It doesn’t really change after the war. Outside of what David M. Glantz wrote, there’s a reason why most English language books on the Eastern Front/Great Patriotic War are based solely on German sources.

It will be a long long time before the documents from both sides become available for analysis like Tank-Artchive’s cross-examination, which is looks at the same battle from both sides to prove or disprove claims, to be made.

Even today most of what written on the Iraq war is just blatant up US propaganda. It’s almost like they’re actively avoiding using neutral language or attempting to sound objective. No fact is framed in a way that doesn’t attempt to manipulate the reader’s opinion. If it even uses Iraqi sources it’s going to be someone explicitly chosen to be an anti-Saddam Sunni, no Baathis, nor Pro-Iran Shias.

I prefer to just read books by people the who were directly involved in the war and primary documents. A collection of interviews like the works of Artem Drabkin or a memoir like “Tiger’s in the Mud”, “Singapore: the Japanese Version”.

I suppose you could also listen from both sides, mix them together and come up with your own conclusion from the mixture. I’ve seen someone on the 'net suggest it once.