What do you think?
Rate this book
Cross Of Iron: The Rise And Fall Of The German War Machine 1918-1945
A riveting account of the origins and development of the German army that breaks through the distortions of conventional military history
Acclaimed for his revisionist history of the German Army in World War I, John Mosier continues his pioneering work in Cross of Iron , offering an intimate portrait of the twentieth-century German army from its inception, through World War I and the interwar years, to World War II and its climax in 1945.
World War I has inspired a vast mythology of bravery and carnage, told largely by the victors, that has fascinated readers for decades. Many have come to believe that the fast ascendancy of the Allied army, matched by the failure of a German army shackled by its rigidity, led to the war's outcome. Mosier demystifies the strategic and tactical realities to explain that it was Germany's military culture that provided it with the advantage in the first war. Likewise, Cross of Iron offers stunning revelations regarding the weapons of World War II, forcing a reevaluation of the reasons behind the French withdrawal, the Russian contribution, and Hitler as military thinker. Mosier lays to rest the notion that the army, as opposed to the SS, fought a clean and traditional war. Finally, he demonstrates how the German war machine succeeded against more powerful Allied armies until, in both wars, it was crushed by U.S. intervention.
The result of thirty years of primary research, Cross of Iron is a powerful and authoritative reinterpretation of Germany at war.
Acclaimed for his revisionist history of the German Army in World War I, John Mosier continues his pioneering work in Cross of Iron , offering an intimate portrait of the twentieth-century German army from its inception, through World War I and the interwar years, to World War II and its climax in 1945.
World War I has inspired a vast mythology of bravery and carnage, told largely by the victors, that has fascinated readers for decades. Many have come to believe that the fast ascendancy of the Allied army, matched by the failure of a German army shackled by its rigidity, led to the war's outcome. Mosier demystifies the strategic and tactical realities to explain that it was Germany's military culture that provided it with the advantage in the first war. Likewise, Cross of Iron offers stunning revelations regarding the weapons of World War II, forcing a reevaluation of the reasons behind the French withdrawal, the Russian contribution, and Hitler as military thinker. Mosier lays to rest the notion that the army, as opposed to the SS, fought a clean and traditional war. Finally, he demonstrates how the German war machine succeeded against more powerful Allied armies until, in both wars, it was crushed by U.S. intervention.
The result of thirty years of primary research, Cross of Iron is a powerful and authoritative reinterpretation of Germany at war.
336 pages, Hardcover
First published May 1, 2006
12 people are currently reading
119 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews
October 9, 2019
Mosier makes some interesting points, but sometimes seems to contradict himself. His observations regarding the political actors are solid and outside of the consensus.
August 13, 2011
John Mosier is a revisionist historian. Revisionist historians are generally hated people by 'regular' historians for two main reasons: 1 a revisionist forces a regular historian to either defend their theories (which is hard work) or actually forces them to re-think much of what they themselves have previously studied and 2, by the very nature of the controversy that a revisionist historian creates, they sell more books and in the short term make much, much more money than a regular historian. However, most revisionist historians are crackpots who are in it primarily for the 2 reason, Mosier however, while not a perfect historian by any means, does seem to genuinely want to change the narrative and not just for monetary reasons.
And that's the reason I give this book 5 stars; I applaud Mosier who himself is not a Military Historian by training for delving into a subject as passionately controversial as the history of the Wehrmacht. And for the most part he does a very good job...for the most part. Mosier certainly has an axe to grind here though. He is far and away adversarial to Eastern Front historians (the 'Eastern Front' in WWII being the name given to the war between Germany and her allies and the Soviet Union) and their contention that it was the Red Army that defeated the Wehrmacht. Mosier follows up his views in 'Cross of Iron' with his newest book 'Deathride' which details exclusively the Eastern Front. I have yet to read 'Deathride' but do plan to, nevertheless I will keep my focus on this book in particular. Mosier is quite antagonistic and even dismissive of the line of thinking that without the Soviet contribution the Germans would have won the war regardless of US involvement. Mosier takes the opportunity to, in my mind at least, overly downplay the role of the Soviet Union in Germany's defeat while never going into too much detail of any kind about how the US then was able to conquer the Wehrmacht.
Mosier does back up his arguments with data however, in the early stages of the war the Germans inflicted roughly a 14-1 kill ratio on the Soviets, and even by the end of the war the Wehrmacht, pathetically under-manned and under-equipped was still killing three Soviet soldiers for every one of theirs lost and taking out five Soviet tanks for every one the Soviets knocked out of the Wehrmacht's. Mosier does admit that the Wehrmacht lost the majority of its war dead in the Soviet Union, but then claims that without 'Lend Lease' the USSR would have collapsed by 1942. So, even in admitting the role the Red Army played in Germany's ultimate defeat, he attributes the Red Army victory, in an off hand way, to the US. To be fair to Mosier it's a valid argument, but I believe he rides the Red Army too hard and he does so mainly out of a valid hatred of Soviet style Communism. Certainly Stalin was a monster, even Kruschev admitted that, but I think Mosier lets his hatred of Communism get in the way of seeing the contribution of the Red Army in a fair light.
Having said that Mosier's book is quite good otherwise. He does detail the pre-war 'Reichswehr' days with Hans Von Seeckt. Although Mosier does believe that it was the National Socialists that spurred re-armament, he does admit that Von Seeckt and the post WWI Army had been looking for loop holes to work around the Versailles Treaty. He points out the irony of Jewish Officers in the German Wehrmacht and Luftwaffe, but does not at all shy away from the Wehrmacht's role in the mass murder of millions all around Europe. In his chapter on war crimes, Mosier is at his best. Though he clearly admires the Wehrmacht, he does not shy away from showing the whole truth, especially the dark side. His overview of the war itself is clearly secondary to his main purpose in showing how the Wehrmacht fought and thought. It's in his chapters on the design of tanks, the building of the Luftwaffe and the level of intellectualism in the military that helped make it so deadly that Mosier does his best work. Although even there, I find much to disagree. Mosier has a dim view of both the Luftwaffe and the Panzerwaffe (Tank Arm). I do agree that the Luftwaffe was unable to achieve significant victory after Operation Barbarossa, but this has far more to do with limited resources and too many commitments than it does technology. And I give the Germans far more credit for building fantastic tanks (even the Mark IV, once it was up-gunned in 1942, was a good tank all throughout the war and no one can doubt the worth of the Tiger's as well as the Panther)then does Mosier.
All in all this is a good book, though it will stir up controversy and heated debate amongst those who pay it any mind. And that is why I think it's a great book, it keeps alive the debate and debate is healthy. The more thinking one is forced to do, the healthier one becomes, the same is true of Military History.
And that's the reason I give this book 5 stars; I applaud Mosier who himself is not a Military Historian by training for delving into a subject as passionately controversial as the history of the Wehrmacht. And for the most part he does a very good job...for the most part. Mosier certainly has an axe to grind here though. He is far and away adversarial to Eastern Front historians (the 'Eastern Front' in WWII being the name given to the war between Germany and her allies and the Soviet Union) and their contention that it was the Red Army that defeated the Wehrmacht. Mosier follows up his views in 'Cross of Iron' with his newest book 'Deathride' which details exclusively the Eastern Front. I have yet to read 'Deathride' but do plan to, nevertheless I will keep my focus on this book in particular. Mosier is quite antagonistic and even dismissive of the line of thinking that without the Soviet contribution the Germans would have won the war regardless of US involvement. Mosier takes the opportunity to, in my mind at least, overly downplay the role of the Soviet Union in Germany's defeat while never going into too much detail of any kind about how the US then was able to conquer the Wehrmacht.
Mosier does back up his arguments with data however, in the early stages of the war the Germans inflicted roughly a 14-1 kill ratio on the Soviets, and even by the end of the war the Wehrmacht, pathetically under-manned and under-equipped was still killing three Soviet soldiers for every one of theirs lost and taking out five Soviet tanks for every one the Soviets knocked out of the Wehrmacht's. Mosier does admit that the Wehrmacht lost the majority of its war dead in the Soviet Union, but then claims that without 'Lend Lease' the USSR would have collapsed by 1942. So, even in admitting the role the Red Army played in Germany's ultimate defeat, he attributes the Red Army victory, in an off hand way, to the US. To be fair to Mosier it's a valid argument, but I believe he rides the Red Army too hard and he does so mainly out of a valid hatred of Soviet style Communism. Certainly Stalin was a monster, even Kruschev admitted that, but I think Mosier lets his hatred of Communism get in the way of seeing the contribution of the Red Army in a fair light.
Having said that Mosier's book is quite good otherwise. He does detail the pre-war 'Reichswehr' days with Hans Von Seeckt. Although Mosier does believe that it was the National Socialists that spurred re-armament, he does admit that Von Seeckt and the post WWI Army had been looking for loop holes to work around the Versailles Treaty. He points out the irony of Jewish Officers in the German Wehrmacht and Luftwaffe, but does not at all shy away from the Wehrmacht's role in the mass murder of millions all around Europe. In his chapter on war crimes, Mosier is at his best. Though he clearly admires the Wehrmacht, he does not shy away from showing the whole truth, especially the dark side. His overview of the war itself is clearly secondary to his main purpose in showing how the Wehrmacht fought and thought. It's in his chapters on the design of tanks, the building of the Luftwaffe and the level of intellectualism in the military that helped make it so deadly that Mosier does his best work. Although even there, I find much to disagree. Mosier has a dim view of both the Luftwaffe and the Panzerwaffe (Tank Arm). I do agree that the Luftwaffe was unable to achieve significant victory after Operation Barbarossa, but this has far more to do with limited resources and too many commitments than it does technology. And I give the Germans far more credit for building fantastic tanks (even the Mark IV, once it was up-gunned in 1942, was a good tank all throughout the war and no one can doubt the worth of the Tiger's as well as the Panther)then does Mosier.
All in all this is a good book, though it will stir up controversy and heated debate amongst those who pay it any mind. And that is why I think it's a great book, it keeps alive the debate and debate is healthy. The more thinking one is forced to do, the healthier one becomes, the same is true of Military History.
May 31, 2020
I love John Mosier's controversial books! This one I think is more conservative then some of his other ones. Mosier always makes good points that you may not always agree with but it starts an interesting conversation nonetheless.
One very interesting point he makes in this one, that I have never heard before, is about German production. The National Socialists and the Bolsheviks both saw the dehumanizing aspect in the mass production methods used in Western Democracies. The Bolsheviks got around this problem by claiming the workers owned the means of production. The National Socialists maintained that the individual when properly empowered could trump any of the dehumanize mass production societies haha. Literally idealism over reality. I have always wondered why the German's were never able to mass produce the tanks and equipment they needed despite being some of the better engineers in the world. And it seems Mosier has found a very good reason. The German's used artisanal methods to produce each tank and would not allow women to work in the factory because they saw the family as more important. Pretty crazy stuff.
One very interesting point he makes in this one, that I have never heard before, is about German production. The National Socialists and the Bolsheviks both saw the dehumanizing aspect in the mass production methods used in Western Democracies. The Bolsheviks got around this problem by claiming the workers owned the means of production. The National Socialists maintained that the individual when properly empowered could trump any of the dehumanize mass production societies haha. Literally idealism over reality. I have always wondered why the German's were never able to mass produce the tanks and equipment they needed despite being some of the better engineers in the world. And it seems Mosier has found a very good reason. The German's used artisanal methods to produce each tank and would not allow women to work in the factory because they saw the family as more important. Pretty crazy stuff.
May 14, 2011
Moiser shares many interesting theories concerning WWII that have not been accepted or offered in standard histories of the war. Most of them make a lot of sense. A worthwhile read for anyone that wants to challenge tier perceptions of the War in Europe and the German Military. His rejection of the many of the "truths" of both wars are on solid foundations.
June 1, 2011
Interesting and sensible revision of German military history and results prior to and during WWII. This is a perspective that I have not read before and worth it to those interested in either the war or the German military.
Read
December 17, 2010Another basic overview of how the Germans allowed their military to run wild. Because their political masters encouraged them to.
Want to read
August 28, 2019Judd books 16-9-2011
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews