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.

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 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. 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.

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.

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.

Imagine your name is Joseph Stalin. You awaken in the Kremilin on June 21, 1941 to learn that over three million German soldiers have attacked your nation! Three Nazi forces attacking Leningrad and the north, Moscow and the central portion of the nation and the southern part of Russia have decided they will end communism and reign over eastern Europe!
The greatest battle began that June dawn in the greatest invasion in modern history. From September 1941 until the spring of 1942 over seven millon soldiers would be involved in the life and death struggle for Moscow. Over 2.5 million Russians would die without the Germans losing about half that number of casualties. Though later battles such as Stalingrad, Leningrad and Kursk would get more publicity the battle of Moscow was the largest contest in the war. During World War II the Soviets lost over 25 million of their soldiers and civilians.
Both regimes were led by cruel amoral dictators. Stalin and Hitler had both been born far from the center of power in their empires. Stalin in Georgia and Hitler in Austria. Both men were ruthless killers of opponents who trusted no person. Stalin wed twice and was a terrible father. Hitler only married in the last hours of his life to his loyal mistress Eva Braun. Together they are responsible for a war in which 55 million lost their lives.
Both dictators made mistakes in the Russian campaign. Hitler invaded Russia too late in the year. His men would die in the thousands during the harsh Russian Winter. They had not been furnished with winter clothing, equipment and supplies of fuel were inadequate. The blitzkrieg warfare did not work in such a huge land as Russia. Hitler failed to learn from Napoleon's disastrous 1812 invasion of Russia! Hitler's forces made a diversion to the south instead of pressing towards Moscow which should have been the main focus of the campaign. Hitler did not win over the populace launching mass terror even worse than the terrorism practiced by Stalin.
Andrew Nagorski is a former Newsweek correspondent in Russia. He interviewed many people who had participated in events during this terrible time. The anecdotes told by and about the old Russians who lived through this era make the book interesting.
The book is well illustrated with maps helping us visualize the battles.
Nagorski has done his research on a battle which is little known in the West. He has done a good job dealing with such a grisly story.

I purchased THE GREATEST BATTLE because of a general interest in World War II and particularly its turning points. I didn't read beforehand a synopsis or reviews of the book and thus wasn't disabused of the notion that its vantage point was that of the units fighting on the ground, perhaps at the army, corps and brigade levels. This preconception proved to be a misconception, though not one fatal to my subsequent appreciation of this narrative about Germany's attempt to capture Moscow.

THE GREATEST BATTLE is rather a Big Picture overview of the largest armed clash of WWII beginning well before Hitler's invasion of the U.S.S.R. to April 1942, considered by military consensus to be the end of the battle. It is, as the subtitle suggests, more about Hitler vs. Stalin and their respective leadership styles as the Wehrmacht, seemingly unstoppable, drove on the Soviet capital in the summer and fall of 1941.

Author Andrew Nagorski touches on so many topics: Stalin's purge of the army in 1937-38, the Nazi-Soviet nonaggression pact, the partition of Poland, the Soviet's 1939 Winter War with Finland, Hitler's reasons for invading Russia, Stalin's apparent blindness to the coming assault, the speed of the German advance, the unpreparedness of the Soviet Army, Stalin's view of Russian POWs, the panic that overtook Moscow's citizenry, the evacuation of Lenin's body, Stalin's decision to remain in Moscow and his decision to recall troops from the Far East, winter's effect on the unprepared German forces, American and British diplomatic overtures to the Kremlin, the Lend-Lease program, the rise of General Zhukov, General Guderian's removal from command, General Andrei Vlasov's switch of sides, the difficulties encountered by Western journalists reporting the battle, and Stalin's concept of post-war boundaries. "Touches on" is the operative term for the author's approach as the volume's relatively short length (316 pages of text) doesn't allow for an in-depth treatment of any one of its wide range of topics.

The book includes four single-page maps that show general directions of advance along the Eastern and Moscow fronts at various times, but which don't include unit designations and positions below Army Group. There's also a serviceable sixteen-page section of photographs.

In my inexpert eyes, THE GREATEST BATTLE doesn't have the narrative power of, say, The Fall of Berlin 1945 by Antony Beevor, but, as a solid, comprehensive summary of the battle for Moscow, it should serve the casual student of WWII well enough.

This is an accurate read, and good for the first-time reader of the Grand Alliance, and the Eastern Front. On the other hand, for those of us already familiar with the subject, there is no groundbreaking news here.

Mr. Nagorski's book is a good introduction to the German/Soviet conflict during WWII. I got this book because,although I have studied the USSR and had a good background on the Great Patriotic War, I didn't know very much about this specific battle. I'm not really Mr. Nagorski's proper audience . This book was written for readers who don't have much background on the conflict or on the Soviet Union during the Stalinist era. Mr. Nagorski spends a good deal of time providing background information that's necessary to understanding the war, but which many readers will already have under their belts. This isn't in any way bad; a normal American or Western European of the late 20th/early 21st Century will find the Stalinist system bewildering. Why did Stalin murder and imprison thousands of loyal and competent officers immediately before the start of a war he knew was imminent? And although its easy to see why Stalin was paralyzed with the fear of "provoking" the Germans, I've always wondered why he didn't do someothing like order his planes to withdraw beyond the operational limits of the Luftwaffe-surely Hitler couldn't have considered that "provocative" and it might have saved his Air Force from its destruction in the first days of the war. Of course Mr. Nagorski can't explain that either-no one really can-but he presents the basic story in a very readable way and gives a good background on the paranoia and unreasoning terror that was part of daily life during the Stalinist era. He also gives a great deal of very useful background from foreigners looking into the Soviet Union at the time, quoting the American diplomatic staff's reports to Roosevelt and their diary entries as they observed one of the most horrific and baffling political systems in history. This is an excellent place for people interested in the Eastern Front to start their studies.

Although well written and doing a good job on the political and human end of this great battle, the military aspect of this book was not very good. There was simply not enough about the battle itself in here and no new info on the military side at all. If anything the battle itself from Barbarossa itself through Smolensk, Kiev, Operation Typhoon, and the great battles and counterattack at Moscow itself, was laid out in only a sketchy and disappointing manner. Hopefully a new and modern complete history of the battle itself, in all aspects, military, human, and political will be written, but this one lacks sorely on the military end. Moscow 1941 by Cedric Braithwaite is actually a superior book to this one, despite lacking some details as well. As I've said, well written and somewhat interesting here, but alot more military detail is needed.

Nagorski does a great job introducing the characters but fails to provide depth into the major conflict between Hilter and his General Heinz Guderian whom he held back from almost certain victory in Moscow. He did the same thing to Guderian at Dunkirk. Why? Who had Hitler's ear? What was he thinking? Perhaps a better written book will provide answers to those intriguing questions.