If you were alive in 1945, subsequently frozen and then defrosted in the present day this book might be interesting or have some new information in it. As it is he argues against theories and opinions and historiography that is decades old or non-existent. The book is one long straw-man going over debates that were old hat in the 1930s (Fuller) and the 1970s (Blitzkreig revisionism). It reads like a very long web forum post: it's opinionated, blatantly contradicts itself in several places and has more than a smug, sarcastic Michael Moore air about it. He dismisses long established academic research with waves of the hand and a "they just don't get it" attitude. The whole Blitzkreig myth did and does exist, but it has been examined in a more learned, more scholarly and more respectable manner than this for nigh on 40 years - you read the book in the hope that there is new insight, what with it having such a confident title, and you are bitterly disappointed. He deliberately ignores the Entire Eastern Front, in my view because of intellectual lazyness and an inability to research the primary sources.
The reviews on Amazon.com list all the other myriad of faults with this book and his dismissive attitude toward 40 years of research. I finished it only to see how outrageous the writing got. If you have even a moderate interest in military history you will waste your time reading this. It does not deliver on its promises. Amateur and shallow.