I found this book an interesting read. I have read other more comprehensive biographies on each of these three generals. I knew they had overlaps, but I still enjoyed reading in detail about the intersections of these men throughout their careers.

I have read reviews about this book discussing the author's overly negative outlook on all three generals. Parts of the book I agree with, others parts could have been presented in better detail.

I found MacArthur's background fairly consistent with other books. I wish that there might have been more detail of his experiences in Japan after the war. His influence on that country's post war recovery seems to be immense, but is not laid out.

Ike's war-time European command experience seemed to get a mild shrift by the author. If I had not read other sources previously, I would have deemed Ike as unworthy of command. I am sure that accolades could be made for at least some of his decisions and interactions with others.

The author makes Marshall come across as milktoast. Personally, I think Marshall was the most interesting of the three generals in terms of impact on the war effort and direction. Other literary resources show him to be a much venerated and respected individual throughout most of the world. Churchill and British General Brooke are not the only persons to view Marshall's performance during the war. I would consider him an unsung hero.

I wished the author would have gone into more depth on interactions with other generals during their careers. I am positive there is a large of amount of detail available through existing published resources where overlaps and intersections with others are explored. One example is the influence of Fox Conner (Pershing's WWI Operations Chief) on Patton, let alone Ike. It would make sense that Conner probably had overlaps with MacArthur and Marshall too.

Overall I enjoyed the book as a decent summary of these three men, their careers, their intersections and their influence on history. But read it after you already have done some basic background reading on these individuals. Without that background, you might walk away from this book with different impressions of these generals than history actually presents. ( )

I have mixed feelings about this book. On the one hand it seems well researched and is certainly well written but it is hard to shake the impression that the judgments on the subjects are based more on their politics than the historical record. The author seems never to have met a Republican that he didn’t dislike. As the title indicates this is a triography of the three five stars generals of World War II: George Marshall, Dwight Eisenhower and Douglas MacArthur. Marshall, the apolitical general, gets the most praise with rarely an unkind word but there is no real controversy there since that opinion is shared by most of his contemporaries and historians. Eisenhower gets a mixed report card especially after he begins to cozy up to the Republicans after the end of the war. There are a number of sarcastic comments about his fat cat Republican friends. Poor Ike does not even get credit for what most people consider two of the important contributions of his Presidency: the interstate highway system (bad for the environment) and civil rights (he was just setting up the solid South for the Republicans). But it is really Douglas MacArthur who gets the harshest treatment. According to the author he seems to do everything except breathe fire. He is pictured as being almost totally incompetent as a general and an all around pompous buffoon. There are plenty of reasons to criticize MacArthur but surely there is a middle ground between American Caesar and Colonel Klink. ( )