Well they did a good job of distilling all of the worst takes about that war into one article I guess. Some highlights:
"Had this happened, there might have been no... [list] Western Civilization." https://twitter.com/I_am_Badibanga/status/1258132214111440896

"A Great King, a lineal descendant of Darius, might still rule the world. All might worship the Zoroastrian god Ahura Mazda, with men going about in turbans, women remaining at home or in harems"

"Greeks won the day, and with it freedom for the West."
"The Greco-Persian War was, as the British classicist Peter Green put it in his Xerxes at Salamis... 'the first great ideological conflict in European history.'"

"Such an offense could not be borne—certainly not by the volatile Xerxes, who kept a servant whose task was to remind him never to forget the effrontery of the Athenians."

Bonus points because this won is just incorrect too. Herodotus says that was Darius.

Too long too quote, but a whole section on Herodotus that goes on and on about numbers, but accepts his description of soldiers outright complete with misleading translations and has absolutely no critique of possible ideological motivations.

And finally a whole final section on "Men Who Saved the West," that shows absolutely no knowledge of historians doing their best to abandon the "Great Man Theory of History." Instead it embraces that and the anachronistic idea of "The West" wholesale.

Oh. I almost forgot the best part. Despite claiming to be a review of three books, they are barely mentioned at all and when they are, it is as sources for the author's own arguments