>> my question is can you recommend a similar book? >> guest: you know, i rely on first-person accounts that have been written by guys in europe and also by journalists. i use journalists more than most historians. i have some sympathy. but a lot of them are underpaid

affectional observers. so i lean on them heavily. people like ernie pyle, and others, i've is then sent to cover the war in new york with a really wonderful liberation trilogy there is nothing like how it comes out of the european theater. there are some pretty good memoirs. and it holds up pretty well.

bradley wrote to memoirs. a soldier story in a general story. but it was nothing that quite has the resonance and the grittiness of the other book. >> this is ernie pyle. i look at it this way, if by having by only a small army, we have been able to save a half million lives in europe. if such things were true, i wasn't sure they were true. >> you just feel the way that it

is so knew ye. here is a guy from indiana writing about aviation and things before the war. and then somehow they accidentally become a war correspondent. they have written millions of words before the war began. of course, have a great knack of empathy. it is always with a grunt with the emperor chairman. he goes through hardship. there are very few other correspondents who do it as intensely or for as long as ernie pyle does. this is a guy who is in his 40s. he is no spring chicken. he's not a healthy man, he drinks too much, you ways maybe 100 pounds soaking wet. he is not a robust character.

yet here he is living this awful life with other infantrymen. they respect and admire him. he is a beautiful writer. he writes so much and there is inevitably some junk in there. but passages like that are so illuminating and touching. and they are so vibrated that i just find that he leaves the european theater, he's had enough and he doesn't enjoy at all because he is so scarred by everything he has seen. he has lost the ability to enjoy life even when he is participating in the liberation of paris. he says goodbye to omar bradley and everyone comments on how bad he looks. he ends up in the pacific and if killed on a little island in

here oshima late in the war in the spring of 1945. especially for anyone who finds themselves in hawaii, i remember as an 11-year-old kid, my father taking me to ernie pyle's grave. it's very moving. he is 11 years old. i think for us to remember this, we have to remember ernie pyle. >> host: we have another quote from your book. if i hear this word ever again, i will believe it will be too soon. >> yes, the soldiers get on his nerves after a while. he was not a man that occasionally didn't use a four letter word himself. but anyone that's been around

soldiers a lot more than i ever have been. but their intensity of that culture can result in a feeling older, as he was. it can cost you senses of grievance. and there is this outcry come i'm really tired of being around these guys, but i'm stuck with them after the war. >> host: if you are a world war ii veteran and would like to talk with rick atkinson, call the number on the bottom of your screen. the call comes from martha in maine. >> caller: thank you again for a wonderful three hours. it is an honor to talk to a journalist who writes history. i have become ensconced in my history reading in the summer i am reading bunker hill. i still cannot believe

washington's treating during the french and indian war and he ended up working with general gage. when he was appointed for our american revolutionary war. general gage is retreating to go to new york and south carolina with the american revolution. i am just amazed at all of this. >> host: do you have a question or would you like to make that comment? >> caller: i wanted to ask about all of the soldiers that were hesitant to fire the shot apparently at lexington. it makes me think of fort sumter in the civil civil war. nobody wants to fire the first shot.

>> guest: there are plenty of shots fired in world war ii. there was a book that was published after the war it is estimated that a substantial number of combat members filed roughly 25% and they didn't fire their weapons because they somehow didn't have the opportunity and could not see the enemy you know, that is a different kind of thing when you're you're talking about. but certainly in world war ii, the first shot could be fired once the war was well underway. i cannot comment about lexington, but i am not a historian of that time. >> host: tony is in san diego. >> caller: mr. akin sin, i enjoyed your book so much that

it inspired me to go onto military academy. thank you for that. i would like to make a comment about the gentleman that he will jima said and i just feel like the media isn't doing a good job covering the story. we couldn't even sit on the same piece of horizontal furniture. i just don't know what more the academy can do. it just doesn't bring true. >> i think it is not true for

the cadets and those in "the washington post" today. there is a story about a mother of a female who alleged that she was raped by three others, and it is upon. once is too often. it's not to say that it's rampant, most cadets don't recognize the right thing to do and would not intervene given the opportunity to stop this kind of behavior. you know, it may be that the rigid controls at a place like west point are part of the problem in the long run. certainly the class of 1956, for example. it is all male, it is a hothouse environment that doesn't really

allow young 19 or 20-year-old man with what we consider normal interactions certainly from the academy and the culture of the academy, it has changed so much about race and gender and so on. i would never argue and i do not think that anyone would argue that this is preponderance with bad behavior. but it is incumbent on the nation to deal with this. the 21st century is a different place when it comes to the role of women in our culture, including our institutional culture like the military

academy. >> host: this is from bill, an e-mail about d-day. i know that there was plenty of intelligence covering normandie, so i echoplex that they were so prepared for the hedgerows, which hindered their advanced and increased casualties. >> that's a really good question. it is perplexing. part of the issue is that so much attention is paid to getting across the beaches, and we see this in the earlier innovations in north africa and the silly. the ballgame is initially to get a foothold. and consequently it is given to what comes next. in the case of normandie, yes, and i write about about how they

recognize that they had this topographical oddities, hedgerows had been built up by farmers clearing fields and pushing rocks and a breeze into walls, essentially, and from those laws grew wines vines and trees. those have been so specific. especially in the jungle. even though there was a knowledge of the train that they were going to encounter. there have not been sufficient thinking by those who should have been thinking about it and how they are going to get through it and how this is going to complicate our lives. how it is a nasty place to fight. omar bradley said that he was aware of it, but he could not imagine how badly it would be.

he should have been aware of it, there were studies that were done saying this is going to be unlike anything you have seen before. these are not easily penetrated by tanks, these are fortresses. figuring out exactly how we will deal with it is something that we need to be thinking about months before the invasion. well, it didn't happen and it required a series of improvisations by american soldiers to come up with ways of blasting through the hedgerows. >> host: here is a quote from the day of battle. for a man that lost the battle in the war, what was observed at the anglo-american commanders made them appear bound to their

plans and they were overlooked or disregarded, although the german divisions of highest quality were tied down in italy by the time they were urgently needed in the french coastal area. >> guest: he was until her years. because he's one of the very finest german field commanders. especially offering that kind of critique of a guy that thrashed you, captured you, and imprison you. that is a part that they are making a point out, that they are somehow perplexed by the lack of boldness of allied generals and there is something to that. i mean, the point is this.

there has been the germans who tended to be tactically superior. so this is really not what global war is about, but it is about a clash of systems and which can produce the men and women capable of producing the logistics and which system can produce victory of the battlefield in which system can detonate an atomic bomb. the germans could not muster the strength to invade england in 1940. the american armed forces are projecting and the endless

heavens and in that notion of tactical beside the point. >> host: were they committed not to these or were they are mean and? >> host: they were army men that were committed not these. >> guest: not in the sense of being partymen, per se, but certainly under the sway of the führer. and they lived in a house that had been confiscated from a jewish family. he did not step in to stop the deportation of jews in italy

were north africa for that matter. many of the survivors@ many of the survivors claim that they were simple soldiers not part of the not the ideology and this was false. they were very much a part of the death machine of the third reich. and that is why people like that end up in prison. >> host: you're watching booktv on c-span2. this is mr. rick atkinson. we have a caller from california. >> caller: hello, thank you for your book. there seems to be extraordinarily sustained in burgeoning interest in world war ii. especially regarding the civil war, let alone world war i.

i wonder what factors you tribute to vets. >> guest: thank you for that question there was an interest in the civil war and there are cycles. in the 1890s we saw a resurgent interest with ken burns and there is no shortage of history coming out about the civil war and i think we visited, in the case of world war ii, more or less after-the-fact. i believe that what we are seeing now is of the 16.1 million in uniform from about 1.3 american veterans are still alive. they are dying at the rate of so many per day, next year the number would be set to go million. and then they said the

generation is slipping away. they are passing over. and we are finding great-grandchildren who are understanding what their great grandfathers did because it's part of the patrimony and part of their heritage and part of understanding who we are and where we came from. world war ii and very profound ways and we have been talking about it with race. the way we think about our role in the world. we will never be isolationist again the way we were before 1941. in all this tripe from world war ii and i think many of them are

so interested in their family histories. and finally, it is the greatest catastrophe in human history. it's hard not to watch a train wreck or look away when they see something so grotesque like world war ii was on that scale and we are on the side of the angels there that there is good and evil and you can differentiate between the two. there is no doubt in contemporary life in contemporary complex that we were on the side of good with the forces of liberation, even though many bad things happen, as we discussed. and i think that that has an appeal. >> host: in your view, how much did the strategic bombing campaign contribute to the defeat of nazi germany, and what was the casualty rate, which he

wrote about. >> guest: the strategic air campaign is invaluable. these are large bombers from the british and the americans primarily, flying over german cities or other strategic targets. there was a bitter dispute over precisely how this should be carried out. they believe that bombing cities was most effective as trying to whittle away at german morale and the germans essentially implode. the americans flew mostly by day, they believe that hitting certain strategic targets, starting in the spring of 1944, that oil was the achilles heel of the german war machine.

that proved to be true. it is absolutely vital in understanding how the ground forces were able to prevail. knowing that these air forces have for years, by the time we get to 1945, how they have been hammering these targets. the casualties were staggering. the odds of surviving on for filling the quota, initially was 25 missions and then it was 35 missions and then going home became pretty dire. there were few professions that were as dangerous as being on a

b-17, for example. it was extremely hazardous with flying against german fighter planes. >> host: jack, you're on booktv with rick atkinson. >> caller: i am not a veteran of that war, but i wanted to pay tribute to some dear friends of mine who are going down in history. but my engineer expresses with a 181st paratroopers and i will never forget the tears in his eyes saying that my mission was to take the guns and i lost a hundred of my friends doing so and they were not in there. he was not mortally wounded in

taking the last bridge, then he went in patton's army throughout the campaign and said this of the soldier who said we had a serious problem with people shooting themselves in the foot, and that is why he loved his job. a lot of our boys died, but not because we weren't fighting. >> host: we are going to leave your comments there. we appreciate you calling in. the e-mail in atlanta, i'm looking forward to hearing you

speak. i was a child of eight years old and i my family had moved to a small village and we were often visited and were given food and they were visited by the facets. we were scared. my question is how effective was the resistance and war. >> guest: every country had its own flavor of resistance, particularly in italy. it is not until you get into the northern part of the war until may of 1945 that the partisans become a force.

they harassed german occupiers, blew up train tracks and bridges, they ambushed patrols and they became pretty formidable and they were aided by the oss and the cia and the british counterparts. so they played a role, it is not a decisive role because there are not enough of them. at the germans are absolutely ruthless. if you are a suspected partisan, you are likely to be executed. in france, it is a bigger network. again, was part of that and there was a little bit that put a dent in this with the french resistance. because the germans would go through and several executed

everyone in the village. i think it is important to acknowledge them, especially in southern france and soldiers who would parachute and help in the french resistance in various ways with explosives and so on. it is not what decided the battle for france. but it's an important part of making them sleep very lightly at night in some instances. >> host: jack from hot springs. first question. why in your opinion didn't eisenhower and bradley keep the warning signs that led to the battle of the bulge, and what you think about the decision to let the russians take the lead?

>> guest: the warning signs were fairly opaque. it's easy to see that they werò >> guest: the warning signs were fairly opaque. it's easy to see that they were massing along the border and at the time the germans had been so thoroughly battered to put together this kind of three army offensive that took place beginning december 16. there was also an over reliance on ultra, which was the british ability to decrypt the most secret german military radio traffic. you didn't hear it, but there was a belief that hadn't happened, all of the planning for the battle of the bulge was done face-to-face, basically by a written message and that they

could then be intercepted and decoded, consequently there was not a recognition that a huge operation was underway. it was unpardonable but they had no clue that this was coming and this was an intelligence order on the first magnitude. yet there are reasons for it. why didn't he take berlin? well, he intended to. that was in the plan for normandy and eisenhower reaffirmed in the fall of 1944 that the ambition of the western allies was to go to her when and then he changed his mind in march of 1945, in part because the russians were virtually on their doorstep in berlin and the russians had, beginning in january 1945, amassed several million troops that were going

to fall in berlin. they were still 200 miles from berlin. physician saturday then made about how germany in general had been divided up after the war, that they would be partitioned with zones for the russians and the americans and ultimately for the french and the same would happen with berlin. eisenhower came to believe, and he was encouraged by roosevelt to avoid conflict with the russians and he came to believe that it was pointless to risk tens of thousands of casualties racing to berlin on the russians were already virtually inside the city limits of berlin. and he directed it towards the southeastern order to cut germany in half and in retrospect i that it was entirely the right decision.

the british were not happy with it. churchill believed that there should've been an effort to push berlin. i think that seven years later the decision holds up really well pieper was a soldier, a lieutenant colonel. he was the point of the spear in that attack that began on december 16 of 1944. his task was to leave an armored column through the american defenses and help capture bridges across the huge important belgian port. and pieper that was this the kid spoke english and french and he had two brothers who had been killed in the war. very intelligent.

utterly ruthless. so today, what we found with the column was difficult to use right from the get-go. things were slower than they were supposed to be moving. he comes near the village and there is an american unit traveling by truck and his forces happen to fall on this unit and they should up the convoy. american soldiers who survived this initial encounter one up and they are massacred. there are more than 80 of them that are shot to death. others get away and word gets around very quickly. it begins a cycle of reprisal. there are no court orders by some american units, pieper never makes it to the news come he gets close, but not quite.

he doesn't have the combat power, he is running out of fuel. he manages with very few of his men to get back his war crimes and he is sentenced to death and others involved in the killings. it was a tainted procedure in the confessions that had been extracted from the defendants were considered to be under judicial review to be improper. the death sentence was lifted and the life sentence was commuted and he served about 10 years in prison and he became a salesman for the motor company porsche and later for volkswagen. he was in charge of american sales and murdered in the early 70s and yet house in eastern france. it was arson.

his burned body was found in the case was never solved. >> host: so he sold cars and had a house in france. >> guest: yes, he did. >> host: we tend to overvalue our contribution to the allied effort to defeat but the journey and undervalue the role of the army? >> i think that we do. and that's a good point. i try to make the point whenever i can that the soviets did. most of them die for the alliance, they had 26 million died during the war. and i think that there is a tendency frequently to overlook the soviet contribution. of course world war ii immediately turns into a cold war and they become our adversary and there is little to

acknowledging this role. i think that 70 years after the fact it should be recognized for every american that it were not for the russians, the war would not have been one as quickly as it was. for every russian soldier that died, there was one american soldier that didn't have to die. >> host: steve is in rancho santa margarita, california. >> caller: i've read the third book and i read the other two. thank you for writing. my question about december 16, it was just answered. in regards to your crusade book and ask about the political pressure to stop the war after the 100 hours in iraq.

how big of an effect was out. i remember very vividly. listening to nancy pelosi rammed about continuing the war. was that a factor in ending of a? >> no, i don't think it was. i don't think congress have anything to do with it. the decision was made early in the pentagon and specifically by colin powell. obviously with the concurrence of his civilian masters and he called general schwarzkopf and say that we are at the hundred hour mark and we have kicked them out of kuwait and we have done what they asked us to do and to fill the terms of the congressional and united nations authorization. what you think about ending it.

he was concerned that eventually there would be a backlash and television photos in particular would be scenes of carnage leading out of kuwait city. none of those photos had yet been on television. he was aware that there was carnage of the would-be photos. i don't think nancy pelosi or anyone else had anything to do that. >> host: thomas, you are on booktv with author rick atkinson. >> caller: hello, they are. thank you so very much for putting this program on. it was my privilege to go to the american cemetery near the beaches of normandy. one time with a next-door

neighbor who was a congressional medal of honor winner. james monteith. there are two in the cemetery. one being theodore roosevelt dinner and those to come i just wanted to point out our wonderful and the process. >> guest: thank you for that, sir. >> host: thomas, what was your service and what do? >> caller: we got off very light. but i was stationed in the pacific.

>> guest: we have had some callers calling in. >> host: in the guns at last light, you write about this a little bit. you have some figures here that i just want to share. 143 death penalties were imposed on gis, most for murder or rape. a severely disproportionate number fell on black soldiers, often after dubious due process. seventy executions took place in europe, including several that were public. >> guest: yes, and i think that you find in general that the racism that was prevalent in many institutions in the united states in the 1940s certainly can be found in the armed

forces. and the disproportionate punishment that was ferreted out to american black soldiers was something that reflected prejudices towards them and the lack of counsel that they often did not receive. you know, it extends all the way to the death penalty. i don't remember number of black american soldiers were among those, but it was disproportionate. >> host: a little bit more of german michelle terry. 50,000 military death sentences in world war ii with half or more carried out. 21,000 soldiers would desert, less than half have been caught by the late 1940s. we have do we have any idea where some of these deserters are? >> guest: i do not know where

they are. yes, pairs in particular was a haven for guys with shady business. eddie slovak am i just mentioned, he was a kid from detroit who was drafted. he had the virtue of writing to he had the virtue of writing to his wife every day and he ended up being sent to the 28th infantry division deserted immediately and was hanging out with a canadian for a wild. and he was court-martialed and refused the offer to basically have his sentence set aside if he would go into combat. it came as an appeal of the darkest time and he was not in a forgiving mood at that time.

unfortunately for him, he affirmed the death sentence and also said that his unit in the 28th division must carry out the execution. so i describe how he is transported by military policeman were the 28th division is at that time. and the firing squad was set up. and i think he believed the very end that he was going to be with a sentence that would be commuted and he was not. he was a guy that had been at omaha beach and one of the worst of all battles and he had been in the battle of the bolt and the 28th division and he was shot to pieces and fought heroically. and he said that the worst 50 minutes of his life were those

15 minutes with eddie slovak. and it left such a hollow feeling in the hearts of everyone who witnessed it or participated in it. >> host: thank you for the story of 601. he said he was a drafty at that time. this is the very end of the book. what he is referring to is that he documented more than 400 pages right after the war and it describes the operations of the effects bureau. it was set up at 601 hartford avenue and a begin in february of 1942 and there were fewer than a dozen people. it grew to more than a thousand

people working in this converted warehouse. and what would happen is that boxcars were pulled onto the side next to warehouse and footlockers and other containers with the effects of the dead on six continents would be hoisted up to the 10th floor. an invite assembly line and conveyor belts, they were seeing inspectors that would go through all this and they would take out photography and letters from her girlfriend that he didn't want the profundity. and as this was happening in a very large room adjacent to the assembly line, they were sending out letters, 70,000 letters per

month. it's like, we had her dead son's stuff, where should we send it. it is an extraordinary scene in the inspectors found all kinds of things. they can and do accumulate and they do have many diaries. and i quote from the diary of one young lieutenant who was killed in the beginning of the end. and it's actually a last letter home. it takes him a couple of days to die in his shanty in new guinea. and he is with his mother and sister. and he says i can understand why

god is taking my life if he wants to but i cannot understand why he is making me suffer. and that is the just of the question that we have to ask about in world war ii and the suffering of war in general. so that is what it is about. >> host: we have a call from smithfield, virginia. >> caller: thank you for taking my call. we have been so interested. my father-in-law is john corley, a member of the 26th infantry and it is kind of interesting about the modern twist to the story. >> thank you for your call. john hurley is one of the great soldiers of world war ii. how many stars as a?

seven or eight. well, i read about this extensively. it is one of the most stressful combat the world war ii starting with omar bradley and on down the line. and we have almost an entire chapter devoted to it. you find there is a very dense and not very big patch of woods from the western edge of germany. the decision is made to her one division after another into the forest and they are chewed to pieces. i write specifically about the 28th division that i just mentioned, that there were more than five divisions altogether that fought there. it went well for none of them, including the first division. the colonel was there for them.

so i write about it and it's not a pretty picture. you know, he was with me in africa, with us for the invasion of sicily. i don't write about him a lot, but i do admire him. >> host: tom e-mails him at the beginning of world war ii. mark clark was looked upon as a golden boy. was he as bad a gentle as he is for. now? >> guest: i do not think he is. i do not prepare him as a bad general. he's a dominant figure, particularly the second half of it. is the west point class of 1917 and he knows that eisenhower, he knows him from the time that was put together. he shows up in north africa having a little bit of combat experience, wounded in world war

i. and he is a difficult man to love. there is no doubt about that. he also tends to be somewhat imperious. he's a bit self absorbed. he is extraordinarily ambitious. he has a thirst for publicity beyond belief. when you get to italy where clark is the commander of the fifth army, you find a man who cares about his soldiers and is intended to their welfare and is personally brave, unlike some stories that have been told about him. and is yet insubordinate at times, particularly when it comes to dealing with the british. making certain decisions that are indefensible about pressing on to rome. he is a mixed bag but you can

see. you can see him as someone who is able to handle 23,000 american battle deaths in italy he is a guy that can deal with the pressure of heavy casualties. he's a man that clearly has flaws as a commander. eisenhower begins to see clark's compulsiveness about personal vainglory, it is something that he has difficulties with and handling. so i think my portrait is probably more empathetic than most. and you have to see he is a very nuanced character who has different facets to his personality.

>> host: and you write at 6:00 a.m. on tuesday, june 6, mark clark and his excelsior suite, with the news that german radio had announced the allied invasion of normandy and he rubbed the sleep from his eyes and said, how do you like that. they didn't even let us have the newspaper headlines for even one day. >> guest: they had been fighting in italy and the next thing you know, he captures rome and he doesn't do it very gracefully or permit the british to share. he does disobey orders, failing to cut off retreating romans. and yet two days later normandy in italy becomes backwater. >> host: robert, please go ahead

with your question or comment. >> caller: yes, thank you for taking my call. i used to work in foreign intelligence. [inaudible] >> host: go ahead. >> guest: does the media have a responsibility? without the question. >> host: i believe it was. >> guest: i did not, personally. i was then went even betray us, commander of the 101st airborne division. i can tell you that he had doubts about it as well, as did many others in the military, whether this was the best option or if it was precipitous. i had some anxiety about it. and i think in retrospect it was

foolhardy. does the media have responsible the? sure, to ask the most pertinent and most difficult questions relating to the largest issue of our natural life. an week am i that includes myself, we didn't do particularly well before that 2003 invasion of asking hard questions of whether in fact there were weapons of mass distraction or saddam hussein really had intent to do the will to others. i don't think we did securely well as an institution. there has been a lot of individuals in the 10 years since then. i think asking about a question like that is entirely appropriate. >> host: the chronicle of combat came out in 2000 for about mr. atkinson's experience in the iraq war.

berliners received an extra allocation of rations to commemorate hitler's birthday on friday, april 20, 1945. half a pound of rice, bacon or sausage, and announce a copy. they pummeled the city for much of the day and risk their lives for groceries. but these rations shall now ascended to heaven, one woman told her husband. shoot said we are defending europe against bolshevism. it seemed uncommonly so. in april in berlin, almost 4000 suicides would be reported in berlin. other means of ending life is

great everywhere. the daughter wrote the two sons were shot and herself, and slid her daughter so. one teacher hanged herself and she was not the. >> guest: the final months in berlin, many cities have this type of quality to it. incessant bombardment in berlin, we know that the soviet army is at the door, another war is lost, many have suffered personal losses with soldiers who have been killed or family members who have died in the bombings. it is awful and you can feel sympathy for germans even if you have a disdain for the larger guilt and responsibility of the

war. >> host: bill, you are on booktv with rick atkinson. >> caller: i want to thank you. i have read a number of books about world war ii. there seems to be one major american general who seems to be universally ignored as a subject of books by historians of that timeframe, almost to the point of disdain. he only appears in the narratives. the only book i can remember about him was his own book, a soldier's story, written in the 1960s. and as you know, i'm speaking of omar bradley. i think i have an opinion as to why this is. i would like to know what you think about it?

was not what you think that is? >> caller: i think he seems to be incompetent at some point. i think that he tends to be stuck on the original plan of battle rather than shifting the strategy and circumstance has changed and he also seems to be, and this is something that he comes about as part of handling theodore roosevelt dinner and that is about it lis thank you. >> guest: i don't think that i ignore omar bradley exactly. he is certainly a large part and you can see that there are many pages devoted to omar bradley.

i think your analysis is pretty much in line with mine. i believe the ec omar bradley who is a west point classmate and friend and he shows up in north africa in the spring of 1943. and he takes over with patton has commanded after he was ouster and he does pretty well at that. ..

and it's hard not to feels sorry for him. it's a very steep learning curve -- curve to go from commanding a court to commanding an army group in a very short amount of time. i think that he, again, is not a natural battle captain. i am heartened by my assessments of them. he wrote to memoirs. he also wrote a book called the general's life which was published posthumously. cannot right every died. he outlived almost everyone else from that generation. consequently have a large role in shaping his own reputation and in shaping the narrative. he was t