Danny S ParkerPeiper's War: The Wartime Years of SS Leader Jochen Peiper, 1941–44

My motivation for buying this book - which is somewhat off the beaten track in terms of what I normally purchase when looking for new titles in WW2 history - stems primarily from the length (604 pages equals lots of potentially new information) and my previous satisfaction with the author's excellent account of aerial combat during the Battle of the Bulge.Needless to say I am more interested in learning more about events than being entertained by lively narrative. Parker's latest account offered me both experiences, but did so in uneven, and at times somewhat unrelated, fashion.One caution up front: It is not a biography of Pieper nor does it cover the event he is most famous for: the massacre of captive US soldiers at the Baugnez crossroads (approx. 3 kms southeast of Malmedy, Belgium) in December 1944.About one-quarter of the book (150+ pages organized into nine chapters) is devoted to Pieper's experiences on the Eastern Front. There are four chapters on events following the D-Day landings in Normandy, several chapters on the Liebstandarte's brief deployment to Italy in late 1943, and a fair amount of material covering multiple periods in which the 1st SS Panzer Division underwent refitting, training and reconstitution in occupied France. The epilogue gives readers a brief insight into events that occurred during the Battle of the Bulge in December 1944 as well as the Fall 1945 war crimes trial of Pieper (and some of his men) and intelligence gathering methods (interrogation and listening devices in special camps) used to gather evidence against Pieper.If it sounds like the narrative sort of wanders around a bit - it does. There is a lot of filler information on the Nazi extermination program, concentration camps, and other topics. Some of that narrative is justified because Pieper was Heinrich Himmler's aide, but in other instances it seems like the author just didn't want to overlook fascinating tidbits of research that he dug up while gathering material for this book.I found the chapters on the Eastern Front very interesting. However, since I make no claims to having an in-depth knowledge of that portion of WW2, I cannot assess Parker's research. I do know substantially more about the Normandy campaign with the result being that I was very disappointed with those chapters. Parker relies on decades old German accounts that have largely been discredited or shown to be exaggerated. However, that is not a fatal flaw as most of the Normandy chapters discuss the "sister" division of Liebstandarte: 12th SS Panzer Division Hitler Jugend. Parker apparently feels he can include that narrative in his account because many of the commanders in the 12th SS Panzer Division previously served with Pieper in Russia. The 1st SS Panzer Division saw far "less" combat in Normandy as it was a somewhat late arrival to that campaign.The problems that I have with Parker's account of events in Normandy are manifold. He basically accepts without examination or verification all of the post-war statements made by Kurt and Hubert Meyer - both Hitler Jugend veterans. I wish he had been a bit more critical because although he tried to link the behavior of SS units in the West to their experiences in the East, that effort fell far short of what it could have been. The Canadians, British and Americans were far more efficient soldiers than the Russians with the result being that the Germans did not triumph dramatically over tremendous odds at tactical level with anything approaching the frequency of their impressive battlefield accomplishments on the Eastern Front. Yet they always refer to the Russians as far more tenacious opponents and characterize Soviet tanks as far superior to Anglo-American designs. That makes for somewhat of a dichotomy in my eyes.Parker paints the 12th SS Panzer Division's opening engagement with the Canadians as an ambush of cigarette smoking Sherman tank commanders who are totally clueless of the proximity of hidden Panzer IVs. In reality, the battle in question resembled more of a prolonged tank duel lasting two hours with considerable losses on both sides before the engagement ended in favor of the Germans. The Hitler Jugend foot soldiers launched an attack on supporting Canadian infantry, suffering heavy losses that infuriated the survivors. The SS men shot their prisoners out of anger - an understandable but unpardonable action for a unit that hadn't seen combat before. Parker intimates that this happened because of habits gained on the Eastern Front but doesn't mention that the high number of German casualties probably contributed to what occurred. For a more recent and fuller account see Marc Milner's "Stopping the Panzers: The Untold Story of D-Day."The rest of the Normandy material is replete with errors and outdated claims - such as Allied fighter bombers knocking out hundreds of vehicles from the 21st Panzer Division on 6 - 7 June (Niklas Zetterling effectively refutes that assertion in his excellent book "Normandy 44 - German Military Organization, Combat Power and Organization Effectiveness". The points brought up by Zetterling are reinforced by Mark Reardon's "Defending Fortress Europe: The German Seventh Army War Diary in Normandy June - July 1944. Reardon provides an edited version of how the Germans saw unfolding events during the campaign.)Misperceptions and exaggeration continue to abound through Chapter 19 where a skewed account of Operation Luttich is presented (where the myth about "skies black with fighter bombers stopped the German panzer offensive at Mortain" is repeated. In reality the Germans were halted by the resistance of US ground forces before the first British Typhoons appeared sometime around 1230pm that afternoon.). The narrative straightens out again beginning in Chapter 20 where Parker details the experiences of the 1st SS Panzer Division during the retreat across France. OBTW, Pieper has been out of the picture for some time at this point having been wounded by British artillery fire in a previous chapter.In retrospect, I have mixed feelings about the book and probably would not have purchased it if I had the opportunity to sift through the pages at a brick and mortar bookstore. However, I don't plan on returning it and have decided to pass it on to a friend whose interest in the Wehrmacht is much greater than my own. I did find the chapters on Russia very interesting and felt that Parker raised several good points about how German experiences on the Eastern Front led to issues on the Western front. He could have followed through on those points a bit better. For readers who are interested in that topic, see John English's "Surrender Invites Death: Fighting the Waffen SS in Normandy." Recommended with caveats.

Parker's most recent volume on SS officer Jochen Peiper offers some excellent insights into the man and his role in the Holocaust and other atrocities blamed on the 1st SS Panzer Division. There is no doubt that the 1st SS Panzer Division had both a formidable and ruthless reputation. Some of its actions were nothing to be proud of, such as supporting the murder of unarmed Jews and executing prisoners of war. Parker also makes clear that this was a hard-fighting unit that fought with utmost bravery, especially in Russia, against superior odds. For all the detailed information Parker compiled on Peiper, the book also repeats long-proven falsehoods on some subjects, particularly the sections dealing with German preparations and actions taken to defeat the Allied invasion of Europe. For example, he does not mention the assessment of German military meteorologists who claimed on 5 June 1944 that weather conditions would prevent a landing at the Pas de Calais on 6 June 1944, but conditions would support an enemy landing in Normandy. Rommel was briefed on this weather forecast, but contrary to Parker's assertion, the Desert Fox never believed that Normandy was the enemy's most likely landing area. Rather, Rommel and most German generals predicted that the Pas de Calais was the most likely landing area, and this is why Rommel departed on an UNAUTHORIZED leave when he left his headquarters to celebrate his wife's birthday in Germany. Parker criticizes the deployment of the panzer divisions, but for the wrong reasons. OKW saw little reason to commit its divisions until Army Group B under Rommel committed its armor reserves. Rommel had three armored divisions: 21st Panzer, 2nd Panzer, and 116th Panzer. Of the three, the 116th Panzer Division was not combat ready as it lacked much of its equipment on 6 June 44. 21st Panzer Division got sucked into the fighting piecemeal, as Parker points out. But 2nd Panzer Division was fully equipped and ready to roll, but ROMMEL SENT IT TO PAS DE CALAIS, not NORMANDY, on 6 June 44. Parker also overrates the effectiveness of allied air power and barely mentions the pulverizing capabilities of allied naval guns. One primary reason why General von Schweppenberg at Panzer Group West advocated maintaining the panzer reserve in the French interior was to protect it from naval artillery. Every previous German armored counterattack against Allied amphibious landings at Sicily, Salerno, and Anzio had been stopped cold by naval gunfire, not fighter bomber attacks. Indeed, naval gunfire was the primary reason why 12th SS Panzer Division and Panzer Lehr Division were unable to penetrate allied lines during their initial attempts to throw the Allies into the sea. Despite hype to the contrary, air power didn't prohibit movement of the OKW Panzer reserve toward the beaches. It did inflict losses, but they were relatively light. As far as the Battle of Kursk goes, Parker's account is entertaining, but he repeats the nonsense that this was the largest tank battle and it crippled the German Army. Other historians, notably Zetterling and Nipe have convincingly shown this is not true. Anyway, Parker is an engaging author and he did an excellent job tying Peiper to the Holocaust and implicating the 1st SS Panzer Division in the atrocities, but at the end of the day other authors have convincingly shown that the German Army as a whole was deeply implicated too. Indeed, the hero of "Is Paris Burning," General Dietrich von Choltitz who refused to follow Hitler's orders to level Paris to the ground, admitted to his peers in captivity that his hardest task was using his regiment to massacre Jews in a Crimean town. So, sure, Peiper played a role in the Holocaust, but so did a lot of so-called good Germans. He also completely ignores Canadian atrocities at Normandy. There is no excuse for executing prisoners of war by any side. The Canadians didn't have clean hands. After ambushing the commander of the Panzer Lehr Division's artillery commander, the Canadians murdered those who surrendered and then tied the wounded regimental commander to front of one of their tanks. Evidence suggests this is why Meyer ordered the execution of the Candian PWs, not that this excuses HIS actions, BUT it would be nice if Parker mentioned this in his book. Anyway, I could go on, but won't. I recommend reading the book if you're interested in Peiper, but there are numerous more accurate accounts of the Battle of Kursk and Normandy found elsewhere.

Very good read on Jochen Peiper. The only thing I didn't quite understand was after all the chapters on Peiper's career pre war, Battle Of France, & Russia, the account doesn't mention anything about the BattleOf The Bulge period of Peiper's command (other than Malmady. I didn't quite understand that, however I understand that the author has written at least 2 other books on Peiper, maybe it was covered they're. Also as mentioned by another commenter, Peiper missed most of the Normandy campaign, & spent most of that period in Germany, but the book has (a good) account of the Leibstandarte's fight in Normandy (less Peiper)which didn't quite make sense, since the book is about Peiper. That being said, this is still a very, very, good read!

This author did an excellent job of researching the subject. The first half of the book was well written, focused on Peiper with excellent maps. Then, when the story moves to France, it no longer was about Peiper but about the SS in general. Then, the author goes to a P.O Box 1142 in the USA and then to the Malmedy massacre and the trials. I gave the book a good review because the first half of the book was excellent. However, the book, in my opinion, goes off the rails in the second half. Maybe he should have focused the book on Peiper in WWII in the East.

I was impressed with the research that went into this historical account. Well written, well documented, excellent reading. I cannot attest to what some reviewers of this work have noted, i.e., errors in some accounts. I am not a scholar of WWII or personalities therein. But, I do recognize hard work and especially documented research. This is a very well-written account of one military officer on the German side. It does show two sides to Piper -- one from documented research of events, and two, Piper's letters.

This is the third book by Danny Parker about Joachim (Jochen) Peiper and like the previous two books is a superbly researched piece of work.What I like about Danny's books is the fact he never lets his personal feelings about the subject come through. He simply sticks to the findings of his research. I have read numerous books about Peiper over the years and sadly most are slanted one way or another. On the one hand you have authors who clearly lean shall we say to the right in their views and it comes through in their writing. Other authors go the other way and seem to want to villify their subject matter at every opportunity. Danny doesn't do this which is what makes his books so good to read.It covers as the sub title states the years 1941 to pre Ardennes campaign1944. Therefore we have Peipers Eastern Front campaigns, Italy and Normandy. Each one is covered in detail and written in a way that keeps you reading. It is simply a very, very good book.Those of us that want to read about the Ardennes campaign (Battle of the Bulge) will have to wait as Danny is currently working on a fourth title about Peiper which will cover it. I for one already look forward to it.All in all a superbly written, well researched book and one that is very highly recommended.

As with his first book on Peiper the author does a fantastic job of detailing the war service of this Waffen SS ‘ icon’. Fascinating stuff.Sadly the ‘ icon’ whilst undoubtedly a brave, daring and fearless commander also had a penchant for mass killing women and children inline with Hitlers and Himmlers desires. Utterly devoid of compassion or conscience before during and after. Psychopath by definition. Hard to find any redeeming features which makes the subject challenging.A Nazi killing hero therefore but not a true military one( the ability to combine military prowess with compassion and mercy).I look forward to Parkers next project.Willi Bittrich perhaps?Kurt Kneispel?

Thought the book was great, a lot has been said about pieper and the ss and it’s always the victors write the story ,you get good and bad on all sides, but I think the man was put down to much, considering what some others had got away with,

Curates egg good when its good but lets itself down with elementary errors the most glaring the myth that Skorzeny rescued Mussolini he did NOT Major Mors and his trainee Fallschrimjaeger did in a plan devised by Student , Skorzeny flew Mussolini off but thats all he did!