From my reading, I've gotten the idea lately, that the British were a much more professional and well led infantry/armor force, than the US was, in WW2. I'm looking for books that can either support or debunk this new idea of mine.
I know the British had an army with a tradition that was quite old, and the US army was fairly new. It interests me that the South, in the Civil War could outfight the Union, and the generals in WW 1 and 2, especiallly, seem as clueless as the Union generals did in the Civil War. Also, looking at the Vietnam war and the current mini-quagmiraes in Iraq and Afghanistan, I'm looking for examples of better strategy and tactics from our long ago brothers in Britian.
Later, I hope to find some reading on what made the Germans as effective as they were, especially in the latter part of WW 2, when the cream of their armed forces were pretty well spent and they were working with the last of their military able labor pool.
In general, I'm trying to figure out why we, the US, seem to have such an ineffetive officer core (?), general staff (?), or whatever. Or to find out if all armies are 80% fools and our armed forces just seem worse cause I know more about them than other countries armed forces.