Terrible Terry Allen: Combat General of World War II - The Life of an American Soldier

Gerald Astor's "Terrible Terry Allen" is a good but uneven treatment of one of the most enigmatic American commanders of World War II. Because Terry Allen never rose higher than a division commander, in one way it is unusual that a biography was written about him; but after reading this book, you'll understand why this man (who commanded two separate divisions in the European Theater and was a true fighting general) deserves a biography. Astor tells the story of Terry Allen's life, from a brief introduction with his parents' background (his father was also an Army officer), briefly discusses his childhood, and then focuses on Terry Allen's military career - which included service during the Mexican incursion and truly heroic service as a battalion commander in World War I. Of course the majority of the book discusses Allen's World War II service. In World War II, Allen served as the commander of the First Infantry Division (from which he was relieved during the Sicily campaign, a move that has been discussed at length but never fully explained) and then the commander of the 104th Infantry Division during its train-up in the United States and its campaign in Europe. Astor sometimes tells this story by quoting from letters that Allen wrote him while at war. At other times he is notably silent on what Allen was thinking or feeling. Sometimes, the book is more of a chronicle of the units that Allen was leading than of his actions. This is of course is the result of writing about someone who was only a division commander: his papers were not preserved like others were; his aides and staff did not keep their own detailed memoirs; and he was not a prolific letter writer and diarist the way some commanders (such as Eisenhower and Patton) were. Also of note: this book had a good collection of maps (very important in any military history work) but the paperback binding was beginning to separate during just one reading. Despite these drawbacks - many outside of the author's control and a natural product of writing on someone without a large body of documentary evidence -- there isn't another good resource on the life of Terry Allen. For this reason, I recommend this book to anyone interested in World War II.

I'm actually surprised Terry Allen was promoted to general. He didn't graduate from West Point, his discipline of his troops was lax in comparison to other generals, and he obviously wasn't in the club with Bradley, Ike, and Patton. While Patton did stand up for him in the invasion of Sicily, Ike wanting to can him, Patton insisted he remain in command of his Big Red One. Patton would do things like pee into Gen Allen's slit trench in front of Allen's men, effectively calling him a coward in not so many words. Two of Allen's men took their tommy guns off of safe into fire mode with an audible click at which point Patton left. I would recommend this book to any WW II buff.

"The Greatest Soldier of World War Two" - This is one of the many accolades said of Major General Terry de la Mesa Allen by other Generals who knew him. He has also been credited with being the best U.S. combat commander of WWII. There are quite a few similarities between General George S. Patton and Major General Terry de la Mesa Allen in that they both:· trained at West Point (Allen did not graduate, but finished his education at the Catholic University),· served in the U.S. Cavalry during World War I as officers,· became generals during World War II, · were aggressive in their campaigns and always attacked, · lost commands for "political" reasons, · and both were very controversial. There were also definite differences between the two:Whereas Patton loved the limelight, and never missed an opportunity to distinguish himself, Allen was very low key, shied from publicity, and who liked his liquor. Patton graduated from West Point, Allen flunked out twice.Known as aggressive fighters, Patton was not terribly concerned with casualties but Allen was continually looking to keep the casualty rate as low as possible. While Patton and Allen were both outspoken, Patton tried to play the "Army" game...Allen did not play the game, which irritated his superiors. Allen was loved and respected by the average "G.I." in both Army Divisions. He was considered the enlisted man's General. Terry Allen was the only American WWII general to train and lead into combat two Army Divisions: The 1st Division (a.k.a. the famous "Big Red One"), and the 104th Infantry Division ("The Timberwolves"). Under his command, the 1st Division helped conquer Sicily. Later, the 104th Division, led by Terry Allen was the first Army Division to make contact with the Russian Army (they met somewhere between the Mulde and Elbe Rivers).The 104th Division under Terry Allen, set a record of 195 days of consecutive combat contact against the German Army.While Gerald Astor has corrected a historical oversight by writing Terry Allen's biography, he definitely fell short of the excellent mark of a great book. I found the book to be slow moving during the first few chapters of "Terrible Terry Allen", and dwelled too much on minute details (such as the letters to his wife), while completely skipping over very important events in his life. While it is still a good book in that it describes a very controversial and brilliant military man, it comes up short describing "the total man". I would normally rate it at 3 stars, but give it a 4th only because it is the only book of its kind on Terry Allen.

Biographies of such prominent World War II generals as Dwight D. Eisenhower and George S. Patton Jr. continue to surface regularly. Rarely do corps and division commanders who wore two stars on their collars receive the honor of the historian's pen. Gerald Astor may perhaps be paving the way for a trickle-down effect with his most recent effort. Astor's subject is not an obscure name in the annals of World War II combat. Major General Terry de la Mesa Allen is perhaps best remembered for commanding the infamous 1st Infantry Division-The Big Red One-during the North African and Sicilian Campaigns. He, along with his deputy commander Brig. Gen Theodore Roosevelt Jr. were perhaps responsible for the belief among its troops that the U.S. Army was made up of the 1st Division and a few million replacements. Just as the Big Red One was at its zenith in Sicily, both commanders were relieved and reassigned; Roosevelt would land on D-Day with his 4th Division, Allen would command the 104th Division during the drive into Germany. This controversial decision between Patton and then II Corps commander Omar Bradley to relieve Allen could become the subject of a book in itself. But Astor gives his readers much more. Allen was an Army brat. His father graduated from West Point and led a relatively uneventful Army career and never saw combat. Allen would flunk out of West Point and gain his commission in the reserves. Allen's son, Terry Jr. would also attend the Academy and die serving in his father's old division in Vietnam. This legacy of professional military officership is a promising theme that does not quite come to full fruition in Astor's' book. It appears Astor could have done more with this concept than a few pages he devoted to the first and third generations of Allens. The chapter on the incorrigible Terry Allen at West Point, however, may rank Allen alongside the likes of George A. Custer and George Pickett as a triumvirate of cadet flunkies. Like Custer, Allen made up for his academic and disciplinary deficiencies on the battle field. Astor, who has established a reputation for his oral histories, writes well and illustrates the personality of his subject with flowing prose. Astor is sympathetic, like Bruce Catton was to Ulysses S. Grant, to the fact that Allen may have had a drinking problem. Astor hammers home one significant contention, however: Allen cared for his men and agonised (and knelt down and prayed) when they became casualties. As I read, I kept thinking how could this poignant testament to a hard-fighting, chain-smoking, maverick general have been better. First, Astor does not cite his sources in notes. This is indeed unfortunate for it not only lessens his credibility as a bonafide historian, but also makes for awkward prose when certain significant works have to be introduced within paragraphs. It is obvious Astor has done his homework and trekked to all the relevant archival repositories. It is sad his diligent research is not docum