What do you think?
Rate this book
Three Days in January: Dwight Eisenhower's Final Mission – The #1 National Bestseller on Principled Leadership and Ike's Warning to America
The blockbuster #1 national bestseller, now updated with a new preface and postcript: Bret Baier, the Chief Political Anchor for Fox News Channel and the Anchor and Executive Editor of Special Report with Bret Baier, illuminates the extraordinary yet underappreciated presidency of Dwight Eisenhower by taking readers into Ike’s last days in power.
In Three Days in January, Bret Baier masterfully casts the period between Eisenhower’s now-prophetic farewell address on the evening of January 17, 1961, and Kennedy’s inauguration on the afternoon of January 20 as the closing act of one of modern America’s greatest leaders—during which Eisenhower urgently sought to prepare both the country and the next president for the challenges ahead.
Those three days in January 1961, Baier shows, were the culmination of a lifetime of service that took Ike from rural Kansas to West Point, to the battlefields of World War II, and finally to the Oval Office. When he left the White House, Dwight Eisenhower had done more than perhaps any other modern American to set the nation, in his words, “on our charted course toward permanent peace and human betterment.”
On January 17, Eisenhower spoke to the nation in one of the most remarkable farewell speeches in U.S. history. Ike looked to the future, warning Americans against the dangers of elevating partisanship above national interest, excessive government budgets (particularly deficit spending), the expansion of the military-industrial complex, and the creeping political power of special interests. Seeking to ready a new generation for power, Eisenhower intensely advised the forty-three-year-old Kennedy before the inauguration.
Baier also reveals how Eisenhower’s two terms changed America forever for the better, and demonstrates how today Ike offers us the model of principled leadership that polls say is so missing in politics. Three Days in January forever makes clear that Eisenhower, an often forgotten giant of U.S. history, still offers vital lessons for our own time and stands as a lasting example of political leadership at its most effective and honorable.
In Three Days in January, Bret Baier masterfully casts the period between Eisenhower’s now-prophetic farewell address on the evening of January 17, 1961, and Kennedy’s inauguration on the afternoon of January 20 as the closing act of one of modern America’s greatest leaders—during which Eisenhower urgently sought to prepare both the country and the next president for the challenges ahead.
Those three days in January 1961, Baier shows, were the culmination of a lifetime of service that took Ike from rural Kansas to West Point, to the battlefields of World War II, and finally to the Oval Office. When he left the White House, Dwight Eisenhower had done more than perhaps any other modern American to set the nation, in his words, “on our charted course toward permanent peace and human betterment.”
On January 17, Eisenhower spoke to the nation in one of the most remarkable farewell speeches in U.S. history. Ike looked to the future, warning Americans against the dangers of elevating partisanship above national interest, excessive government budgets (particularly deficit spending), the expansion of the military-industrial complex, and the creeping political power of special interests. Seeking to ready a new generation for power, Eisenhower intensely advised the forty-three-year-old Kennedy before the inauguration.
Baier also reveals how Eisenhower’s two terms changed America forever for the better, and demonstrates how today Ike offers us the model of principled leadership that polls say is so missing in politics. Three Days in January forever makes clear that Eisenhower, an often forgotten giant of U.S. history, still offers vital lessons for our own time and stands as a lasting example of political leadership at its most effective and honorable.
384 pages, Paperback
First published January 10, 2017
947 people are currently reading
3459 people want to read
About the author
Bret Baier
15 books217 followersWilliam Bret Baier is an American journalist and the host of Special Report with Bret Baier on the Fox News Channel and the chief political anchor for Fox. He previously worked as the network's Chief White House Correspondent and Pentagon correspondent.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 449 reviews
February 7, 2017
While I genuinely have a great deal of respect for Bret Baier and the work he does (especially his debate moderations), this is not very good writing, biography, or critical examination. It's quite hard in fact to determine who this could be written for. Those hoping for a great amount of biographical material will be disappointed. Those hoping for an examination of the 34th President in office will be disappointed. Those hoping for a critical examination of the meaning of Ike's legendary farewell address will be sorely disappointed, especially given the title of this book. I suppose if you genuinely have never read anything about Eisenhower or have little pre-existing knowledge of this speech then this could be a good précis, otherwise I would encourage you to look elsewhere. Especially pointless and ridiculously disconnected is a short coda at the end of the book trying to connect the transfers of power from Ike to Kennedy to the current transfer of power from Obama to Trump. Tenuous doesn't even begin to describe the connections Baier tries to make and the book would have been better without it. All in all, a disappointing read from a political commentator (and debate moderator) I normally enjoy.
February 27, 2017
The author puffed out the book with a brief biography of Dwight D. Eisenhower and John F. Kennedy. Also included was Eisenhower’s farewell address. Ike stressed the critical need for bipartisanship and balance in all governmental and foreign affairs. The complete speech is in the appendix of the book. I found the speech most interesting considering all that has happened since it was given.
When Ike took office, the relationship between Truman and Ike was strained. According to the author, Ike wanted to help the new president’s transition into office, as he apparently admired John F. Kennedy. Baier tells about the last three days in office where Ike attempted to prepare JFK for the current and ongoing problems he would be facing as president. Ike warned JFK about the military industrial complex, and the enormous federal funding that needed to be restrained. I found this part of the book quite interesting. I wish the author had gone more in depth about the discussions between Ike and JFK. I realize that there may be a limited amount of information available.
I was most disappointed in the rest of the book because of the numerous factual errors, particularly in the biographical sketch of Eisenhower and about WWII. Most books have one of two minor errors, but this book goes beyond that. I don’t know whether it was due to sloppy editing or sloppy research. For example, Baier states that Winston Churchill, Charles de Gaulle and FDR comprised a troika of the allied front. Troika connotes three persons working together. De Gaulle played no such role. There were to many errors in the North African Campaign to list here. There are a number of good biographies about Eisenhower available if one wants to know more about him, for example: one of the recent ones is Jean Edward Smith’s “Eisenhower in War and Peace”.
In spite of the errors, I found the book most interesting and enjoyed it. If you are interested in learning about the Cold War and presidential transitions, this book is for you. Bret Bier is an anchor newsman for the Fox Network.
I read this as an audiobook downloaded from Audible. The book is about ten and half hours long. Bret Bier and Danny Campbell did a good job narrating the book. Campbell is an actor and audiobook narrator.
When Ike took office, the relationship between Truman and Ike was strained. According to the author, Ike wanted to help the new president’s transition into office, as he apparently admired John F. Kennedy. Baier tells about the last three days in office where Ike attempted to prepare JFK for the current and ongoing problems he would be facing as president. Ike warned JFK about the military industrial complex, and the enormous federal funding that needed to be restrained. I found this part of the book quite interesting. I wish the author had gone more in depth about the discussions between Ike and JFK. I realize that there may be a limited amount of information available.
I was most disappointed in the rest of the book because of the numerous factual errors, particularly in the biographical sketch of Eisenhower and about WWII. Most books have one of two minor errors, but this book goes beyond that. I don’t know whether it was due to sloppy editing or sloppy research. For example, Baier states that Winston Churchill, Charles de Gaulle and FDR comprised a troika of the allied front. Troika connotes three persons working together. De Gaulle played no such role. There were to many errors in the North African Campaign to list here. There are a number of good biographies about Eisenhower available if one wants to know more about him, for example: one of the recent ones is Jean Edward Smith’s “Eisenhower in War and Peace”.
In spite of the errors, I found the book most interesting and enjoyed it. If you are interested in learning about the Cold War and presidential transitions, this book is for you. Bret Bier is an anchor newsman for the Fox Network.
I read this as an audiobook downloaded from Audible. The book is about ten and half hours long. Bret Bier and Danny Campbell did a good job narrating the book. Campbell is an actor and audiobook narrator.
November 12, 2024
Ike was a soldier at heart. As a General he opposed dropping the bomb on Japan. He believed they were already defeated. He hated politics and politicians. He was a moderate and put the nation above the party. He settled the war in Korea and held the Russians at bay. He warned about the private industrial military machine overbalancing our needs. After his presidency, he asked to be honorally reinstated as a 5 star General, which was done by Congress. He was asked by JFK for advice during Cuban Missile Crisis and later by LBJ. At his request he was buried in a standard issue $80 military coffin. It seems fitting to say that he was the end of an era.
July 19, 2019
I knew little to nothing about Eisenhower before I read this book. I really enjoyed learning about Eisenhower's life and career through the lens of the transition of power to Kennedy. Baier shows a lot of what makes a good leader, and what those hallmarks were for Eisenhower. I am not normally a history reader but I found this book engrossing and full of fascinating facts and context.
February 10, 2017
Billed as a historical focus on the end of President Eisenhower’s administration, the first third glosses over his early life and military career, which is fine given the stated emphasis. The final third, dealing with the transition to the Kennedy administration, descends to the level of tedium at times. There is no “ah-ah” moment revealing an amazing, previously unknown truth. The writing is workman-like if uninspired. The book jumps around quite a bit, a technique I found distracting and unnecessary. The book’s portrayal of Ike as always right and unwaveringly superior to men such as Kennedy and Truman is a bit hard to swallow. It appeared to be a puff piece for Eisenhower (I still like Ike). Three overly-generous stars since I love popular American and military history, but it lacks the quality and memorability of, say, O’Reilly’s “Killing…” series. Worth the money, though.
February 18, 2017
I really enjoyed this book. Although it does provide some history of Eisenhower's life and career, both as a general and as president, it focuses on the transition of power from Eisenhower to Kennedy, in January of 1961. The book provided a great deal of fascinating insight into both men, their relationship, and how each viewed the responsibilities of the presidency. Definitely worth the read if you are interested in American history, especially presidential history.
November 26, 2016
Wow well researched. I can't decide if it is history or current affairs because his insights are very relevant to today's struggles within our countries political system.
April 3, 2018
“Is it good for America?” Ike
A welcome contrast to most books by reporters. The norm is shallow, sensational and political, like their reporting (despite their leaning). This is an informative, in-depth look at our 34th president’s last days in office.
Suaviter in modo, fortiter in re: Gently in manner, strong in deed. (Displayed in Oval Office)
Baier telescopes Ike’s biography into the first third of the book, focuses on the titular three days during the middle, and devotes the end to Ike’s relations with subsequent presidents. Few new facts emerge for those familiar with Ike, who are probably the minority today. (David A. Nichols has written several excellent analyses of crises during Ike’s administration.)
“I am not going to land any American troops in those [Vietnamese] jungles.” Ike “Vietnam represents the cornerstone of the free world in [southeast Asia].” JFK
The press pilloried Eisenhower for his off-the-cuff speaking, but the decades since should have taught us that facile speakers are not necessarily honest nor thoughtful men.
“A man will respect you and perhaps even like you if you differ with him on issues and on principle. But if you ever challenge his motives, he will never forgive you. Nor should he.” Ike
I became aware of politics and government during Ike’s terms, and they are the measure for all presidents since. None, in my opinion, have approached his high standard for service before self and reconciliation before confrontation. He did not respond when people lied about him; he hated politics; he worked with people he didn’t like nor trust--all for the good of the country.
“We should not engage in wars we cannot win (and resorting to the use of nuclear weapons would be no victory at all.)” Ike
Like many others of the last generation who knew him, I feel America has slighted her native son and trampled on his vision. His was the last administration which, once he resolved the Korean War, had no wars in his eight years in office.
“You may feel regret that the age is past, but there can be no complaints about the quality of the life.” Walter Cronkite
“Here was a man on a mission to serve America, who largely succeeded.”
A welcome contrast to most books by reporters. The norm is shallow, sensational and political, like their reporting (despite their leaning). This is an informative, in-depth look at our 34th president’s last days in office.
Suaviter in modo, fortiter in re: Gently in manner, strong in deed. (Displayed in Oval Office)
Baier telescopes Ike’s biography into the first third of the book, focuses on the titular three days during the middle, and devotes the end to Ike’s relations with subsequent presidents. Few new facts emerge for those familiar with Ike, who are probably the minority today. (David A. Nichols has written several excellent analyses of crises during Ike’s administration.)
“I am not going to land any American troops in those [Vietnamese] jungles.” Ike “Vietnam represents the cornerstone of the free world in [southeast Asia].” JFK
The press pilloried Eisenhower for his off-the-cuff speaking, but the decades since should have taught us that facile speakers are not necessarily honest nor thoughtful men.
“A man will respect you and perhaps even like you if you differ with him on issues and on principle. But if you ever challenge his motives, he will never forgive you. Nor should he.” Ike
I became aware of politics and government during Ike’s terms, and they are the measure for all presidents since. None, in my opinion, have approached his high standard for service before self and reconciliation before confrontation. He did not respond when people lied about him; he hated politics; he worked with people he didn’t like nor trust--all for the good of the country.
“We should not engage in wars we cannot win (and resorting to the use of nuclear weapons would be no victory at all.)” Ike
Like many others of the last generation who knew him, I feel America has slighted her native son and trampled on his vision. His was the last administration which, once he resolved the Korean War, had no wars in his eight years in office.
“You may feel regret that the age is past, but there can be no complaints about the quality of the life.” Walter Cronkite
“Here was a man on a mission to serve America, who largely succeeded.”
December 4, 2025
Even though I am not a fan of all of him or the news organization that he works for, I decided to give Brett Baier’s contribution to Dwight Eisenhower scholarship a chance. The title of the book refers to Eisenhower‘s last three days in office. It is specifically meant to focus on his farewell address, with his famous warning about guarding against the military industrial complex. Unfortunately, Baier does not stick to just those three days, nor the few days immediately preceding or succeeding those days.
Instead, Baier spins the first 1/3 of the book doing a lightning trip through Eisenhower‘s very eventful life. He goes from Eisenhower‘s birth up to the end of his presidency in 84 pages. This is both too much and too little at the same time. Too much in the sense that, if you were picking this book up, only to read about the end of Eisenhower‘s presidency, you don’t need 84 pages to sum up Eisenhower‘s life up to that point. And too little, because if you are not very familiar with Eisenhower and want to know more about him, Baier’s overview of Eisenhower‘s life is not going to be nearly enough to give you an accurate portrait of the man. So this doesn’t work either way.
Part of the problem with this first third of the book is that Baier tends to bring into the narrative, contemporary politicians and politics. For example, he talks about Barack Obama and Chief Justice John Roberts Junior on page 90. Baier specifically references Roberts flubbing the oath of office when he was reciting it to Obama. This has absolutely nothing to do with Eisenhower! Neither Obama nor Roberts should be in this book, yet they are. So is Nancy Pelosi, on page 132. Again, why? And of course, Baier has to put his favorite president Donald Trump in here multiple times, including a very unnecessary and needless postscript talking about Trump meeting Obama in the White House for a transition meeting in late 2016 following the election. While this is a stretch, given that part of the ostensible purpose of Baier’s book is to talk about the transition from Eisenhower to John F. Kennedy, I still don’t really see where Trump needed to be in this book at all. There was no reason to mention him, other than that Baier seems to like doing so.
Also, Baier tends to get dates wrong sometimes. On pages 84 and 85 he refers to presidential inaugurations happening in the years 1948 in 2008, respectively. No, both of those years had presidential elections, with the inaugurations occurring January of the following years. Just sloppy. He also tends to make statements such as “History seems to support Truman‘s decision…“. Here bear is talking about Truman‘s decision to fire Douglas MacArthur and to not use nuclear weapons in the Korean War in 1951. So does history “seemingly“ support Truman‘s decision? In my view, I think history overwhelmingly supports Truman‘s decision in that regard. But not in Baier’s world. Also, while mentioning MacArthur, Baier notes that Eisenhower first worked under MacArthur in 1933 in Washington DC. This is incorrect because Eisenhower was already working from MacArthur before that. When MacArthur infamously put down the Bonus Marcher army in 1932, Eisenhower was serving under him then. Although not pictured in this book, I have seen a photo of Eisenhower with MacArthur on that day.
Speaking of Truman, Baier is very partisan against him, and makes Truman out to be the bad guy in pretty much all of the interactions that he describes with Eisenhower. This is unfortunate as I think that the failure of the Eisenhower/Truman relationship is equally on both men. But Baier puts it pretty much completely on Truman. It seems like he is painting Eisenhower in a bit too much of a positive light while making sure to shine an overly negative one on Truman at the same time.
Fortunately, Baier does pick up the quality of the book once he moves more towards Eisenhower’s speech. He parses the farewell address as well as Eisenhower‘s final press conference and his two transition meetings with Kennedy fairly well. He delves into the Eisenhower/Kennedy relationship and does a pretty evenhanded job about it. Also, his review here of certain parts of Eisenhower‘s presidency is pretty fair and balanced, to use a phrase from organization that Baier works for. For example, Baier talks about Eisenhower‘s handling of Senator Joseph McCarthy and his communist witch hunts. Baier correctly notes that Eisenhower employed a a hidden hand method against McCarthy, and that while it did somewhat ultimately work, a lot of people were hurt and damaged significantly in the process, and maybe in retrospect that wasn’t the best tactic Eisenhower should have adopted.
His discussion of Eisenhower’s speeches is pretty good. He examines why Eisenhower chose certain phrases and lines, and also shows how involved Eisenhower was in the speechmaking process. While Eisenhower did have, and often relied on, a couple of speech writers he did a lot of work himself. And a lot of the final editing was Eisenhower‘s alone. He took great care in what he said to the American people, and he did not want to get mixed up in overly partisan or personal games.
Baier also reviews the first few months of Eisenhower‘s post presidency, and how Kennedy contacted him to discuss the Bay of Pigs disaster. He then goes further and talks more about how Eisenhower and Kennedy would speak occasionally during Kennedy‘s time as president, and then Eisenhower continued that role even more so with Lyndon Johnson. In all of Baier clearly admires Eisenhower, but is also not above making a criticism here there if needed. I think that there were a few areas where he probably could’ve been a bit more critical of Eisenhower, however, he did not come across as overly partisan in his treatment of Eisenhower.
I did notice, when looking at the photos included in the book, the very last photo is of Baier himself, standing at Eisenhower‘s tomb at his presidential library in Abilene, Kansas. I have to say, this just struck me as quite tacky. I don’t know why he had to have himself in one of the photos. A simple picture of the burial site itself, by itself, would have been more than sufficient.
Overall, while this wasn’t a horrible book, I don’t think that Baier did a particularly good job. He strayed too far away from the main tenant of his message, although once he finally got to that, he did do a decent enough review. But the inclusion of so many contemporary politicians really marred the book for me. And then the unnecessary post script at the end just left a bad taste in my mouth. I will not be reading any more of Baier’s work.
Grade: D-
Instead, Baier spins the first 1/3 of the book doing a lightning trip through Eisenhower‘s very eventful life. He goes from Eisenhower‘s birth up to the end of his presidency in 84 pages. This is both too much and too little at the same time. Too much in the sense that, if you were picking this book up, only to read about the end of Eisenhower‘s presidency, you don’t need 84 pages to sum up Eisenhower‘s life up to that point. And too little, because if you are not very familiar with Eisenhower and want to know more about him, Baier’s overview of Eisenhower‘s life is not going to be nearly enough to give you an accurate portrait of the man. So this doesn’t work either way.
Part of the problem with this first third of the book is that Baier tends to bring into the narrative, contemporary politicians and politics. For example, he talks about Barack Obama and Chief Justice John Roberts Junior on page 90. Baier specifically references Roberts flubbing the oath of office when he was reciting it to Obama. This has absolutely nothing to do with Eisenhower! Neither Obama nor Roberts should be in this book, yet they are. So is Nancy Pelosi, on page 132. Again, why? And of course, Baier has to put his favorite president Donald Trump in here multiple times, including a very unnecessary and needless postscript talking about Trump meeting Obama in the White House for a transition meeting in late 2016 following the election. While this is a stretch, given that part of the ostensible purpose of Baier’s book is to talk about the transition from Eisenhower to John F. Kennedy, I still don’t really see where Trump needed to be in this book at all. There was no reason to mention him, other than that Baier seems to like doing so.
Also, Baier tends to get dates wrong sometimes. On pages 84 and 85 he refers to presidential inaugurations happening in the years 1948 in 2008, respectively. No, both of those years had presidential elections, with the inaugurations occurring January of the following years. Just sloppy. He also tends to make statements such as “History seems to support Truman‘s decision…“. Here bear is talking about Truman‘s decision to fire Douglas MacArthur and to not use nuclear weapons in the Korean War in 1951. So does history “seemingly“ support Truman‘s decision? In my view, I think history overwhelmingly supports Truman‘s decision in that regard. But not in Baier’s world. Also, while mentioning MacArthur, Baier notes that Eisenhower first worked under MacArthur in 1933 in Washington DC. This is incorrect because Eisenhower was already working from MacArthur before that. When MacArthur infamously put down the Bonus Marcher army in 1932, Eisenhower was serving under him then. Although not pictured in this book, I have seen a photo of Eisenhower with MacArthur on that day.
Speaking of Truman, Baier is very partisan against him, and makes Truman out to be the bad guy in pretty much all of the interactions that he describes with Eisenhower. This is unfortunate as I think that the failure of the Eisenhower/Truman relationship is equally on both men. But Baier puts it pretty much completely on Truman. It seems like he is painting Eisenhower in a bit too much of a positive light while making sure to shine an overly negative one on Truman at the same time.
Fortunately, Baier does pick up the quality of the book once he moves more towards Eisenhower’s speech. He parses the farewell address as well as Eisenhower‘s final press conference and his two transition meetings with Kennedy fairly well. He delves into the Eisenhower/Kennedy relationship and does a pretty evenhanded job about it. Also, his review here of certain parts of Eisenhower‘s presidency is pretty fair and balanced, to use a phrase from organization that Baier works for. For example, Baier talks about Eisenhower‘s handling of Senator Joseph McCarthy and his communist witch hunts. Baier correctly notes that Eisenhower employed a a hidden hand method against McCarthy, and that while it did somewhat ultimately work, a lot of people were hurt and damaged significantly in the process, and maybe in retrospect that wasn’t the best tactic Eisenhower should have adopted.
His discussion of Eisenhower’s speeches is pretty good. He examines why Eisenhower chose certain phrases and lines, and also shows how involved Eisenhower was in the speechmaking process. While Eisenhower did have, and often relied on, a couple of speech writers he did a lot of work himself. And a lot of the final editing was Eisenhower‘s alone. He took great care in what he said to the American people, and he did not want to get mixed up in overly partisan or personal games.
Baier also reviews the first few months of Eisenhower‘s post presidency, and how Kennedy contacted him to discuss the Bay of Pigs disaster. He then goes further and talks more about how Eisenhower and Kennedy would speak occasionally during Kennedy‘s time as president, and then Eisenhower continued that role even more so with Lyndon Johnson. In all of Baier clearly admires Eisenhower, but is also not above making a criticism here there if needed. I think that there were a few areas where he probably could’ve been a bit more critical of Eisenhower, however, he did not come across as overly partisan in his treatment of Eisenhower.
I did notice, when looking at the photos included in the book, the very last photo is of Baier himself, standing at Eisenhower‘s tomb at his presidential library in Abilene, Kansas. I have to say, this just struck me as quite tacky. I don’t know why he had to have himself in one of the photos. A simple picture of the burial site itself, by itself, would have been more than sufficient.
Overall, while this wasn’t a horrible book, I don’t think that Baier did a particularly good job. He strayed too far away from the main tenant of his message, although once he finally got to that, he did do a decent enough review. But the inclusion of so many contemporary politicians really marred the book for me. And then the unnecessary post script at the end just left a bad taste in my mouth. I will not be reading any more of Baier’s work.
Grade: D-
June 8, 2018
I feel like Bret Baier wanted to write a biography of Eisenhower, a man he clearly admires (and for good reason), but he looked around and saw a market glutted with Eisenhower biographies. He needed a hook, so, apparently at random, he picked the last three days of Ike’s presidency and wrote a life of Eisenhower (or at least had his non-famous co-author write one) as seen through the prism of those last days. But this effort to make his book stand out has resulted in muddle and mediocrity.
The fact is that other than Eisenhower’ memorable farewell address (probably the only memorable farewell address in history other than Washington’s), the last days of his term as president were not particularly interesting, and looking at his presidency through this perspective doesn’t provide any interesting insights into the man or his time. If you want to read about Eisenhower, I’d read Stephen Ambrose’s one volume biography instead.
The fact is that other than Eisenhower’ memorable farewell address (probably the only memorable farewell address in history other than Washington’s), the last days of his term as president were not particularly interesting, and looking at his presidency through this perspective doesn’t provide any interesting insights into the man or his time. If you want to read about Eisenhower, I’d read Stephen Ambrose’s one volume biography instead.
February 6, 2017
This book is really good . I learned more about Eisenhower then I ever knew before. I had no idea his wife was the one of his life or how close he was to her even though he had all these other responsibilities and duties she was more important to him. That's how love and marriage should be. Also he just was a force to be reckoned with when it came to Wars.
June 1, 2018
Should be read by all High School students
Should be read by all College students
Should be read by all students majoring in History or Political Science
Should be read by all Politicians
Should be read by all citizens or prospective citizens of the United States
Should be read again and again
Should be read by all College students
Should be read by all students majoring in History or Political Science
Should be read by all Politicians
Should be read by all citizens or prospective citizens of the United States
Should be read again and again
June 20, 2017
It is like Baier has compiled the Cliffs' Notes for Michael Korda's much better (and more readable) Eisenhower biography. If you want to read about President Eisenhower's Cold War challenges (Baier only acknowledges that the USSR was in World War II when he absolutely has to, and says nothing about the fact that the Soviets--as awful as their system was--were sacrificing a huge proportion of their military manpower against the Nazis and we couldn't have stormed the glacis of Europe without them tying up the bulk of the Wehrmacht out East), I'd pick up Michael Beschloss's superb "Mayday". I actually bought "Three Days in January" because Beschloss's endorsement was on the back cover under Tom Brokaw's. There is little nuance here or recognition that the geopolitical situation JFK was inheriting was filled with extremely complex tasks (i.e., the CIA training Cuban exiles, the French passing the baton to America in Vietnam after their catastrophic defeat at Dien Bien Phu, and Khrushchev himself--a boorish and shady character, but one who shocked the Soviet Politburo by attacking Stalin's legacy in his Secret Speech to the 20th Party Congress in 1956) that Baier never seems to get his hands around. Full disclosure--I'm a Kansan and my hometown actually has a major airport named after President Eisenhower. I'm also a veteran and a political scientist, and I think there are a lot of great lessons we can learn from his leadership both in WWII and the really scary time in which he assumed the office from Harry Truman. I wanted a good comprehensive look at that moment that he attempted to convey those lessons to his successor. I wanted an honest assessment of not only the Eisenhower Administration's big successes, but also some of its more controversial decisions (for example pushing regime change in Iran, Guatemala, and Cuba--situations that had repercussions for U.S. foreign policy that went far beyond JFK's tenure). I was disappointed. The book represents a series of 30-second sound bytes on all the aforementioned issues, and each deserves a much deeper look. This book would be a great primer for getting through a high school U.S. history exam, but if I handed it off to my kids for that purpose, there would be a vigorous question-and-answer session after every chapter to fill in the details.
February 10, 2017
Several weeks ago I won a proof copy of Three Days in January, a sympathetic biography of Dwight Eisenhower written by Bret Baier with Catherine Whitney.
I don't see how any serious student of American history can help but admire Dwight Eisenhower as a man, a soldier, and as President of the United States. This certainly holds true with Mr. Baier. His book puts special emphasis on the final speech Ike made as President, which he gave 3 days before his successor John F. Kennedy was inaugurated.
Three Days in January is a fascinating work. I learned a lot. For instance, while I knew Eisenhower met several times and had a friendly relationship with his Russian counterpart, General Georgy Zhukov, I was not aware that he enjoyed that same type of relationship with Russian Premier Nikita Khrushchev. When Russian nuclear missiles were discovered on Cuba during President Kennedy's administration, JFK consulted Ike, seeking his opinion on the likely hood of Khrushchev starting a nuclear war if the US put a naval blockade around that island. Relying on friendly conversations about the use of nuclear weapons he previously had with the Premier, Ike gave President Kennedy an educated answer that he did not think Khrushchev would resort to that. Ike was right.
Now for the bad stuff: The book fails to mention Ike's alleged affair with Kay Summersby during WWII, and also ignores the deal he made with Earl Warren during the 1952 campaign for the Republican nomination for President. If Warren would drop out of the campaign and shift his support to him, Ike would nominate Warren for Justice of the Supreme Court at the first opportunity. Warren did and Ike did. Warren became Chief Justice. Eisenhower later said he made a mistake in doing this.
Three Days in January was well researched, well written, and deserves 4 stars.
Robert Walker
I don't see how any serious student of American history can help but admire Dwight Eisenhower as a man, a soldier, and as President of the United States. This certainly holds true with Mr. Baier. His book puts special emphasis on the final speech Ike made as President, which he gave 3 days before his successor John F. Kennedy was inaugurated.
Three Days in January is a fascinating work. I learned a lot. For instance, while I knew Eisenhower met several times and had a friendly relationship with his Russian counterpart, General Georgy Zhukov, I was not aware that he enjoyed that same type of relationship with Russian Premier Nikita Khrushchev. When Russian nuclear missiles were discovered on Cuba during President Kennedy's administration, JFK consulted Ike, seeking his opinion on the likely hood of Khrushchev starting a nuclear war if the US put a naval blockade around that island. Relying on friendly conversations about the use of nuclear weapons he previously had with the Premier, Ike gave President Kennedy an educated answer that he did not think Khrushchev would resort to that. Ike was right.
Now for the bad stuff: The book fails to mention Ike's alleged affair with Kay Summersby during WWII, and also ignores the deal he made with Earl Warren during the 1952 campaign for the Republican nomination for President. If Warren would drop out of the campaign and shift his support to him, Ike would nominate Warren for Justice of the Supreme Court at the first opportunity. Warren did and Ike did. Warren became Chief Justice. Eisenhower later said he made a mistake in doing this.
Three Days in January was well researched, well written, and deserves 4 stars.
Robert Walker
February 6, 2017
Maybe my rating is based more on nostalgia than a critical view, but I am grateful to Bret Baier for bringing forth this part of history at the current time. Although the three days in January are during the transition of Eisenhower's administration to Kennedy's administration, the book is really a biography of Ike. I've read several books pertaining to this era ("my" era), and although nothing earth-shattering new was uncovered, it was comfortable to relive so many moments I remembered ... and throughout the book, I could hear Ike's voice repeating those words of his speeches. A definite recommend for history lovers.
February 26, 2017
Bret Baier, chief political anchor for Fox News, has done a good job putting together a well-written, enjoyable read of Eisenhower’s presidency. If you like presidential politics, “Three Days in January” is not only an interesting look at Eisenhower’s philosophy in dealing with Congress and foreign policy, but it has rich, ironic parallels to today’s tumultuous times. Ike offers some wonderful lessons in leadership applicable to today’s era of polarization and gridlock. Overall, it’s a riveting account of Eisenhower’s determination to end the Korean conflict and prepare America for the perils of a new war – the Cold War.
February 18, 2017
Baier focuses on the transition of power between Ike and JFK, giving some important context and analysis. I haven’t read a biography of Eisenhower and so I appreciated this book with its understanding of how Ike positively impacted our nation’s history.
August 15, 2017
Summary: An account of the final three days of the Eisenhower presidency, focused around his farewell speech, highlighting Eisenhower’s principled leadership and contribution to the nation.
Dwight Eisenhower is the first president I remember. My recollections seem to be mostly of Eisenhower on the golf course. He didn’t hold the attention of this five-year old when he spoke. He faded quickly into the background when the dashing Jack Kennedy took office. His successors were much in the news in my growing up and adult years from the Vietnam war to Watergate and the pardon to the Iranian hostage crisis to “morning in America” to “shock and awe.” I didn’t think much about Ike as a president, probably more as the general who led us to victory in Europe in World War Two.
Bret Baier suggests that a re-assessment might be worth it. Behind the bland exterior was a president who ended the Korean War and presided over eight years free of war (if not the threat of nuclear war, which he skillfully addressed). He launched the Interstate Highway System revolutionizing travel and transport in America. He signed some of the earliest civil rights legislation (though many will criticize him for not going further) and balanced budgets. He argues he gave the right kind of presidential leadership to a nation weary of Depression and war.
Baier explores the life and contribution of this president through the window of his last three days in office beginning with his Farewell Speech, most known for his prescient warnings against the “military-industrial complex.” But first he goes back. He begins with narrating the meeting he had with recently victorious Jack Kennedy in early December, and Eisenhower’s determination to make a much better transition than Truman had in handing the presidency over to him, briefing the incoming president on everything from the policy apparatus he had put in place (which Kennedy dismantled) to world and domestic situations. Significantly, he briefed him on a covert operation in the planning stages against Castro’s Cuba involving a landing in the Bay of Pigs. He warned against moving forward unless adequate leadership was in place. Kennedy mistook this for an endorsement of the operation.
Baier then recaps Eisenhower’s life from boyhood, to military service to his rise to the Allied command, post war activities, and his entry into politics as a very apolitical Republican (much to Truman’s disappointment, perhaps accounting for the frosty reception he gave Eisenhower).
He recounts the Farewell Speech itself, which he sees as modeled after Washington’s. He explores the writing of the speech and Eisenhower’s interactions with his speechwriters. He describes a relationship with Congress that was “interdependent,” striking because Democrats were in the majority for six of the eight years of his presidency. Eisenhower regularly hosted bipartisan meetings of Congressional leadership and fostering warm personal relations with Sam Rayburn and Lyndon Johnson.
He describes the hostile global situation, particularly significant because of the chill in relations with the Soviets despite Ike’s efforts to pursue peace, recognizing the necessity of a strong deterrence. He had fought along with the Soviets against Germany, forging personal ties with General Zhukov, and hoped it could eventuate in a more durable peace, which was not to be. He goes on to discuss Ike’s frustration both with the false accusations of a “gap” in the arms race when the U.S. enjoyed superiority, and with his inability to find a way out of that race, which he recognized an exercise in futility.
Finally, he turned to the “military-industrial” complex in which peace-time defense industries and their survival threatened to co-opt American foreign policy for its own perpetuation. He warned:
“In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.”
The concluding section of Baier’s book covers the last three days. He discusses the thorough work Eisenhower did in planning the transition from his end to provide continuity and to allow the new president to be able to lead well from day one. He held a good-bye press conference. On his last day, he dealt with the huge snowfall that blanketed D.C. and prepared to greet the incoming president and for the handing off of power. He said goodbyes to the White House staff, met the Kennedys, heard Kennedy’s magnificent address, and then departed for Gettysburg.
He would meet again with Kennedy a few months later at Camp David, where he discussed the failed Bay of Pigs mission with Kennedy and helped him debrief that experience and consider how he would handle future instances of proposed actions. Eisenhower unfailingly offered his advice when sought, wrote his memoirs and enjoyed a resurgence of popularity until his health failed in 1968 and he passed in 1969.
Baier’s account seemed to me more adulatory than a balanced history. Yet he underscored several important points about Eisenhower worth consideration by our present political leaders. One was his willingness to work with the whole Congress and not just his own party. There was clarity about the common task they shared to serve the whole country, even while they differed at times how to do so. Country was always ahead of personal ambition. A second was the soldier committed to pursuing peace, perhaps truer to his Quaker roots than many thought him. He got the country out of Korea and kept it out of war, while never sacrificing a clear-eyed strong defense. And finally, he was a man of principle, not perfect but honorable. Baier’s point is that these are qualities that we should look for in all of our presidents, something I cannot dispute. The tougher question to my mind is, why don’t we?
Dwight Eisenhower is the first president I remember. My recollections seem to be mostly of Eisenhower on the golf course. He didn’t hold the attention of this five-year old when he spoke. He faded quickly into the background when the dashing Jack Kennedy took office. His successors were much in the news in my growing up and adult years from the Vietnam war to Watergate and the pardon to the Iranian hostage crisis to “morning in America” to “shock and awe.” I didn’t think much about Ike as a president, probably more as the general who led us to victory in Europe in World War Two.
Bret Baier suggests that a re-assessment might be worth it. Behind the bland exterior was a president who ended the Korean War and presided over eight years free of war (if not the threat of nuclear war, which he skillfully addressed). He launched the Interstate Highway System revolutionizing travel and transport in America. He signed some of the earliest civil rights legislation (though many will criticize him for not going further) and balanced budgets. He argues he gave the right kind of presidential leadership to a nation weary of Depression and war.
Baier explores the life and contribution of this president through the window of his last three days in office beginning with his Farewell Speech, most known for his prescient warnings against the “military-industrial complex.” But first he goes back. He begins with narrating the meeting he had with recently victorious Jack Kennedy in early December, and Eisenhower’s determination to make a much better transition than Truman had in handing the presidency over to him, briefing the incoming president on everything from the policy apparatus he had put in place (which Kennedy dismantled) to world and domestic situations. Significantly, he briefed him on a covert operation in the planning stages against Castro’s Cuba involving a landing in the Bay of Pigs. He warned against moving forward unless adequate leadership was in place. Kennedy mistook this for an endorsement of the operation.
Baier then recaps Eisenhower’s life from boyhood, to military service to his rise to the Allied command, post war activities, and his entry into politics as a very apolitical Republican (much to Truman’s disappointment, perhaps accounting for the frosty reception he gave Eisenhower).
He recounts the Farewell Speech itself, which he sees as modeled after Washington’s. He explores the writing of the speech and Eisenhower’s interactions with his speechwriters. He describes a relationship with Congress that was “interdependent,” striking because Democrats were in the majority for six of the eight years of his presidency. Eisenhower regularly hosted bipartisan meetings of Congressional leadership and fostering warm personal relations with Sam Rayburn and Lyndon Johnson.
He describes the hostile global situation, particularly significant because of the chill in relations with the Soviets despite Ike’s efforts to pursue peace, recognizing the necessity of a strong deterrence. He had fought along with the Soviets against Germany, forging personal ties with General Zhukov, and hoped it could eventuate in a more durable peace, which was not to be. He goes on to discuss Ike’s frustration both with the false accusations of a “gap” in the arms race when the U.S. enjoyed superiority, and with his inability to find a way out of that race, which he recognized an exercise in futility.
Finally, he turned to the “military-industrial” complex in which peace-time defense industries and their survival threatened to co-opt American foreign policy for its own perpetuation. He warned:
“In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.”
The concluding section of Baier’s book covers the last three days. He discusses the thorough work Eisenhower did in planning the transition from his end to provide continuity and to allow the new president to be able to lead well from day one. He held a good-bye press conference. On his last day, he dealt with the huge snowfall that blanketed D.C. and prepared to greet the incoming president and for the handing off of power. He said goodbyes to the White House staff, met the Kennedys, heard Kennedy’s magnificent address, and then departed for Gettysburg.
He would meet again with Kennedy a few months later at Camp David, where he discussed the failed Bay of Pigs mission with Kennedy and helped him debrief that experience and consider how he would handle future instances of proposed actions. Eisenhower unfailingly offered his advice when sought, wrote his memoirs and enjoyed a resurgence of popularity until his health failed in 1968 and he passed in 1969.
Baier’s account seemed to me more adulatory than a balanced history. Yet he underscored several important points about Eisenhower worth consideration by our present political leaders. One was his willingness to work with the whole Congress and not just his own party. There was clarity about the common task they shared to serve the whole country, even while they differed at times how to do so. Country was always ahead of personal ambition. A second was the soldier committed to pursuing peace, perhaps truer to his Quaker roots than many thought him. He got the country out of Korea and kept it out of war, while never sacrificing a clear-eyed strong defense. And finally, he was a man of principle, not perfect but honorable. Baier’s point is that these are qualities that we should look for in all of our presidents, something I cannot dispute. The tougher question to my mind is, why don’t we?
April 4, 2024
After reading a Presidential rankings book had ranked Eisenhower number five on the list of best presidents, I was intrigued to learn more about the General turned President. His tenure as President in the 50’s to the early 60’s was a time of peace and prosperity in the country. Some of his accomplishments include the expansion of the Interstate Highway System, implementing the first civil rights legislation since reconstruction, putting an end to the Korean War, and keeping America safe during a nuclear era. After the close out of the Korean War, only one known military death occurred during his administration.
Ike was frequently called upon to offer help and advice to Kennedy and Johnson in dealing with foreign relations (particularly the Cuban Missile Crisis and Vietnam), and stressed an efficient transition when Kennedy took over as President. He was a careful decision maker and was so particular about his speeches that he would often critique and re-write them dozens of times until he felt they were perfect.
Despite him being the Five-Star General and Supreme Commander of the Allied Expeditionary Force in Europe, as President, he focused on waging peace over war. He feared the “military-industrial complex” building throughout the country. With the US having developed the atom bomb to end the war, the nuclear threat throughout the world was rising, and regardless of how many nuclear warheads the US had in their arsenal, it didn’t necessarily make the world a safer place. His administration introduced the idea of using nuclear technology for other purposes besides war, and urged other countries to follow suit.
On his desk included a quote that I found similar to Teddy Roosevelt’s “speak softly and carry a big stick,” but in a tone that better aligns with Ike: “gently in manner, strong in deed.”
Ike was frequently called upon to offer help and advice to Kennedy and Johnson in dealing with foreign relations (particularly the Cuban Missile Crisis and Vietnam), and stressed an efficient transition when Kennedy took over as President. He was a careful decision maker and was so particular about his speeches that he would often critique and re-write them dozens of times until he felt they were perfect.
Despite him being the Five-Star General and Supreme Commander of the Allied Expeditionary Force in Europe, as President, he focused on waging peace over war. He feared the “military-industrial complex” building throughout the country. With the US having developed the atom bomb to end the war, the nuclear threat throughout the world was rising, and regardless of how many nuclear warheads the US had in their arsenal, it didn’t necessarily make the world a safer place. His administration introduced the idea of using nuclear technology for other purposes besides war, and urged other countries to follow suit.
On his desk included a quote that I found similar to Teddy Roosevelt’s “speak softly and carry a big stick,” but in a tone that better aligns with Ike: “gently in manner, strong in deed.”
October 18, 2020
page 123 Ike's accomplishments listed' End of Korean War, eight years of peace, Interstate Highway System, first civil rights legislation since Reconstruction and several balanced budgets."
page 166-Ike is against sending troops to Vietnam but Kennedy says' Vietnam represents the cornerstone of the free world in Southern Asia' which is eerily foreshadowing.
After the total fiasco of the Bay Of Pigs, President Kennedy confers with Ike and Ike is incredulous when Kennedy informs Ike that no air support was provided to the American trained invaders and thus left them on the beach to die !!
page 166-Ike is against sending troops to Vietnam but Kennedy says' Vietnam represents the cornerstone of the free world in Southern Asia' which is eerily foreshadowing.
After the total fiasco of the Bay Of Pigs, President Kennedy confers with Ike and Ike is incredulous when Kennedy informs Ike that no air support was provided to the American trained invaders and thus left them on the beach to die !!
January 23, 2021
The implication of the title is that this is all about the last three days of DDE's presidency emphasizing his parting speech (the military industrial complex one) but it is also a bio of 34 for anyone who doesn't necessarily want to become an expert on the man. It's very well done and sheds a lot of light on JFK as well as Eisenhower.
September 18, 2022
I learned a lot about President Eisenhower and have increased respect for him and for John F Kennedy.
May 21, 2017
Got this from a Republican friend a few days ago. Not a Fox fan, but I think Bret Baier is one of the more agreeable people on the network, so I was willing to give it a fare shake.
It wasn't my cup of tea. As a biography, it gives a sum-up of Eisenhower's career but seems to skip on a lot of the details. While it's not meant to be comprehensive, I wished Baier had gone into more detail about his subject, which he obviously has a great admiration for. I also wish he had edited it a little more, as the book tends to fall into repetition.
It also has a tendency to sanitize his presidency and put the general on a pedestal. As a result, Ike doesn't seem to have that much of a personality and I didn't really get to know him as a person. Same with Mamie and John. As Baier is writing for a mainly conservative audience, he panders to them by taking a couple of jabs at the Kennedys while completely glancing over Nixon.
The book also doesn't focus that much on Ike's final presidential speech (which I assumed would be the centerpiece of the book), analyzing only a few sections of it which are sandwiched between Ike's military career (only twenty pages or so is dedicated to that) and the Bay of Pigs fiasco. The actual speech is banished to the back of the book after an afterword where Baier compares the Ike/JFK transition to the BO/DJT transition. Simply put, that wasn't a good idea.
Baier did kindle my interest for Eisenhower, though, and gave a few good suggestions in Jean Edward Smith and Stephen Ambrose, along with Eisenhower's own memoirs. So I give him credit for that. And as I mention, Baier obviously has a great admiration for the general and it shows. So if anything, this book is probably a toe-dipper for people who are not that familiar with Eisenhower and, again, Bret Baier is an alright writer who I hope tightens his style in future books.
All-in-all, a good, albeit conservative-pandering, introduction to Ike.
It wasn't my cup of tea. As a biography, it gives a sum-up of Eisenhower's career but seems to skip on a lot of the details. While it's not meant to be comprehensive, I wished Baier had gone into more detail about his subject, which he obviously has a great admiration for. I also wish he had edited it a little more, as the book tends to fall into repetition.
It also has a tendency to sanitize his presidency and put the general on a pedestal. As a result, Ike doesn't seem to have that much of a personality and I didn't really get to know him as a person. Same with Mamie and John. As Baier is writing for a mainly conservative audience, he panders to them by taking a couple of jabs at the Kennedys while completely glancing over Nixon.
The book also doesn't focus that much on Ike's final presidential speech (which I assumed would be the centerpiece of the book), analyzing only a few sections of it which are sandwiched between Ike's military career (only twenty pages or so is dedicated to that) and the Bay of Pigs fiasco. The actual speech is banished to the back of the book after an afterword where Baier compares the Ike/JFK transition to the BO/DJT transition. Simply put, that wasn't a good idea.
Baier did kindle my interest for Eisenhower, though, and gave a few good suggestions in Jean Edward Smith and Stephen Ambrose, along with Eisenhower's own memoirs. So I give him credit for that. And as I mention, Baier obviously has a great admiration for the general and it shows. So if anything, this book is probably a toe-dipper for people who are not that familiar with Eisenhower and, again, Bret Baier is an alright writer who I hope tightens his style in future books.
All-in-all, a good, albeit conservative-pandering, introduction to Ike.
April 11, 2020
Delightful book full of well researched analysis of Eisenhower’s presidency and transitions from Truman to Eisenhower and Eisenhower to Kennedy. Eisenhower was one of the greatest military and political leaders of our time. His major accomplishments - WW2 D-Day victory, ending Korean War and navigating Cold War with Soviet Union - are remarkable in scope and avoiding threats to our existence as a nation. My ideal profile of a president is one with huge military and/or business accomplishments resulting in tested leadership skills. Eisenhower fits that model perfectly. Those with academic and/or political backgrounds always seem to disappoint and fall short. They may sound and look good but results matter in the long term and that’s what Eisenhower delivered.
March 21, 2017
I picked up this book because I have always thought highly Dwight Eisenhower (perhaps because he is the first US president I remember). The book is unabashedly adulatory--and I suppose there is a great deal to admire about the man. But he is portrayed as virtually perfect. At the same time, judging from his voluminous footnotes, Baier has done considerable research for this book, which focuses on the days between Ike’s final presidential address and John F. Kennedy’s accession to the oval office.
December 12, 2017
I like Ike. I appreciated the personal biography and Bret Baier's telling of the transition of power between Eisenhower and Kennedy. I would have preferred more biographical history on Eisenhower's military accomplishments. Why? In this book, Kennedy calls on Eisenhower more for his military experience than his presidential experience. As a reader, it would have been nice to draw on more of the military experience.
June 11, 2020
3-1/2 to 4 stars
I enjoyed “Three Days in January” a great deal because I embarrassingly knew little about General Eisenhower. Baier presents an adequate introduction with a broad overview of his life, although a little bias in Eisenhower’s favor showed through at times.
The focus of this Eisenhower biography is the significant speech he gave as he was exiting his Presidential office. JFK was to inherit delicate situations and a shaky world. Eisenhower attempted to offer a wise and moderated approach in his final speech based upon his years of military service and global knowledge and experience. He warned against an industrial military complex; he warned against challenging Khrushchev in ineffective, perhaps dangerous, ways. It was also important to Eisenhower to have a smooth transition from one president to another. It was interesting to read how he ensured this was to happen.
It is also educational to learn of the impressive accomplishments and firsts of President Eisenhower. No spoilers here!
A quote from Eisenhower’s second inaugural address bears repeating because it is relevant for today. “May we pursue the rights—without self-righteousness. May we know unity—without conformity. May we know strength—without pride in self. May we, in our dealings with all peoples of the earth, ever speak truth and serve justice.” page 104.
I enjoyed “Three Days in January” a great deal because I embarrassingly knew little about General Eisenhower. Baier presents an adequate introduction with a broad overview of his life, although a little bias in Eisenhower’s favor showed through at times.
The focus of this Eisenhower biography is the significant speech he gave as he was exiting his Presidential office. JFK was to inherit delicate situations and a shaky world. Eisenhower attempted to offer a wise and moderated approach in his final speech based upon his years of military service and global knowledge and experience. He warned against an industrial military complex; he warned against challenging Khrushchev in ineffective, perhaps dangerous, ways. It was also important to Eisenhower to have a smooth transition from one president to another. It was interesting to read how he ensured this was to happen.
It is also educational to learn of the impressive accomplishments and firsts of President Eisenhower. No spoilers here!
A quote from Eisenhower’s second inaugural address bears repeating because it is relevant for today. “May we pursue the rights—without self-righteousness. May we know unity—without conformity. May we know strength—without pride in self. May we, in our dealings with all peoples of the earth, ever speak truth and serve justice.” page 104.
February 7, 2019
The author declares at the onset that he is not attempting to write a biography of Eisenhower, yet the first part of the book certainly reads like one. I realized after getting further into the work that the description of Eisenhower's early life was a necessary undertaking to try and put the later life into some perspective.
The focus on the transition to the Kennedy administration and how that time in history is instructive to the present was well done.
Having read this work long after Donald Trump became President I found it already getting a bit dated, which is the fate of any work which narrates in the present, as opposed to some removed and more historic point of view. Maybe this is a reflection on the author's regular role as commentator on and describer of current events.
A good read and a good look at a key moment in our history. There are lessons in it for all of us.
The focus on the transition to the Kennedy administration and how that time in history is instructive to the present was well done.
Having read this work long after Donald Trump became President I found it already getting a bit dated, which is the fate of any work which narrates in the present, as opposed to some removed and more historic point of view. Maybe this is a reflection on the author's regular role as commentator on and describer of current events.
A good read and a good look at a key moment in our history. There are lessons in it for all of us.
November 20, 2021
Interesting book, albeit brief, on our thirty-fourth president. This is by no means a complete biography on Eisenhower, nor does it claim to be. It does however give insight into specific incidents in Eisenhower’s life. In fact, it provides insight in the dealings between Ike, JFK and LBJ. I found it interesting that both Kennedy and Johnson both sought out Ike’s counsel in matters of national security and what was best for the country. Wow, what a concept, reaching across party lines for the betterment of the country. Worth your time, learned quite a bit.
January 26, 2024
Brett Baier's book is well written and focused on Eisenhower's political outlook and influence on the Presidents he served as both a general and an advisor. It's more of a breakdown of his political hopes with a small biography bookending it.
I didn't find this book too interesting, but it had nothing to do with the writing style. Just wasn't my thing. I did find one great quote (a modernized take from George Washington's farewell speech) in Eisenhower's farewell speech that seemed especially relevant to today.
Pg. 301 'Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.'
I didn't find this book too interesting, but it had nothing to do with the writing style. Just wasn't my thing. I did find one great quote (a modernized take from George Washington's farewell speech) in Eisenhower's farewell speech that seemed especially relevant to today.
Pg. 301 'Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.'
Displaying 1 - 30 of 449 reviews