends (Ike, President and WSC Prime Minister again). Dull, Duller, Dulles. OK! (U.S. Politics). Who saw the way forward and who was right? One, Both? Basically, it was just a mentality of carry-over after the conflicts of command and decision making after the war in my opinion. Eisenhower had lost respect in a way for Churchill because he wanted to be the man or take the rein....ego! It was a natural progression. He thought it was his time (AND IT WAS). Remember, when Japan bombed Pearl Harbor, Eisenhower was at Fort Sam Houston in San Antonio, Tx and Gen. Marshall told him to get his ass on a train to Washington D.C. pronto, two days I might add. Churchill had been at war for 18 months holding the line on Hitler. Eisnehower was to endure a couple of years of "Gen. Marshall " training before his ego began to rise. Marshall had basically picked these guys out. What good choices! To me the most induring legacy of all the U.S. Generals as well as all the British Generals and Field Marshalls is how little Churchill smoked them in his reviews. He strove to get every one of their attentions! "Pay attention to Me!" Some did, some didn't! Usually, the one's who didn't got the most attention because it allowed Churchill to have someone to argue with and bounce his idea's on their opinions. Greg, I believe that Eisnehower's book is more than self serving. He was however, the elected President Of the United States. I love WSC but I don't know how we could have made it without Eisenhower or someone of his caliber. Best, Marcus --- On Sat, 5/22/10, Gregory B. Smith <[email protected]> wrote: From: Gregory B. Smith <[email protected]> Subject: [ChurchillChat] Eisenhower's "Crusade in Europe" To: "ChurchillChat" <[email protected]> Date: Saturday, May 22, 2010, 1:14 PM For some unknown reason, I plucked Eisenhower’s “Crusade in Europe” from my library the other day – it was a first edition my father bought in 1948 while on vacation in 1948 in Durango , Colo. (I was 11) and which I inherited some 25 years ago. I read it in less than a week. I found it to be eminently readable and was intrigued by the insight it gave to decision making at the highest levels in WW II. Ever the gentleman, Ike was generous with his praise and miserly with his criticisms, especially with respect to Churchill. The book certainly gives no feel for the challenges facing the enlisted man as, for example, Martin Gilbert does in his WW II History. Although it is clear that Ike had the highest regard and concern for the lowest infantryman, the book is about Generals, Nations and major strategies. I am curious, however, about how this work is viewed by contemporary historians and would like to hear from any on the listserv (amateur or professional). Is it regarded as an important contribution to WW II history? Is it regarded as honest or self-serving? Have any critiques of it ever been published? Are his judgments on Churchill regarded as fair? -- Gregory B. Smith 154 W. Spain St., Villa T Sonoma, CA 95476 707 974-9324 Live dangerously, dread naught, all will be well. (W. S. Churchill) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ChurchillChat" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/churchillchat?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ChurchillChat" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/churchillchat?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ChurchillChat" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/churchillchat?hl=en.
