What do you think?
Rate this book
General Fox Conner: Pershing's Chief of Operations and Eisenhower's Mentor
John J. Pershing considered Fox Conner to have been a brilliant solider and one of the finest characters our Army has ever produced. During World War I, General Conner served as chief of operations for the American Expeditionary Force in Europe. Pershing told Conner: 'I could have spared any other man in the A.E.F. better than you.'
Dwight D. Eisenhower viewed Fox Conner, as 'the outstanding soldier of my time.' In the early 1920s, Conner transformed his protege Eisenhower from a struggling young officer on the verge of a court martial into one of the American army s rising stars. Eisenhower acknowledged Fox Conner as the one more or less invisible figure to whom I owe an incalculable debt.
This book presents the first complete biography of this significant, but now forgotten, figure in American military history.In addition to providing a unique insider s view into the operations of the American high command during World War I, Fox Conner also tells the story of an interesting life. Conner felt a calling to military service, although his father had been blinded during the Civil War. From humble beginnings in rural Mississippi, Conner became one of the army s intellectuals. During the 1920s, when most of the nation slumbered in isolationism, Conner predicted a second world war.
As the nation began to awaken to new international dangers in the 1930s, President Roosevelt offered Fox Conner the position of army chief of staff, which he declined. Poor health prevented his participation in World War II, while others whom he influenced, including Eisenhower, Patton, and Marshall, went on to fame. Fox Conner presents the portrait of the quintessential man behind the scenes in U.S. military history. Readers will find this book, and the man, fascinating.
Dwight D. Eisenhower viewed Fox Conner, as 'the outstanding soldier of my time.' In the early 1920s, Conner transformed his protege Eisenhower from a struggling young officer on the verge of a court martial into one of the American army s rising stars. Eisenhower acknowledged Fox Conner as the one more or less invisible figure to whom I owe an incalculable debt.
This book presents the first complete biography of this significant, but now forgotten, figure in American military history.In addition to providing a unique insider s view into the operations of the American high command during World War I, Fox Conner also tells the story of an interesting life. Conner felt a calling to military service, although his father had been blinded during the Civil War. From humble beginnings in rural Mississippi, Conner became one of the army s intellectuals. During the 1920s, when most of the nation slumbered in isolationism, Conner predicted a second world war.
As the nation began to awaken to new international dangers in the 1930s, President Roosevelt offered Fox Conner the position of army chief of staff, which he declined. Poor health prevented his participation in World War II, while others whom he influenced, including Eisenhower, Patton, and Marshall, went on to fame. Fox Conner presents the portrait of the quintessential man behind the scenes in U.S. military history. Readers will find this book, and the man, fascinating.
320 pages, Hardcover
First published October 31, 2016
31 people are currently reading
104 people want to read
About the author
Steven Rabalais
2 books2 followersSteven Rabalais has a lifelong interest in military history and in the biographies of lesser-known, but historically significant, figures. In his first published work, Rabalais combines these interests with years of extensive analysis of material available at the National Archives, the State of Mississippi archives, West Point, the Eisenhower Presidential Library, and numerous other sources to present the first full-length biography of General Fox Conner-one of the most significant, but largely forgotten, American military officers of the early twentieth century.
Mr. Rabalais obtained his Bachelor of Arts in Journalism degree from Louisiana State University in 1982 and his Juris Doctor in 1985. He has practiced law for more than thirty years and is a founding partner of Rabalais & Hebert of Lafayette, Louisiana.
Mr. Rabalais obtained his Bachelor of Arts in Journalism degree from Louisiana State University in 1982 and his Juris Doctor in 1985. He has practiced law for more than thirty years and is a founding partner of Rabalais & Hebert of Lafayette, Louisiana.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 16 of 16 reviews
November 18, 2022
An outstanding book about an incredible leader.
The military career of Fox Conner is a case study in mentorship, talent management, and exercising influence behind-the-scenes. It is sad that so few know his name, but that fact is also a testament to Conner’s character and humility. Without him, it is likely that we would have fought World War II without the leadership of Dwight Eisenhower and possibly George Patton.
This book explores Conner’s entire career in depth, an amazing feat considering that the General never wrote a memoir and had his personal papers burned following his death. The absence of these documents required the author to depend largely upon the recollections and writings of others to fill-in the gaps in the historical record. These secondary perspectives served to validate the incredible legacy of Fox Conner.
Conner was not free from criticism, but it is amazing how little was thrown his way, especially considering the momentous positions he held in an early 20th century US Army that was rife with professional rivalries and personal vendettas. When offered the coveted Army Chief of Staff position, Conner declined so that he could remain in a field command. Even after a debilitating stroke following his retirement from active duty, he continued to contribute to his Nation’s war effort though articles and official consultation with another protégé, George Marshall.
Fox Conner has long been the military officer whom I most admire. Even though I can never match his intellect and achievements, I have tried to model my own approach to leadership after his example.
After studying the gargantuan egos of prima donnas like MacArthur (and many others), Fox Conner is a breath of fresh air. I hope that we have some modern day Fox Conner’s at work now, mentoring our future leaders.
The military career of Fox Conner is a case study in mentorship, talent management, and exercising influence behind-the-scenes. It is sad that so few know his name, but that fact is also a testament to Conner’s character and humility. Without him, it is likely that we would have fought World War II without the leadership of Dwight Eisenhower and possibly George Patton.
This book explores Conner’s entire career in depth, an amazing feat considering that the General never wrote a memoir and had his personal papers burned following his death. The absence of these documents required the author to depend largely upon the recollections and writings of others to fill-in the gaps in the historical record. These secondary perspectives served to validate the incredible legacy of Fox Conner.
Conner was not free from criticism, but it is amazing how little was thrown his way, especially considering the momentous positions he held in an early 20th century US Army that was rife with professional rivalries and personal vendettas. When offered the coveted Army Chief of Staff position, Conner declined so that he could remain in a field command. Even after a debilitating stroke following his retirement from active duty, he continued to contribute to his Nation’s war effort though articles and official consultation with another protégé, George Marshall.
Fox Conner has long been the military officer whom I most admire. Even though I can never match his intellect and achievements, I have tried to model my own approach to leadership after his example.
After studying the gargantuan egos of prima donnas like MacArthur (and many others), Fox Conner is a breath of fresh air. I hope that we have some modern day Fox Conner’s at work now, mentoring our future leaders.
February 5, 2018
Conner was assigned to command in Panama between world wars. Eisenhower was assigned as his executive officer and Conner was able to take him under his wing and reignite a love of history and reading in Eisenhower whole mentoring him for greater things. An interesting biography with insight into WWI staff under General Pershing and the interwar years.
"We never prepared in time of peace, the material we knew we would need in time of war." This issue identified by Conner has been a recurring issue with the American military.
"In time of peace, almost all decisions are made from a money point of view. The enemy does not exist, the limitations of time and space are of relatively minor importance, and all other obstacles shrink into insignificance when compared to the limitation of funds. The real problem of the War Department is to secure the maximum amount of national defense with minimum appropriations."
"We never prepared in time of peace, the material we knew we would need in time of war." This issue identified by Conner has been a recurring issue with the American military.
"In time of peace, almost all decisions are made from a money point of view. The enemy does not exist, the limitations of time and space are of relatively minor importance, and all other obstacles shrink into insignificance when compared to the limitation of funds. The real problem of the War Department is to secure the maximum amount of national defense with minimum appropriations."
April 19, 2024
Who was Fox Conner (FC)? I have not read anything about him, except he was a mentor to Eisenhower, Patton, and Marshall. This alone got my attention; these men are all iconic names in our military history.
This book is Rabalais’s first published work, and he did a fine job. Yet, I sense he fell into the trap of hero worship, but it is not fatal in this work because his skill at research makes this work a good study of the American military, up to and including World War II.
I did feel that the narrative regarding the First World War was too much in Conners’ favor. Rabalais gave this reader the impression that FC lead the American forces in the First World War and made most of the major decisions, of course that overlooks the fact that General Pershing was in command. I attribute this to his zeal for telling the FC story, that he overreached on his focus on FC.
Rabalais does point out that most of the criticism regarding the management of that war fell on FC and not as much on Pershing. In his narrative Rabalais states, for instance, that FC’s battle strategies did incur many casualties, and after the war Congressional committees did point this out.
Rabalais also provided full accounts of the Belfort Ruse, where he misled his field, Commanders to surprise the German Army, this type of action by the man in charge loses the respect of his subordinates and affects team moral; his division leaders felt betrayed once the truth was known and were critical of FC in their post war narratives.
FC went out of his way to attacked and regain the city of Sedan from German occupation rather than allowing the French forces to have the honor of avenging a previously lost battle for this town. His actions and the fact that the town was in the French zone of operation caused an uproar with our allies.
Despite knowing that the armistice had been signed, Conner did not direct any of his forces to stand down. The AEF suffered 3,912 casualties on 11-11-1918 including 268 American’s killed on the war’s last day. Conner received a lot of criticism for these needless acts, but none of these acts of poor judgement got a reaction from Rabalais; he states the facts and moves on, and maybe this was the right response, yet I wanted some condemnation.
Another point that struck this reader was a sentence in Rahis prologue that read, “…..imparted that belief to his protégé Eisenhower and transformed him from a struggling officer facing a court-martial into one of the Army’s rising stars.” Eisenhower about to be court-martialed? I did not know about this, and I have read Eisenhower’s biography; so, I had to go to outside sources for the details, then our author provided the detail one hundred pages later page 185. He brought this up in the Prologue and in my opinion should have addressed it there.
Eisenhower’s writings in the Infantry Journal showed disfavor with the Chief of Infantry, Major General, Charles S. Farnsworth, who told young Eisenhower that his ideas were wrong and dangerous. Farnsworth added that if he published anything further incompatible with “solid Infantry doctrine,” he would be hauled before a court-martial. Rabalais could have done a better job on this most interesting factoid, but I must admit that he made me scurry to get the facts from outside sources, and this need for further research was something I enjoyed, yet I felt that Rabalais should have given this little-known bit of history more attention in this book.
During FC’s West Point days, he did quite well academically despite his backwater heritage and lack of education. His senior class was graduated early because of America’s war with Spain. Most of his class went right into battle while FC was sent to Leavenworth for more training and then to the Army War College for intensive leadership training. He asked repeatedly for a combat assignment yet was refused. This reader never served, so some of the subtler concepts of military life escaped me. The question that comes to my mind is why was FC handled differently? Like FC, Eisenhower and George Marshall followed a similar path. None of these men could get a combat assignment and was routed through many assignments that eventually placed them in high level staff positions. How does the military decide where the millions of men who pass through the system get placed? These three men were clearly singled out and withheld from combat yet nurtured into high level staff positions. They managed wars without ever leading in combat. This has never been explained to me and while our author to his credit pointed this phenomenon out, he does not explain who and why such decisions are made. We can only assume that these three men were singled out because of traits or academic excellence to be trained to lead rather than fight. These men were frustrated in seeking combat assignments and were criticized by those in combat for never leading men in action. History vindicated the military judgement because these men were responsible for the allied victory in WWII. What makes me sensitive to this issue was the fact that my grandfather in 1917 was sent to Kentucky rather than most other Maryland recruits who went to Fort Meade. I regret never having asked him why he was sent to Kentucky, but I do know he was trained for ambulance duty. Was this action arbitrary on the part of the military or did testing indicate his proper area of service?
An interesting fact that is little discussed in other narratives on World War 1, was that the Americans arrived in Europe with little more than their rifles. France made a commitment to supply needed resources such as Artillery; but they were slow to fulfill the need, so rich America went to war with just rifles and had to borrow and beg the other allies for needed supplies.
After the American force was in Europe, Rabalais did a good job illustrating the dysfunction of the ally’s high command, they fought over resources and actual command. Pershing and his Chief of Staff Conners were in a constant fight to command their own American forces. The French General Foch was the overall allied Commander and he insisted on controlling the American forces, he integrated them into French divisions with French leadership; and so did the British. Perching and Conner felt that they were not equal partners in this war until 1918 when Pershing stood up and told Foch that he acknowledged Foch’s authority as overall commander, but he insisted that all American forces would be under his command from that day forward. Perching was a team player and stated while controlling his own forces he would follow Foch’s commands, because he was the supreme allied Commander. This dysfunction and command challenges are an interesting aspect of this book and illustrates the authors through research.
After the War years, Rabalais describes the deep military and personal relationship between Eisenhower and FC. The author states that FC saw the great potential in the young Eisenhower and groomed him and protected him as he rose through the ranks. To a lesser extent he did the same for Patton and Marshal. All three of these men were instrumental in the allied success in World War II; and to a man point to what they learned under FC’s tutelage.
I enjoyed this book and I applaud this successful first publication by the author.
Among the things learned in this study is that politics exists in every human endearer. A mentor, whether in business, or life and especially in the military is essential for eventual success. Another thing learned is there is always tension between the field and Headquarters, particularly when the person giving orders never had field experience. The final lesson learned is that Fox Conner was vital to winning WWI and helped win WW II by preparing the Army and mentoring the likes of Eisenhower, Patton, and Marshal. His continuous fights with Congress for the budgets necessary to fight a Pacific and a European war helped in the preparation for the next war, and the innovations he introduced and utilized by his three students helped in the allied victory. It is a wonder that more has been said about this genius for war.
This book is Rabalais’s first published work, and he did a fine job. Yet, I sense he fell into the trap of hero worship, but it is not fatal in this work because his skill at research makes this work a good study of the American military, up to and including World War II.
I did feel that the narrative regarding the First World War was too much in Conners’ favor. Rabalais gave this reader the impression that FC lead the American forces in the First World War and made most of the major decisions, of course that overlooks the fact that General Pershing was in command. I attribute this to his zeal for telling the FC story, that he overreached on his focus on FC.
Rabalais does point out that most of the criticism regarding the management of that war fell on FC and not as much on Pershing. In his narrative Rabalais states, for instance, that FC’s battle strategies did incur many casualties, and after the war Congressional committees did point this out.
Rabalais also provided full accounts of the Belfort Ruse, where he misled his field, Commanders to surprise the German Army, this type of action by the man in charge loses the respect of his subordinates and affects team moral; his division leaders felt betrayed once the truth was known and were critical of FC in their post war narratives.
FC went out of his way to attacked and regain the city of Sedan from German occupation rather than allowing the French forces to have the honor of avenging a previously lost battle for this town. His actions and the fact that the town was in the French zone of operation caused an uproar with our allies.
Despite knowing that the armistice had been signed, Conner did not direct any of his forces to stand down. The AEF suffered 3,912 casualties on 11-11-1918 including 268 American’s killed on the war’s last day. Conner received a lot of criticism for these needless acts, but none of these acts of poor judgement got a reaction from Rabalais; he states the facts and moves on, and maybe this was the right response, yet I wanted some condemnation.
Another point that struck this reader was a sentence in Rahis prologue that read, “…..imparted that belief to his protégé Eisenhower and transformed him from a struggling officer facing a court-martial into one of the Army’s rising stars.” Eisenhower about to be court-martialed? I did not know about this, and I have read Eisenhower’s biography; so, I had to go to outside sources for the details, then our author provided the detail one hundred pages later page 185. He brought this up in the Prologue and in my opinion should have addressed it there.
Eisenhower’s writings in the Infantry Journal showed disfavor with the Chief of Infantry, Major General, Charles S. Farnsworth, who told young Eisenhower that his ideas were wrong and dangerous. Farnsworth added that if he published anything further incompatible with “solid Infantry doctrine,” he would be hauled before a court-martial. Rabalais could have done a better job on this most interesting factoid, but I must admit that he made me scurry to get the facts from outside sources, and this need for further research was something I enjoyed, yet I felt that Rabalais should have given this little-known bit of history more attention in this book.
During FC’s West Point days, he did quite well academically despite his backwater heritage and lack of education. His senior class was graduated early because of America’s war with Spain. Most of his class went right into battle while FC was sent to Leavenworth for more training and then to the Army War College for intensive leadership training. He asked repeatedly for a combat assignment yet was refused. This reader never served, so some of the subtler concepts of military life escaped me. The question that comes to my mind is why was FC handled differently? Like FC, Eisenhower and George Marshall followed a similar path. None of these men could get a combat assignment and was routed through many assignments that eventually placed them in high level staff positions. How does the military decide where the millions of men who pass through the system get placed? These three men were clearly singled out and withheld from combat yet nurtured into high level staff positions. They managed wars without ever leading in combat. This has never been explained to me and while our author to his credit pointed this phenomenon out, he does not explain who and why such decisions are made. We can only assume that these three men were singled out because of traits or academic excellence to be trained to lead rather than fight. These men were frustrated in seeking combat assignments and were criticized by those in combat for never leading men in action. History vindicated the military judgement because these men were responsible for the allied victory in WWII. What makes me sensitive to this issue was the fact that my grandfather in 1917 was sent to Kentucky rather than most other Maryland recruits who went to Fort Meade. I regret never having asked him why he was sent to Kentucky, but I do know he was trained for ambulance duty. Was this action arbitrary on the part of the military or did testing indicate his proper area of service?
An interesting fact that is little discussed in other narratives on World War 1, was that the Americans arrived in Europe with little more than their rifles. France made a commitment to supply needed resources such as Artillery; but they were slow to fulfill the need, so rich America went to war with just rifles and had to borrow and beg the other allies for needed supplies.
After the American force was in Europe, Rabalais did a good job illustrating the dysfunction of the ally’s high command, they fought over resources and actual command. Pershing and his Chief of Staff Conners were in a constant fight to command their own American forces. The French General Foch was the overall allied Commander and he insisted on controlling the American forces, he integrated them into French divisions with French leadership; and so did the British. Perching and Conner felt that they were not equal partners in this war until 1918 when Pershing stood up and told Foch that he acknowledged Foch’s authority as overall commander, but he insisted that all American forces would be under his command from that day forward. Perching was a team player and stated while controlling his own forces he would follow Foch’s commands, because he was the supreme allied Commander. This dysfunction and command challenges are an interesting aspect of this book and illustrates the authors through research.
After the War years, Rabalais describes the deep military and personal relationship between Eisenhower and FC. The author states that FC saw the great potential in the young Eisenhower and groomed him and protected him as he rose through the ranks. To a lesser extent he did the same for Patton and Marshal. All three of these men were instrumental in the allied success in World War II; and to a man point to what they learned under FC’s tutelage.
I enjoyed this book and I applaud this successful first publication by the author.
Among the things learned in this study is that politics exists in every human endearer. A mentor, whether in business, or life and especially in the military is essential for eventual success. Another thing learned is there is always tension between the field and Headquarters, particularly when the person giving orders never had field experience. The final lesson learned is that Fox Conner was vital to winning WWI and helped win WW II by preparing the Army and mentoring the likes of Eisenhower, Patton, and Marshal. His continuous fights with Congress for the budgets necessary to fight a Pacific and a European war helped in the preparation for the next war, and the innovations he introduced and utilized by his three students helped in the allied victory. It is a wonder that more has been said about this genius for war.
February 28, 2020
Fascinating to read, and to realize that perhaps this man was situated exactly at the right time and in the right place to learn best the lessons of WWI (success and failures) and transmit those lessons to a man who would be responsible for striving for victory against Hitler and Japan in WWII.
Fox Conner (and his first name is Fox, that threw me off a bit) worked under General Pershing in WWI. He got to see first hand the failures of that war, the failures to really resolve the issues that brought about the war, and the warnings he heard from Pershing about "the next war to come". And the next war to come was WWII.
Fox Conner met Dwight Eisenhower in 1920 through George Patton. Conner's ability to mentor the younger military men was his most enduring legacy. And he taught these young men about the mistakes of WWI and what to do about "the next war to come" to fix many of those failures.
Dwight Eisenhower credits learning these lessons and being able to apply them in WWII directly to Fox Conner, and thus the victories from WWII are due to this man who was kind of between the wars.
Very worthwhile reading!
Fox Conner (and his first name is Fox, that threw me off a bit) worked under General Pershing in WWI. He got to see first hand the failures of that war, the failures to really resolve the issues that brought about the war, and the warnings he heard from Pershing about "the next war to come". And the next war to come was WWII.
Fox Conner met Dwight Eisenhower in 1920 through George Patton. Conner's ability to mentor the younger military men was his most enduring legacy. And he taught these young men about the mistakes of WWI and what to do about "the next war to come" to fix many of those failures.
Dwight Eisenhower credits learning these lessons and being able to apply them in WWII directly to Fox Conner, and thus the victories from WWII are due to this man who was kind of between the wars.
Very worthwhile reading!
June 11, 2021
General Fox Conner is one of America’s unsung heroes. Although General Conner is probably known to most for his mentorship of Eisenhower, he was an exemplary military man in his own right. He was integral to the success of the American Expeditionary Force in Europe during World War I and to the modernization of the Army during the Interwar years.
As a Ravenclaw, I most admire General Conner for his love of learning. Despite his humble upbringing in rural Mississippi, Conner was an avid reader and autodidact: he taught himself everything he needed to know to pass the rigorous West Point entrance exam. Over the course of his military career, he cultivated an expansive, 1000-volume private library and even taught himself French and German to read the works of European military theorists in their original languages.
While General Conner is best known as Eisenhower’s mentor, I encourage fans of Eisenhower to read this book to better understand Conner’s innumerable contributions to the Army and for a candid glimpse into his life.
As a Ravenclaw, I most admire General Conner for his love of learning. Despite his humble upbringing in rural Mississippi, Conner was an avid reader and autodidact: he taught himself everything he needed to know to pass the rigorous West Point entrance exam. Over the course of his military career, he cultivated an expansive, 1000-volume private library and even taught himself French and German to read the works of European military theorists in their original languages.
While General Conner is best known as Eisenhower’s mentor, I encourage fans of Eisenhower to read this book to better understand Conner’s innumerable contributions to the Army and for a candid glimpse into his life.
January 19, 2019
A biography that needed to be written!
Well written account of the life, training, and career of one of many of America 's unsung military heroes. I knew that Fox Connor had influenced the careers and destiny of the likes of Gen Eisenhower, but I knew little of his own military career, especially his accomplishments as Pershing's G3. Our level of preparedness was so dismal that when Pershing and Staff arrived in France we had no G1, G2, etc, so we borrowed France's military
designations for Admin, Intel, Ops, Sup, etc. That was good reading! Enough maps to satisfy the reader as to which units were where on the Western Front. I think the author did a good job of conveying the disconnect which occurs between a headquarters and the units it supposedly serves. That's always and everywhere. A good read! 👍👍👍👍👍.
Well written account of the life, training, and career of one of many of America 's unsung military heroes. I knew that Fox Connor had influenced the careers and destiny of the likes of Gen Eisenhower, but I knew little of his own military career, especially his accomplishments as Pershing's G3. Our level of preparedness was so dismal that when Pershing and Staff arrived in France we had no G1, G2, etc, so we borrowed France's military
designations for Admin, Intel, Ops, Sup, etc. That was good reading! Enough maps to satisfy the reader as to which units were where on the Western Front. I think the author did a good job of conveying the disconnect which occurs between a headquarters and the units it supposedly serves. That's always and everywhere. A good read! 👍👍👍👍👍.
December 23, 2019
I had the opportunity to meet Steven Rabalais at the 2019 International World War II Conference on a panel talking about Fox Conner as Eisenhower's mentor. He was an excellent presenter - funny, interesting content and a very gifted storyteller.
The book reads the same way Steven talks I'm happy to say. There doesn't seem to be much material on Fox Conner and I very much appreciate this book to educate us on a very important person in history.
Also, Conner's wife, Bug Conner, might be my new favorite woman in history. Excellent read - highly recommend!
The book reads the same way Steven talks I'm happy to say. There doesn't seem to be much material on Fox Conner and I very much appreciate this book to educate us on a very important person in history.
Also, Conner's wife, Bug Conner, might be my new favorite woman in history. Excellent read - highly recommend!
May 15, 2020
Well-written and -researched. Fox Connor deserves more recognition than has been granted by history. Rabalais tells us a thorough story of this important and influential officer, who had tremendous direct and indirect impact on the US Army in the 20th Century. Recommended for officers of all grades.
November 10, 2018
My knowledge of WWI is limited, so I had never heard of General Conner. It is curious that such a leader seemed like he had trouble getting along with some other generals. Ego, I guess. He seemed like a man who was hard to know.
September 21, 2024
Thoroughly Enjoyed!
This book is a great read. Any student of American military history will enjoy learning about this lynchpin of two eras of Army leadership. It provides wonderful narrative as well as keen insight into the making of Eisenhower and Marshall.
This book is a great read. Any student of American military history will enjoy learning about this lynchpin of two eras of Army leadership. It provides wonderful narrative as well as keen insight into the making of Eisenhower and Marshall.
August 16, 2017
Interesting
This book is a little dry but does a lot to explain how Ike became Ike so if you like to know the background story this is a book for you
This book is a little dry but does a lot to explain how Ike became Ike so if you like to know the background story this is a book for you
July 10, 2023
Great book, to see how influential this general was on so many great U.S. military leaders and how his mentoring shaped our WW2 strategies.
August 9, 2023
Good biography of a leader I had never heard of. Well paced without excessive detail or tangents.
July 3, 2023
This short biography is well worth the read if you are interested in how successful people succeed. As an Army officer (now retired) I have always enjoyed reading the biographies and autobiographies of Flag Officers. It helped develop my own leadership skills and how to mentor younger officers. Fox Conner was an important mentor to Dwight D. Eisenhower. Eisenhower in his books often heaps praise on Conner for teaching him how to lead and be successful. Conner was a West Point graduate commissioned as an artillery officer. He served in WWI as a staff officer to General Pershing. He planned many of the operations that the US Army conducted. He mentored George Patton and George Marshall during WWI. He did not know Eisenhower then as Ike was back in the states training tankers for overseas deployment. Conner had limited direct command of soldiers. He did not command a fighting unit in the war and after he commanded in Panama and Hawaii. In Panama is where he tutored Eisenhower. Conner had an extensive library and he loaned books to Ike to read then he asked numerous questions about what Ike had learned. He also had Eisenhower issue all of the operations orders and handle most of the administrative work which prepared Ike for future staff assignments. Conner never stopped preparing the country and the army for the war to come. He spoke to numerous groups and testified before Congress about readiness and the need to increase funding for the armed services. Conner was quick to grasp the value of the tank and airplane in future combat and sought ways to improve funding for each when he served as the Chief of Staff to General Pershing when Pershing was the Army Chief. Conner never reached the position of Army Chief of Staff for many reasons, jealousy, health and lack of political support. He died from lung cancer but he had suffered two strokes and a fractured skull. His importance to the army and society is in his development of future leaders. He recommended many of his classmates and friends for important positions and steered Eisenhower to advanced schooling and kept him from being court marshaled on one occasion. This is an easy and informative read!
March 1, 2022
This is an awesome book for military history buffs and anyone looking for a better understanding of America's role in WW1 and the interwar years.
Recently I have been working on increasing my understanding of WW1 and this book really highlights many of the main issues of: mobilization, training, inter-allies political maneuvering as well as how and why the USA got into the fighting.
It's a great perspective on the behind the scenes relationships of Fox Conner with General Pershing, General Patton, Ike, and Marshall. Fox Conner was one of those behind the scenes guys who influenced so many and implemented so many programs, organizational structures and strategies that moved our military forward in the interwar years.
Highly Recommended.
Recently I have been working on increasing my understanding of WW1 and this book really highlights many of the main issues of: mobilization, training, inter-allies political maneuvering as well as how and why the USA got into the fighting.
It's a great perspective on the behind the scenes relationships of Fox Conner with General Pershing, General Patton, Ike, and Marshall. Fox Conner was one of those behind the scenes guys who influenced so many and implemented so many programs, organizational structures and strategies that moved our military forward in the interwar years.
Highly Recommended.
March 17, 2020
A great read and a wealth of information about World War I that I had never seen before.
Displaying 1 - 16 of 16 reviews