Talk:Citizen Soldiers

Cleanup required. Will do it myself, tagging for a reminder.--Sonance 00:25, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Title

Who would actually type all of the article's name in the search when looking for this article? Most people would simply use "Citizen Soldiers," so I'm suggesting a move to that or another appropriate title. -- VGF11 22:41, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm going to move this, The title is far too verbose --Twyford 10:30, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Move done. --Twyford 10:32, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Criticism section

Ambrose also went out of his way to portray U.S. soldiers as morally superior to other WWII combatants.

Is this really the case? If I recall correctly, the book mentions several instances of American soldiers committing war crimes or behaving in ways that required disciplinary action from a superior, or in one case a reprimand from the unit chaplain, etc. CillaИ ♦ XC 04:28, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

also... "The book has also been criticized for overemphasizing the U.S. role in the liberation of Western Europe and limiting the role that British forces played in the course of the war." I don't see how this criticism is justified, the book is called "The US Army from the Normandy Beaches to the Bulge to the Surrender of Germany" it isn't called "the allied armies...." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.50.239.190 (talk) 22:17, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Why is it non-fiction then? The author may have interviewed veterans and their stories may have flown into the narrative, but it's still not a history book, rather epic prose. 105.4.4.21 (talk) 18:16, 24 November 2019 (UTC)

Consolidate with D-Day?

Just an idea: Since this book is kind of a sequel to the Ambrose D-Day book, and since we don't have an article for the D-Day book, what do we think about adjusting this article so that it covers both D-Day and Citizen Soldiers. Any thoughts? KConWiki (talk) 06:27, 1 January 2012 (UTC)