Product Description

The battle for Moscow was the biggest battle of World War II -- the biggest battle of all time. And yet it is far less known than Stalingrad, which involved about half the number of troops. From the time Hitler launched his assault on Moscow on September 30, 1941, to April 20, 1942, seven million troops were engaged in this titanic struggle. The combined losses of both sides -- those killed, taken prisoner or severely wounded -- were 2.5 million, of which nearly 2 million were on the Soviet side. But the Soviet capital narrowly survived, and for the first time the German Blitzkrieg ended in failure. This shattered Hitler's dream of a swift victory over the Soviet Union and radically changed the course of the war.

The full story of this epic battle has never been told because it undermines the sanitized Soviet accounts of the war, which portray Stalin as a military genius and his people as heroically united against the German invader. Stalin's blunders, incompetence and brutality made it possible for German troops to approach the outskirts of Moscow. This triggered panic in the city -- with looting, strikes and outbreaks of previously unimaginable violence. About half the city's population fled. But Hitler's blunders would soon loom even larger: sending his troops to attack the Soviet Union without winter uniforms, insisting on an immediate German reign of terror and refusing to heed his generals' pleas that he allow them to attack Moscow as quickly as possible. In the end, Hitler's mistakes trumped Stalin's mistakes.

Drawing on recently declassified documents from Soviet archives, including files of the dreaded NKVD; on accounts of survivors and of children of top Soviet military and government officials; and on reports of Western diplomats and correspondents, The Greatest Battle finally illuminates the full story of a clash between two systems based on sheer terror and relentless slaughter.

Even as Moscow's fate hung in the balance, the United States and Britain were discovering how wily a partner Stalin would turn out to be in the fight against Hitler -- and how eager he was to push his demands for a postwar empire in Eastern Europe. In addition to chronicling the bloodshed, Andrew Nagorski takes the reader behind the scenes of the early negotiations between Hitler and Stalin, and then between Stalin, Roosevelt and Churchill.

This is a remarkable addition to the history of World War II.

Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #83606 in Books
• Published on: 2007-09-18
• Format: Bargain Price
• Number of items: 1
• Binding: Hardcover
• 384 pages

From Publishers Weekly
Journalist and foreign correspondent Nagorski combines published sources and interviews in this history of what he calls the largest, deadliest and most decisive battle of WWII. The often cited Russian winter did not account for the battle's outcome, he asserts, nor did German military overstretch. The tide wasn't turned by Hitler's increasingly erratic command decisions either. Moscow, Nagorski argues, was won by the Soviet government, the Red Army and the Russian people. Stalin's decision to stay in the city provided a rallying point—otherwise his mistakes as a commander and his brutality as head of state might have handed the Germans a victory they couldn't win in combat. A Red Army still learning its craft lost more than two million soldiers before Moscow, many of whom were victims of teenaged officers and obsolete weapons, failed tactical doctrines and logistical systems. Even the vaunted Siberian divisions were short of everything, including winter clothes, as they fought in sub-zero temperatures. Nor were Moscow's residents the united folk of Communist myth. Nagorski's sources luridly describe panic, looting and wildcat strikes as the Germans approached. Still, he concludes that whatever the shortcomings of Moscow's defenders, their deeds don't require heroic myth: the truth is honorable enough. (Sept.)
Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

From AudioFile
Adolf Hitlers unsuccessful invasion of Stalins Russia in 1941 brought two of historys most evil dictators into a four-year struggle for control of the world. THE GREATEST BATTLE contains one of the best biographies of Stalin in audio today because it exists in the context of Uncle Joes fight for his life. Michael Prichards performance shows why he is so well liked for nonfiction. His conversational style makes learning enjoyable, and his relaxed pace allows time to assimilate the details of important events. His expertise with the foreign names and places makes it sound as though they were his native language. Both content and narration will appeal to history lovers and WWII buffs. J.A.H. © AudioFile 2008, Portland, Maine-- Copyright © AudioFile, Portland, Maine

From Booklist
The war on the eastern front during World War II was the greatest land war in history, and it was unprecedented in its savagery and slaughter. Westerners usually think of the battle for Stalingrad as the obvious representation of that savagery. However, Nagorski, a senior editor at Newsweek, makes a convincing assertion that the battle for Moscow, which raged from September 1941 to April 1942, was the most destructive and most important battle of the war. The broad outlines of Nagorski's chronicle are familiar, including the rapid initial advance of the Germans after the invasion of June 1941, the early snows that bogged down the advance, and the brilliant counterattack of the Siberian reserves that drove the Germans back from the gates of Moscow. What makes Nagorski's account special are his skill at conveying the devastating human costs of the conflict and his integration of individual experiences with the broader strategic goals of each side. Freeman, Jay

Customer Reviews

Good but not great
Does this book break any major new ground? No, but what do you expect over 60 years after the events described? Am I on the lookout for a deeper and more authoritative account of the struggle for Moscow? Yes. Does this book give a good general overview of the Battle of Moscow, along with some rather interesting reminiscences from its survivors? Yes. But still, I wonder about the honesty of the historical publishing industry towards their customers when I see them churn out book after book like this that simply revisit well-worn subjects and rearrange the same old information, except with a different set of pictures and a new author. I get most of my books from the library, so it's no skin off my nose, but I imagine a lot of people must snatch up these retread histories retail if the industry keeps perpetrating this scam. What's even worse are the gimmicks; I see a book out now that presents an intertwined biography of Abraham Lincoln and Charles Darwin, purporting to find some previously unknown cosmic connection between their lives, of which we must all now be aware. Well, if we don't want to waste our time reading mediocre books and publishing gimmicks, I guess we need to rely on our fellow amazon reviewers in order to really separate the wheat from the chaff. In my judgement, don't settle for this one. If you really want to learn about the Battle of Moscow, I'm sure there have been better books written, even if I don't know what they are.

Moscow; The Titanic Struggle between Hitler & Stalin
The Greatest Battle: Stalin, Hitler, and the Desperate Struggle for Moscow That Changed the Course of World War II

Many people think Stalingrad was the turning point in WWII in the East, but I think Andrew Nagorski is right that Hitler's failure to take Moscow set the stage for the Soviets to be able to recover and drive the Germans back. It all hinged on Stalin being able to call up his reserves from the Far East, the Siberians. Once Stalin was convinced the Japanese were moving South and wouldn't attack him, he could call up these important reserves. These troops and the Russian winter stopped the Germans.

This book is easy to read and well researched. Andrew Nagorski points out that the Great Terror unleashed on the Red Army in the late 1930s weakened the military leadership and coupled with the Red Army's poor showing against Finland these factors convinced Hitler that the Soviet Union would collapse once attacked. Stalin regained his nerve, used very brutal tactics against troops that surrendered and deserters, and recognized the talents of capable commanders like Zhukov.

The battles of Stalingrad, Kursk, and Leningrad got a lot more attention in the war chronicles of this mighty struggle, but the saving of Moscow enabled the Soviet Union to recover and fight back to victory! This book tells this story very well and it will hold your attention as you read it. The narrative moves very quickly.

NOT a military book!
The title is misleading in that its talks about the battle of Moscow. This book is really about the political aspects of the German attack, mostly Stalin. The battle itself is rarely touched on, but a great deal of the book describes Stalin, Hitler, Lenin's body, foreign correspondents, and the lives of the lowly soldiers involved.
I have troubles with several parts of the book. Stalin and Hitler, two worst dictators for killing people, mostly their own. Err, sorry. Mao Zedong wins. The Germans had an easy time at first in fighting the Eastern front. Nope. The Soviets were caught with their pants down but they fought like hell after a few days and NEVER let up. The severe weather was the worst mistake that Hitler made and it was the weather that stopped the German army in its tracks. Wrong again. The German army was at the end of its rope by the time Moscow was in view. Their troops were mostly dead or wounded, their tanks blown up or broken down, food and ammo mostly gone, and they left their supply lines wide open behind them in their rush forward.
Finally, that Moscow was the greatest battle. Well, if you take into account that there were 15-20 battles scattered over a thousand square miles in a period over a year, yeah, I guess so.

If you do not know of Stalin's past, his self caused famine, the pogroms of the military, and his brutal treatment of his citizens and troops, the reason for his delay in acknowledging the invasion, then this book could be an eye opener and a good read. Otherwise, it is covering old ground. For anyone who has read a few good books on the eastern front, then give this a miss.